Suppr超能文献

伊克莱斯(Eclipse):它真的符合其健康宣称吗?

Eclipse: does it live up to its health claims?

作者信息

Slade J, Connolly Gregory N, Lymperis D

机构信息

School of Public Health, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, USA.

出版信息

Tob Control. 2002 Jun;11 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):ii64-70. doi: 10.1136/tc.11.suppl_2.ii64.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To examine the plausibility of health claims for Eclipse, a novel smoking article being marketed by the RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company (RJR) as potentially reducing the risk of cancer and other diseases compared to conventional cigarettes.

DATA SOURCES

A company product website (www.eclipse.rjrt.com) summarising scientific studies of various versions of Eclipse, and the published review of these studies by an expert panel convened by RJR, an independent study comparing the smoke yields of major carcinogens from Eclipse and two low yield "ultralight" brands (Now and Carlton), and an analysis of the levels of these compounds in Eclipse and Premier (its predecessor) over time.

ANALYSIS

The overall doses and effects of toxins in the aerosol from Eclipse are smaller than those from most conventional cigarettes on a per mg basis. However, two tests that compared Eclipse on a per cigarette basis revealed that Eclipse was as or more toxic than an ultralight cigarette. Studies show that consumers smoke Eclipse (like they do cigarettes) at puff volumes and puff frequencies far higher than those used for the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) test. RJR's test results, which are based on aerosols generated under FTC conditions, may not reflect actual human dosing, since the operating temperature of Eclipse is highly dependent on these puffing parameters. Even under FTC/International Organization for Standardization (ISO) standard measures, Eclipse smoke carcinogen yields were higher than Now, but similar to Carlton. The yields of carcinogens from Premier and different versions of Eclipse have increased over time. Furthermore, the human studies reviewed by the RJR expert panel do not offer compelling evidence of reduced harm, as they have not been conducted in smokers who have adopted Eclipse.

CONCLUSION

There is as yet unsatisfactory evidence that Eclipse is less harmful than conventional cigarettes. Eclipse appears to be at least as toxic as some commercially available cigarette brands. Consumers may be misled by RJR's health claims into believing that Eclipse is a safer alternative to conventional cigarettes, underscoring the need for regulatory intervention.

摘要

目的

检验雷诺烟草公司(RJR)所销售的新型吸烟制品Eclipse与传统香烟相比可能降低癌症及其他疾病风险这一健康声明的合理性。

数据来源

公司产品网站(www.eclipse.rjrt.com)总结了对Eclipse不同版本的科学研究,以及RJR召集的专家小组对这些研究的发表评论;一项独立研究比较了Eclipse与两个低焦油“超轻型”品牌(Now和Carlton)主要致癌物的烟雾产量;以及对Eclipse和Premier(其前身)中这些化合物水平随时间变化的分析。

分析

按每毫克计算,Eclipse烟雾中毒素的总体剂量和影响小于大多数传统香烟。然而,两项按每支香烟进行比较的测试表明,Eclipse的毒性与超轻型香烟相当或更高。研究表明,消费者吸Eclipse(如同吸香烟一样)时的 puff 量和 puff 频率远高于联邦贸易委员会(FTC)测试所采用的水平。RJR基于FTC条件下产生的烟雾进行的测试结果可能无法反映实际人体剂量,因为Eclipse的工作温度高度依赖于这些 puffing 参数。即使在FTC/国际标准化组织(ISO)标准测量条件下,Eclipse烟雾中致癌物产量高于Now,但与Carlton相似。Premier和不同版本的Eclipse中致癌物产量随时间增加。此外,RJR专家小组审查的人体研究并未提供令人信服的危害降低证据,因为这些研究并非在使用Eclipse的吸烟者中进行。

结论

尚无充分证据表明Eclipse比传统香烟危害更小。Eclipse似乎至少与某些市售香烟品牌毒性相当。消费者可能会被RJR的健康声明误导,认为Eclipse是传统香烟更安全的替代品,这凸显了监管干预的必要性。

相似文献

1
Eclipse: does it live up to its health claims?伊克莱斯(Eclipse):它真的符合其健康宣称吗?
Tob Control. 2002 Jun;11 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):ii64-70. doi: 10.1136/tc.11.suppl_2.ii64.

引用本文的文献

8
Postmarketing surveillance for "modified-risk" tobacco products.“改良风险”烟草产品的上市后监测。
Nicotine Tob Res. 2012 Jan;14(1):29-42. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntq243. Epub 2011 Jan 20.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验