Recherche du Dr. Farsalinos (Anglais)

[ebaiwa]

Bonjour,

Pour ceux qui peuvent lire l'anglais et qui voudraient lire l'étude du Dr. Farsalinos au sujet de l'utilisation de la cigarette électronique voice le lien pour télécharger le document:

https://online.sagepub.com/cgi/register?registration=FT2010TAW

Vous voulez savoir qui est le Dr. Farsalinos?
http://e-cigarette-summit.com/speaker-lineup/dr-konstantinos-farsalinos/


Je me permet de mettre ici sa conclusion


Existing evidence indicates that EC use is by far a less harmful alternative to smoking. There is no tobacco and no combustion involved in EC use; therefore, regular vapers may avoid several harm- ful toxic chemicals that are typically present in the smoke of tobacco cigarettes. Indeed, some toxic chemicals are released in the EC vapor as well, but their levels are substantially lower compared with tobacco smoke, and in some cases (such as nitrosamines) are comparable with the amounts found in pharmaceutical nicotine products. Surveys, clinical, chemistry and toxicology data have often been mispresented or misinterpreted by health authorities and tobacco regulators, in such a way that the potential for harmful conse- quences of EC use has been largely exaggerated [Polosa and Caponnetto, 2013]. It is obvious that some residual risk associated with EC use may be present, but this is probably trivial compared with the devastating consequences of smoking. Moreover, ECs are recommended to smokers or former smokers only, as a substitute for conven- tional cigarettes or to prevent smoking relapse; thus, any risk should be estimated relative to the risk of continuing or relapsing back to smoking and the low efficacy of currently approved medi- cations for smoking cessation should be taken into consideration [Moore et al. 2009; Rigotti et al. 2010; Yudkin et al. 2003]. Nonetheless, more research is needed in several areas, such as atom- izer design and materials to further reduce toxic emissions and improve nicotine delivery, and liq- uid ingredients to determine the relative risk of the variety of compounds (mostly flavorings) inhaled. Regulations need to be implemented in order to maintain the current situation of minimal penetration of EC use in nonsmokers and young- sters, while manufacturers should be forced to provide proof for the quality of the ingredients used and to perform tests on the efficiency and safety of their products. However, any regulatory decisions should not compromise the variability of choices for consumers and should make sure that ECs are more easily accessible compared with their main competitor, the tobacco cigarette. Consumers deserve, and should make, informed decisions and research will definitely promote this. In particular, current data on safety evalua- tion and risk assessment of ECs is sufficient enough to avert restrictive regulatory measures as a consequence of an irrational application of the precautionary principle [Saitta et al. 2014].

ECs are a revolutionary product in tobacco harm reduction. Although they emit vapor, which resembles smoke, there is literally no fire (com- bustion) and no ‘fire’ (suspicion or evidence that they may be the cause for disease in a similar way to tobacco cigarettes). Due to their unique char- acteristics, ECs represent a historical opportu- nity to save millions of lives and significantly reduce the burden of smoking-related diseases worldwide.