THE distinctively fruity scent gives the game away: another person is puffing away on an e-cigarette, a device widely seen as a less harmful alternative to genuine cigarettes. That description is supported by health organisations from NHS Scotland to the Royal College of Physicians.
But a study, funded by Cancer Research UK, and to be presented in Glasgow today at the 2018 National Cancer Research Institute Cancer Conference, makes interesting reading.Twenty-nine per cent of health professionals would not recommend e-cigarettes to cancer patients who already smoke. More than half of those surveyed did not know enough about e-cigarettes to make recommendations to patients. A quarter did not know whether e-cigarettes were less harmful than smoking. The researchers, with justification, say their findings indicate a need for clearer guidance and training for health professionals around endorsing e-cigarettes to cancer patients who smoke.
But concerns have been expressed that children and teenagers who have never smoked are turning to e-cigarettes, seeing them as “cool”, and drawn, at least in part, by the sweet or fruit flavours. The US Food and Drug Administration speaks of an “epidemic” among young people who are using the devices and are getting hooked on nicotine. A leading US manufacturer is to discontinue most of its flavoured e-cigarettes. A RAND Corporation study says that adolescents who vape are not only more likely to smoke cigarettes but are also likely to increase their use of both products eventually. On the other hand, a Public Health England e-cigarette evidence review, published last February, said the evidence did not support the concern that e-cigarettes were a route into smoking among young people.
The previous month, scientists said vaping may raise the risk of certain cancers and heart disease. Though e-cigarettes may help people to give up smoking, there is as yet no clear consensus on the devices as a whole.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here