On March 20, 2020, the National Library of Medicine and the National Institutes of Health published an e-cigarette addiction study on the official website. The study is titled “Horizontal Comparison of the Dependence of American Adults on Electronic Cigarettes and Cigarettes”. The study uses a representative of American adults as a sample and analyzes and compares 13,311 e-cigarette users and traditional smokers. Psychometric dependence of e-cigarettes and cigarettes.
The researchers found that users’ dependence on e-cigarettes was significantly lower than that on regular cigarettes.
“There is no doubt that e-cigarettes are addictive, but they are different from traditional cigarettes. We compared the dual users of e-cigarettes and cigarettes, and their dependence on e-cigarettes is significantly lower than that of cigarettes (1.58 [SE = 0.05] For 2.76 [0.04]), p <0.0001). Not only that, separate group studies of e-cigarette users and smokers also showed that e-cigarettes are less addictive than cigarettes (1.95 [0.05] vs. 2.52 [0.02], p < 0.0001).”
Studies have shown that few e-cigarette users are highly dependent on e-cigarettes, but most smokers are highly dependent on cigarettes. Interestingly, the most reliant on e-cigarette users are those who switch to e-cigarettes to quit smoking and stop smoking. Those who have no history of smoking and only use e-cigarettes have the least dependence. The researchers believe that this is consistent with the idea of smokers by transferring and transitioning their dependence to e-cigarettes. It may be based on such reasons and facts that they stopped smoking and completely transitioned to e-cigarettes, becoming the group most likely to use e-cigarettes frequently. However, regardless of the size of cigarette addiction, and whether or not e-cigarettes are still used, the researchers found that the results are consistent under the group comparison of various situations-the dependence on e-cigarettes is much lower than that on cigarettes. This suggests that who switched from smoking to electronic cigarettes may reduce their dependence on nicotine, as well as health risks.
The researchers finally reached a suggestive conclusion: modern medicine has pointed out that the harm of cigarettes is not caused by nicotine dependence, but caused by other toxic substances exposed to cigarette smoke. In fact, the proponents of harm reduction believe that from the perspective of harm reduction, if e-cigarettes can successfully replace cigarettes in the future to reduce the risk of users, then e-cigarettes should be dependent to a certain extent. It was even criticized because it did not allow users to rely on it, resulting in poor popularity. Therefore, when weighing e-cigarettes to reduce the expected damage to the body, we believe that some continued dependence may be beneficial or even necessary.
Source:
- 1Wang T. W., Asman K., Gentzke A. S., Cullen K. A., Holder‐Hayes E., Reyes‐Guzman C., et al. Tobacco product use among adults ‐ United States, 2017. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2018; 67: 1225– 1232.Crossref PubMed Web of Science®Google Scholar
- 2 National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine Public Health Consequences of E‐Cigarettes. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2018.Google Scholar
- 3Mcneill A., Brose L. S., Calder R., Bauld L., Robson D. A report commissioned by Public Health England. London: Public Health England; 2018.Google Scholar
- 4Avdalovic M. V., Murin S. POINT: does the risk of electronic cigarettes exceed potential benefits? Yes, Chest 2015; 148: 580– 582.Crossref PubMed Web of Science®Google Scholar
- 5Etter J. F., Eissenberg T. Dependence levels in users of electronic cigarettes, nicotine gums and tobacco cigarettes. Drug Alcohol Depend 2015; 147: 68– 75.Crossref PubMed Web of Science®Google Scholar
- 6Farsalinos K. E., Romagna G., Tsiapras D., Kyrzopoulos S., Voudris V. Evaluating nicotine levels selection and patterns of electronic cigarette use in a group of “vapers” who had achieved complete substitution of smoking. Subst Abuse: Res Treatment 2013; 7: 139– 146.Crossref PubMed Google Scholar
- 7Jankowski M., Krzystanek M., Zejda J. E., Majek P., Lubanski J., Lawson J. A., et al. E‐cigarettes are more addictive than traditional cigarettes‐a study in highly educated young people. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2019; 16.Crossref Web of Science®Google Scholar
- 8Morean M., Krishnan‐Sarin S., O’malley S. S. Comparing cigarette and e‐cigarette dependence and predicting frequency of smoking and e‐cigarette use in dual‐users of cigarettes and e‐cigarettes. Addict Behav 2018; 87: 92– 96.Crossref PubMed Web of Science®Google Scholar
- 9Smith S. S., Piper M. E., Bolt D. M., Fiore M. C., Wetter D. W., Cinciripini P. M., et al. Development of the brief Wisconsin inventory of smoking dependence motives. Nicotine Tob Res 2010; 12: 489– 499.Crossref PubMed Web of Science®Google Scholar
- 10Shiffman S., Waters A., Hickcox M. The nicotine dependence syndrome scale: a multidimensional measure of nicotine dependence. Nicotine Tob Res 2004; 6: 327– 348.Crossref CAS PubMed Web of Science®Google Scholar
- 11Sterling K. L., Mermelstein R., Turner L., Diviak K., Flay B., Shiffman S. Examining the psychometric properties and predictive validity of a youth‐specific version of the nicotine dependence syndrome scale (NDSS) among teens with varying levels of smoking. Addict Behav 2009; 34: 616– 619.Crossref PubMed Web of Science®Google Scholar
- 12Piper M. E., Baker T. B., Benowitz N. L., Smith S. S., Jorenby D. E. E‐cigarette dependence measures in dual users: reliability and relations with dependence criteria and E‐cigarette cessation. Nicotine Tob Res 2019. https://academic.oup.com/ntr/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/ntr/ntz040/5381490Crossref Google Scholar
- 13Piper M. E., Bolt D. M., Kim S. Y., Japuntich S. J., Smith S. S., Niederdeppe J., et al. Refining the tobacco dependence phenotype using the Wisconsin inventory of smoking dependence motives. J Abnorm Psychol 2008; 117: 747– 761.Crossref PubMed Web of Science®Google Scholar
- 14Piper M. E., Mccarthy D. E., Bolt D. M., Smith S. S., Lerman C., Benowitz N., et al. Assessing dimensions of nicotine dependence: an evaluation of the nicotine dependence syndrome scale (NDSS) and the Wisconsin inventory of smoking dependence motives (WISDM). Nicotine Tob Res 2008; 10: 1009– 1020.Crossref CAS PubMed Web of Science®Google Scholar
- 15Adkison S. E., Rees V. W., Bansal‐Travers M., Hatsukami D. K., O’connor R. J. Psychometric characteristics of the brief Wisconsin inventory of smoking dependence motives among a nonclinical sample of smokers. Nicotine Tob Res 2016; 18: 470– 476.Crossref CAS PubMed Web of Science®Google Scholar
- 16Japuntich S. J., Piper M. E., Schlam T. R., Bolt D. M., Baker T. B. Do smokers know what we’re talking about? The construct validity of nicotine dependence questionnaire measures. Psychol Assess 2009; 21: 595– 607.Crossref PubMed Web of Science®Google Scholar
- 17Piasecki T. M., Piper M. E., Baker T. B. Refining the tobacco dependence phenotype using the Wisconsin inventory of smoking dependence motives: II. Evidence from a laboratory self‐administration assay. J Abnorm Psychol 2010; 119: 513– 523.Crossref PubMed Web of Science®Google Scholar
- 18 American Psychiatric Association., American Psychiatric Association Dsm‐5 Task Force. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM‐5. Washington, D.C.: American Psychiatric Association; 2013.Crossref Google Scholar
- 19Baker T. B., Breslau N., Covey L., Shiffman S. DSM criteria for tobacco use disorder and tobacco withdrawal: a critique and proposed revisions for DSM‐5. Addiction 2012; 107: 263– 275.Wiley Online Library PubMed Web of Science®Google Scholar
- 20Pomerleau C. S., Carton S. M., Lutzke M. L., Flessland K. A., Pomerleau O. F. Reliability of the Fagerstrom tolerance questionnaire and the Fagerstrom test for nicotine dependence. Addict Behav 1994; 19: 33– 39.Crossref CAS PubMed Web of Science®Google Scholar
- 21Strong D. R., Pearson J., Ehlke S., Kirchner T., Abrams D., Taylor K., et al. Indicators of dependence for different types of tobacco product users: descriptive findings from wave 1 (2013‐2014) of the population assessment of tobacco and health (PATH) study. Drug Alcohol Depend 2017; 178: 257– 266.Crossref PubMed Web of Science®Google Scholar
- 22Embretson S. E., Reise S. P. Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2000.Google Scholar
- 23 Truth Initiative. E‐cigarettes: Facts, stats and regulations. 2019. Available at https://truthinitiative.org/research‐resources/emerging‐tobacco‐products/e‐cigarettes‐facts‐stats‐and‐regulations.Google Scholar
- 24Manzoli L., Flacco M. E., Ferrante M., La Vecchia C., Siliquini R., Ricciardi W., et al. Cohort study of electronic cigarette use: effectiveness and safety at 24 months. Tob Control 2017; 26: 284– 292.Crossref PubMed Web of Science®Google Scholar
- 25Hyland A., Ambrose B. K., Conway K. P., Borek N., Lambert E., Carusi C., et al. Design and methods of the population assessment of tobacco and health (PATH) study. Tob Control 2017; 26: 371– 378.Crossref PubMed Web of Science®Google Scholar
- 26 United States Department of Health and Human Services; National Institutes of Health; National Institute on Drug Abuse; Food and Drug Administration; Center for Tobacco Products. Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study [United States] Public‐Use Files. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter‐university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2018‐09‐28. https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR36498.v8, 2018.Google Scholar
- 27 United States Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Tobacco Products. Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study [United States] Public‐Use Files: Inter‐university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]; 2018.Google Scholar
- 28Breslau N., Johnson E. O., Hiripi E., Kessler R. Nicotine dependence in the United States: prevalence, trends, and smoking persistence. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2001; 58: 810– 816.Crossref CAS PubMed Web of Science®Google Scholar
- 29Liu G., Wasserman E., Kong L., Foulds J. A comparison of nicotine dependence among exclusive E‐cigarette and cigarette users in the PATH study. Prev Med 2017; 104: 86– 91.Crossref PubMed Web of Science®Google Scholar
- 30Biener L., Hargraves J. L. A longitudinal study of electronic cigarette use among a population‐based sample of adult smokers: association with smoking cessation and motivation to quit. Nicotine Tob Res 2015; 17: 127– 133.Crossref PubMed Web of Science®Google Scholar
- 31Levy D. T., Yuan Z., Luo Y., Abrams D. B. The relationship of E‐cigarette use to cigarette quit attempts and cessation: insights from a large, nationally representative U.S. survey. Nicotine Tob Res 2018; 20: 931– 939.Crossref PubMed Web of Science®Google Scholar
- 32Gottlieb S., Zeller M. A nicotine‐focused framework for public health. N Engl J Med 2017; 377: 1111– 1114.Crossref PubMed Web of Science®Google Scholar
- 33 Royal College of Physicians. Nicotine without smoke: Tobacco harm reduction. London: RCP, 2016, 2016.Google Scholar
- 34Abrams D. B., Glasser A. M., Pearson J. L., Villanti A. C., Collins L. K., Niaura R. S. Harm minimization and tobacco control: reframing societal views of nicotine use to rapidly save lives. Annu Rev Public Health 2018; 39: 193– 213.Crossref PubMed Web of Science®Google Scholar
- 35Britton J., Arnott D., Mcneill A., Hopkinson N. Tobacco advisory Group of the Royal College of P. nicotine without smoke‐putting electronic cigarettes in context. BMJ 2016; 353: i1745.Crossref PubMed Web of Science®Google Scholar
- 36 Food and Drug Administration. FDA Briefing Document. September 13–14, 2018 Meeting of the Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee (TPSAC). Modified Risk Tobacco Product Applications (MRPTAs) MR0000068‐MR0000073 RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company. https://www.fda.gov/downloads/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/TobaccoProductsScientificAdvisoryCommittee/UCM620064.pdf. Accessed June 26, 2019.Google Scholar
Great share!
Thanks for reading