From the Associate editor
This March, seven anti-tobacco groups and five individual pediatricians sued the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Why? Basically, they weren’t happy that the FDA pushed back the pre-market application submission deadline for e-cigarettes from August 2018 to 2022.
Now, considering that one of the main reasons why the FDA delayed the deadline was so that it could gather more information to develop a better understanding of the effects of e-cigarettes, one has to wonder: isn’t it a good thing that the FDA is prepared to undergo a lengthy, time-consuming process to be sure they know what really is going on? Why are these anti-tobacco groups and pediatricians so against allowing the agency time to gather scientific data that could help clarify some issues that have been under increasingly heated debate, like whether e-cigarettes are really a less dangerous alternative to combustible cigarettes, or if they really aid in smoking cessation? Wouldn’t that be a good thing?
Across the pond in the UK, a review of evidence on e-cigarettes commissioned by Public Health England (PHE) reported that e-cigarettes could already be helping some 20,000 smokers a year to quit smoking. The review also found that vaping is at least 95% less harmful than smoking combustible tobacco and of negligible risk to bystanders.
Interestingly, the PHE report came out shortly after a US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine report on e-cigarettes, which was also based on hundreds of scientific studies and also found that e-cigarettes are likely to be far less harmful than regular tobacco cigarettes. In the words of John Newton, a professor and director for health improvement at PHE, “It would be tragic if thousands of smokers who could quit with the help of an e-cigarette are being put off due to false fears about their safety.”
The groups that brought this suit against the FDA have expressed their concern that delaying regulations on e-cigarettes leaves youth “vulnerable”. But, why does this have to be a case of cutting off the nose to spite the face? Wouldn’t it be possible to put in place regulations prohibiting the sale of e-cigarettes to youth, like the laws already prohibiting tobacco sales to those under the age of 21, without thwarting efforts to properly understand this new product and its potential benefits and effects? Can’t we all take an objective, level-headed approach to trying to figure this out? Or is that shiny, red panic button too alluring and all reasoning should just get thrown out the window?
Oh, and just in case you were wondering, the PHE report also found that evidence does not support concerns that e-cigarettes are a first step for youths to a lifetime of smoking.