Following up on previous findings, a new study has found that using vapes to quit smoking is more effective than using traditional NRT (nicotine replacement therapy).
In the monitored open-label trial, “Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems for Smoking Cessation,” researchers aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of electronic nicotine delivery systems , or vapes, to help smokers trying to quit.
Volunteers included adults who smoked at least five cigarettes a day and intended to quit. They were randomly assigned to either the intervention or control group. The intervention group received free vapes and e-liquids, standard-of-care smoking cessation counseling, and optional (non-free) nicotine replacement therapy (NRT).
In contrast, the control group received standard counseling and a gift voucher that could be used for various purposes, including NRT. The primary outcome was biologically verified ability to stop smoking for six months. Secondary outcomes included quitting smoking with any source of nicotine, respiratory symptoms, or side effects reported by the volunteer.
Of the 1,246 volunteers, 622 were assigned to the intervention group and 624 to the control group. Results showed a significant difference in biochemically confirmed abstinence, with 28.9% in the intervention group compared with 16.3% in the control group (relative risk, 1.77; 95% confidence interval, 1.43 to 2.20). In addition, the proportion of participants in the intervention group who had quit smoking within 7 days prior to the 6-month visit was 59.6% in the intervention group, compared with 38.5% in the control group. However, the proportion of individuals abstaining from any nicotine use was higher in the control group at 33.7%, compared with 20.1% in the intervention group.
The 'vape group' reported less severe side effects
Interestingly, more serious side effects occurred in the control group at 5.0% compared to 4.0% of participants in the intervention group. However, less serious side effects were reported in 43.7% of participants in the intervention groups compared to 36.7% in the control group.
In conclusion, the study found that incorporating vaping into standard smoking cessation counseling resulted in higher quit rates than counseling alone. Consistent with previous findings, this suggests that vaping should be considered and incorporated into smoking cessation efforts.
A US proposal for a federal vape tax is still pending.
Sadly, policymakers in many countries continue to choose to ignore such data. In the US, HR 5715 , introduced last October, aims to raise taxes on all tobacco (and/or nicotine) products to match the tax on cigarettes. In fact, the proposed tax on cigarettes would double the current tax, increasing from $50.33 to $100.66 per 1,000 cigarettes.
However, the bill has faced criticism for inconsistent taxation based on nicotine content, as cigarettes would be taxed at a rate five times lower than vape products when comparing milligrams of nicotine. If enacted, HR 5715/S 2929 would result in consumers paying 5.5 cents per milligram of nicotine for vapes and other alternatives, while cigarettes would only be taxed at 1.1 cents per milligram (based on an average nicotine content of 9mg/cigarette across many brands). The significant tax increase therefore raises concerns for reduced-risk products such as vapes, nicotine pouches, snus, and moist inhalers (dip).
Critics argue that the proposed tax increase is inconsistent with the principle of " proportionate risk regulation ," as it imposes higher taxes on products deemed less harmful than traditional cigarettes. Various reputable sources, including the FDA, tobacco scientists, the Royal College of Physicians of England, and several international government health agencies, acknowledge the existence of "long-term risks" associated with tobacco products. In addition, these groups emphasize that nicotine itself is not the primary source of harm.
What can you do?
The Consumer Advocates for Smoke-Free Alternatives Association (CASAA) emphasizes that if passed, the ban could have a negative impact on consumers seeking harm-reduction alternatives and is inconsistent with evidence-based approaches recognized by health authorities around the world. The group is calling on consumers and tobacco harm reduction advocates to take action, and has facilitated this by drafting a letter that interested individuals can sign and forward to their local legislators.
On a positive note, health economist and health policy researcher Dr. Michael Pesko doesn't seem concerned. He told Vape Post that to his knowledge, "...there haven't been any serious efforts to pass new tobacco taxes in the current Congress, nor do I think they're likely to succeed at present.
