Author:
Phillips Carl V.,Rodu Brad
Abstract
PurposeThis paper aims to provide a brief summary of the effectiveness and efficacy of tobacco harm reduction (THR). THR is the substitution for cigarettes of low‐risk alternatives, including Swedish or American‐style smokeless tobacco, pharmaceutical nicotine products, and electronic cigarettes. The paper then very briefly summarizes the current social and political situation regarding THR.Design/methodology/approachThis paper is a review of the evidence.FindingsThe risk from smoke‐free tobacco/nicotine products is so low as to be unmeasurable. For most smokers, adopting THR is a lower risk option than to trying to become nicotine abstinent. THR products have been widely adopted in some populations, providing great public health benefits. There is currently an explosion of interest in electronic cigarettes. However, THR is a threat to the business model of the tobacco control industry, and so they are fighting hard to discourage it. Because they cannot admit their real motives for discouraging THR, anti‐THR activism is an entirely dishonest enterprise.Practical implicationsTobacco harm reduction is the greatest untapped public health initiative in the developed world. It is more promising than further attempts to promote tobacco/nicotine abstinence. The future inevitably includes a large portion of the population using low‐risk tobacco/nicotine, but anti‐THR efforts might keep people smoking in the short run.Originality/valueWhile most of the content of this paper is well known to experts on THR, many ostensible experts on health, as well as other opinion leaders and policy makers, are unaware of the truth.
Subject
Psychiatry and Mental health,Clinical Psychology,Medicine (miscellaneous)
Reference14 articles.
1. Bertuccio, P., La Vecchia, C., Silverman, D.T., Petersen, G.M., Bracci, P.M. and Negri, E. et al. (2011), “Cigar and pipe smoking, smokeless tobacco use and pancreatic cancer: an analysis from the International Pancreatic Cancer Case‐Control Consortium (PanC4)”, Annals of Oncology, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 1420‐6.
2. European Commission (2001), “Directive 2001/37/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council”, available at: http://eur‐lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2001:194:0026:0034:EN:PDF (accessed June 5, 2001).
3. International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) (2007), “Smokeless tobacco”, IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans, Vol. 89.
4. Lund, K.E., Scheffels, J. and McNeill, A. (2011), “The association between use of snus and quit rates for smoking: results from seven Norwegian cross‐sectional studies”, Addiction, Vol. 106 No. 1, pp. 162‐7.
5. Peiper, N., Stone, R., van Zyl, R. and Rodu, B. (2010), “University faculty perceptions of the health risks related to cigarettes and smokeless tobacco”, Drug and Alcohol Review, Vol. 29, pp. 121‐30.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献