Etter Jean-François
BMC Med. 2015 Feb 16;13:32. doi: 10.1186/s12916-014-0264-5.
Cigarette combustion, rather than either tobacco or nicotine, is the cause of a public health disaster. Fortunately, several new technologies that vaporize nicotine or tobacco, and may make cigarettes obsolete, have recently appeared. Research priorities include the effects of vaporizers on smoking cessation and initiation, their safety and toxicity, use by non-smokers, dual use of vaporizers and cigarettes, passive vaping, renormalization of smoking, and the development of messages that effectively communicate the continuum of risk for tobacco and nicotine products. A major difficulty is that we are chasing a moving target. New products constantly appear, and research results are often obsolete by the time they are published. Vaporizers do not need to be safe, only safer than cigarettes. However, harm reduction principles are often misunderstood or rejected. In the context of a fierce ideological debate, and major investments by the tobacco industry, it is crucial that independent researchers provide regulators and the public with evidence-based guidance. The methodological and ideological hurdles on this path are discussed in this commentary.
香烟燃烧,而非烟草或尼古丁本身,才是这场公共卫生灾难的根源。幸运的是,最近出现了几种能使尼古丁或烟草汽化的新技术,这些技术可能会让香烟过时。研究重点包括汽化器对戒烟和开始吸烟的影响、它们的安全性和毒性、非吸烟者的使用情况、汽化器与香烟的同时使用、被动汽化、吸烟的常态化,以及制定能有效传达烟草和尼古丁产品连续风险的信息。一个主要难题在于我们追逐的是一个移动目标。新产品不断涌现,研究结果往往在发表时就过时了。汽化器不一定要安全,只要比香烟更安全就行。然而,减少危害的原则常常被误解或拒绝。在激烈的意识形态辩论以及烟草行业大量投资的背景下,独立研究人员为监管机构和公众提供基于证据的指导至关重要。本评论将探讨这条道路上的方法和意识形态障碍。