FDA should not authorize marketing flavored ZYN nicotine pouches as modified risk products because Swedish Match failed to provide evidence specific to ZYN demonstrating that they will benefit the health of the population, including youth My colleagues at UCSF and Stanford have submitted this…

HTP attract youth, act as a gateway to cigarettes, and keep adults smoking

Readers should not rely on “completely unscientific surveys. “

The post I put up Presented data a year after the quit attempt. More smokers given ecigs were dual users than quitters. The journey leaves them worse off.

New paper by Hajek group presents misleading incomplete results about dual use when using e-cigs as cessation aid One concern about giving smokers e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation aid is that doing so instantly converts them into dual users (smoking both cigarettes and e-cigarettes), which adds…

“Largely independent” is not “independent”. What were the dependencies? (The link didn’t work.)

Yes, Robert West. He showed that "The use of NRT bought over the counter was associated with a lower odds of abstinence (odds ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.49-0.94)." Prescription NRT + counseling works. You guys are ignoring that important distinction. www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S002...

I don't support OTC NRT because, like e-cigarettes, it doesn't help smokers quit without clinical supervision and counseling. That's why I support prescription NRT. The tobacco companies (and e-cg advocate John West) figured this out a long time ago. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28817320/

When an ecig company gets it approved as a cessation medicine with a demonstrated positive benefit/risk ratio (which NRT has), I expect I would support it. So far, no company anywhere in the world has done that, perhaps because they know it would fail.

I don’t see how you can read “reducing or eliminating consumption of tobacco” as supporting the industry’s newer products. The recent WHO position paper I posted a while ago makes that clear. www.who.int/publications...

National Academy of Medicine calls out CDC for misrepresenting NAM position on vaccines and autism This blog focuses on tobacco and cannabis and public health, so I have refrained from commenting on broader public health issues. But, I am making an exception to disseminate the National Academy of…

California Enacts World’s First Thirdhand Smoke Disclosure Law California has enacted the first law, AB455, that requires sellers of single-family homes to disclose in writing any known indoor smoking, vaping, or thirdhand smoke contamination to prospective buyers. It also also directs the…

Based on 4 year followup, dual use is rarely an intermediate condition on the way from cigarettes to “switching completely” or quitting. profglantz.com/2024/12/30/d...

Didn't you go to work for Philip Morris-funded FSFW in 2018, and work there for years when PM was the only financier? It's also important to note that PM dumped FSFW, not the other way around.

Another statement with no direct evidence to support it.

What the data from the RCTs show is that for every smoker who quits, 2-4 become dual users. That's what we know. At least you now admit that you are promoting an assumption.

That's what ecig enthusiasts like to say, but not what the data shows. Read the RCTs carefully for people's status at the end of followup.

You're ignoring the fact that people who use ecigs to quit cigs are 2-4 times more likely to become dual users than quitters, which means that the overall risk/benefit ratio is adverse. Why do you keep leaving out important details?

Plain language summary of meta-analysis of ecigs and disease available Last year we published "Population-Based Disease Odds for E-Cigarettes and Dual Use versus Cigarettes" that showed that some disease risks of e-cigarettes are indistinguishable from cigarettes and for others they on only…

The fact that they are popular doesn't mean they work. Smokers who use ecigs to quit are more likely to end up dual users (both smoking cigs and ecigs) than to quit. And dual use is more dangerous than just smoking.

E-cigarettes as consumer products are not effective for cessation. profglantz.com/2024/04/24/w...

We found similar results in the USA: profglantz.com/2020/12/01/m...

If it's not obvious, "younger adult smokers" is an industry euphemism for "kids."

Priorities.

E-cigarettes increase harm to smokers, so should not be promoted as a harm reduction strategy (in 10 slides) now available in 10 other languages My blog post "E-cigarettes increase harm to smokers, so should not be promoted as a harm reduction strategy (in 10 slides)" has attracted a lot of…

How e-cigarettes compromise children’s human rights The new paper "How e-cigarettes compromise children’s human rights" by Tom Gatehouse and colleagues provides more evidence to inform e-cigarette policy making by reminding the delegates to the FCTC Conference of the Parties next week that they…

Gardner still does not seem to have carefully read our paper. Ecigs are associated with disease in NEVER SMOKERS, where former smoking is not an issue. About 1/3 of studies controlled for former smoking, which didn't affect results. Read the paper at evidence.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/...

Plug the name "Farsalinos" into our Truth Tobacco Industry Documents #archive and you get over 6000 hits that chronicle a decade of work: www.industrydocuments.ucsf.edu/all-industri...

Where are our fellows now? This month we spotlight Lucy Popova PhD, CTCRE alum and now Professor at Georgia State University who shows how our fellowship trains the next generation of tobacco control leaders. Learn more: tobacco.ucsf.edu/fellowship

The 2025 Global Tobacco Industry Interference Index, which was released this week, ranks 100 countries based on how well they implement and comply with guidance and measures designed to prevent tobacco industry interference in policymaking. Explore the Global Index: https://globaltobaccoindex.org/

WHO position on Tobacco Control and Harm Reduction In the face of a major push by the tobacco companies and their allies to trick Parties to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) to integrate the industry's "harm reduction" marketing message into FCTC guidelines, the WHO has…

What we did was a lot more sophisticated than difference-in-difference. We used cointegrating regressions that do not require the (often strong) assumption of parallel trends that difference-in-difference requires. And his name is Lightwood.

I guess you haven't read any of our papers that use advanced econometric methods. Check out pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36928830/, other papers with Lightwood or pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11114317/ among others. They all have control groups.

A comment on my blog post on your paper stated, "the COI disclosures that Pesko lists the Kentucky Institute for the Study of Free Enterprise. That is funded by the Global Action to End Smoking." Did you know that GAES is the new name for Philip Morris' Foundation for SmokeFree World?

And that's why enough time has passed for epidemiology to detect links between ecigs and disease that we quantified in our meta-analysis.

Interrupted time series are a fine method (I have published several), but not the only form of evidence. You are still refusing to engage the epidemiology linking ecigs to disease. You have also ignored the literature on psychophysiology of ecigs, i.e., how they cause disease. Why?

You ignore over 125 papers that detected associations of ecigs with disease. Philip Morris says after 5 years people should rely on epi not biomarkers. Like tob industry, you are just ignoring evidence you don't like. Not very respectable behavior. profglantz.com/2025/10/27/e...

What specific two or three studies do you refer to? Which ones report associations of e-cigs and actual disease (as opposed to a limited set of indirect biomarkers, usually based on combustion products in cig smoke)?

Juul’s Connection to ‘Independent’ Expert Farsalinos Revealed Greek cardiologist Konstantinos Farsalinos has been one of the e-cigarette industry's most consistent supporters. Despite his behavior having all the hallmarks of undisclosed industry ties, until now no one was able to prove it. Now,…

Good article on important paper

The citations are in the paper. (I would have thought that you would have read the paper carefully before criticizing it.) You can read it for free at evidence.nejm.org/doi/full/10....

Garner's statement that I believe "most smokers who take up vaping remain dual users" shows that he never bothered to carefully read our paper. We state, based on most recent data at the time, that 39.1% of US and 66.7% of Swedish vapers are dual users.

Every ecig paper I saw at the TOPS lectures I attended made the (often unstated) assumption that they reduce harm. Also, I applied to present our NEJM-E paper and you said "no" because I was retired. I think you & your committee are afraid of data that questioned your assumptions.

Wodak’s graph makes my point. It does not present any actual data.

There are thousands of chemicals in ecig aerosol. See the paper discussed here: profglantz.com/2021/10/12/t...

Actually, these calculations apply at the level of individual smokers, not the population. Population estimates would have to include all the kids addicted to nicotine with ecigs, which would make the picture even worse.

As countries around the world stampede to ban flavoured vapes, the US FDA under Trump who was bankrolled big time by BigTobacco, installs a yes man to push for the opposite xyfil.com/countries-wi... www.2firsts.com/news/fda-2#g...

Actually, rather than a private presentation lets' do TOPS. What are you afraid of?

While there is some substitution, the RCTs show that for every switcher there are 2-4 dual users. Dual use is more dangerous than just smoking.