Ayesta Javier, Peruga Armando, Rebollar Aarón, Rey Noa, Zamorano Andrés, Verdejo Susana, Panero Javier, Doncel Julio César, Martín Andrea, Pérez-Sacristán Eva Mª
Profesor de Farmacología. Universidad de Cantabria. Santander. España.
Ex Director de la Iniciativa Libre de Tabaco. Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS). España.
Rev Esp Salud Publica. 2024 May 28;98:e202405037.
Harm reduction is a classic Public Health concept to refer to the reduction of the negative effect of drug use/abuse with a focus on justice and human rights, but the tobacco industry has been perverting this concept for years and using it as a tool for its own marketing. This publication details what real harm reduction action on tobacco use would be, when it should be implemented, and what pillars it should be based on. Different methods of reducing the harmful effects of tobacco and nicotine have been tried and tested over time, but the results have been poor; therefore, smoking cessation by the various officially recognised methods is recommended as a priority objective, using the tools that are truly supported by science. In contrast, it also explains the strategies developed by the industry to manipulate consumers and make them dependent on products that can eventually kill them: from the development of filtered cigarettes to light cigarettes, and from menthol to flavoured vapes. In all cases, they have falsely led people to believe that they were developing less toxic products when they were not. Nowadays, both light and menthol cigarettes are banned in Spain, filters have not reduced risk but increased the use, and vapes try to replace cigarettes with their attractive flavours and their false legend of healthier products when what they are really doing is maintaining the same addiction by changing the object, encouraging dual use, and attracting younger and younger non-smokers. At the same time, a strategy of dividing the opinion of health professionals has been developed, using medical doctors and researchers with recognised conflicts of interest but who manage to confuse consumers. In conclusion, we consider that, although nicotine releasing devices may be useful elements in some particular cases, they are not recommended at the population level as they can promote onset, prevent cessation, as well as maintaining the addictive capacity. The only nicotine products that are recommended are those of pharmacological use approved for the case and provided they are used as a transitional tool to complete cessation.
减少伤害是一个经典的公共卫生概念,指的是减少药物使用/滥用的负面影响,重点关注正义和人权,但多年来烟草行业一直在歪曲这一概念,并将其用作自身营销的工具。本出版物详细阐述了针对烟草使用的真正减少伤害行动应该是什么、何时应实施以及应以哪些支柱为基础。随着时间的推移,人们尝试并测试了各种减少烟草和尼古丁有害影响的方法,但效果不佳;因此,建议将通过各种官方认可的方法戒烟作为首要目标,并使用真正有科学依据的工具。相比之下,它还解释了烟草行业为操纵消费者并使他们依赖最终可能致其死亡的产品而制定的策略:从过滤嘴香烟到淡味香烟的发展,以及从薄荷醇香烟到调味电子烟的发展。在所有这些情况下,它们都误导人们相信自己开发的产品毒性较小,而实际并非如此。如今,西班牙已禁止销售淡味和薄荷醇香烟,过滤嘴并未降低风险反而增加了使用量,电子烟试图用其诱人的口味和关于更健康产品的虚假说法来取代香烟,而它们真正做的是通过改变对象来维持相同的成瘾性、鼓励双重使用并吸引越来越年轻的非吸烟者。与此同时,烟草行业还制定了一种分化健康专业人士意见的策略,利用存在公认利益冲突但却设法迷惑消费者的医生和研究人员。总之,我们认为,尽管尼古丁释放装置在某些特定情况下可能是有用的元素,但不建议在人群层面推广,因为它们可能会促进吸烟开始、阻碍戒烟,并维持成瘾能力。唯一推荐的尼古丁产品是那些经批准用于特定情况的药用产品,并且前提是将其用作完成戒烟的过渡工具。