“Electronic Cigarettes” Are Not Cigarettes, and Why That Matters

Author:

Olonoff Matthew1ORCID,Niaura Raymond2,Hitsman Brian1

Affiliation:

1. Department of Preventive Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL

2. Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, College of Global Public Health, New York University, New York, NY

Abstract

Abstract As the prevalence rates of cigarette use have declined over the past decade, use of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) continues to increase, and companies are heavily invested in manufacturing new e-cigarette products. Scientists are therefore studying e-cigarette use at a rapid rate, generally by conceptualizing e-cigarettes as similar to traditional cigarettes in their use and effects. Thinking of e-cigarettes as largely comparable with cigarettes, however, fails to capture the unique e-cigarette capabilities, user experiences, and effects on nicotine dependence and even health. Assuming that e-cigarette users puff on their devices as they do cigarettes to attain doses of nicotine comparable in magnitude and asking questions about e-cigarette use modeled after how smoking behavior has been usually assessed (eg, puff number, duration, number of cigarettes per day) may miss important differences. A greater appreciation of the distinct uniqueness of e-cigarettes, as compared with cigarettes, will help to accelerate innovative research on e-cigarettes and other electronic devices, leading to new theoretical models and behavioral measures. Implications With research about electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) rapidly increasing, this commentary addresses the conceptualization of e-cigarettes as similar to traditional cigarettes. The more we attempt to understand and measure e-cigarettes as equivalent to cigarettes, the more likely research may err in conclusions about these unique devices. Our commentary notes how using unique conceptualizations and measures for e-cigarettes will help accelerate new research.

Funder

National Institutes of Health

Truth Initiative

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3