We have a smoking cessation service in Leicester City which is relatively effective.In the more deprived areas where smoking prevalence is over 30%,up to 20% of the smoking population engages with the service; of these 50% are successful in quitting. So 10% of smokers are successful in quitting; 90% therefore, continue to smoke.
The reality is that despite our intensive efforts to encourage tobacco cessation we are not succeeding. However, with electronic cigarettes there is a new option, we can now encourage committed smokers to switch,an action akin to a brand change that does not produce the resistance typified by the addict.
Whilst there is no long term data about the potential for harm from heavy use of propylene glycol, it is undoubtedly the case that it will be less harmful than continued tobacco smoking.
There is no evidence of electronic cigarette consumption resulting in conversion to tobacco consumption, all the evidence to date points in the opposite direction.
The proposal from the EU and MHRA to regulate these products is fundamentally flawed. Currently there is advertising from the commercial sector which will effectively drive down tobacco consumption. This is at no cost to the public purse through public health campaigns. The proposal to require classification of electronic cigarettes as medical devices effectively medicalises a lifestyle choice and adds to the financial burden on the health service.
We in the medical profession need to take a step away from "Doctor knows best" and give up on shock strategies which are of limited effectiveness and move to a place where we meet the smokers where they are and recommend "smart" or "21st century" smoking. From my own anecdotal experience, my committed smokers have been a lot more receptive to this approach. If smokers switch to exclusive electronic cigarette use, from a health perspective they are quitters.
The profession needs to wise up and support this innovation and its maintained liberalisation. Anything less is a sop to the tobacco industry.
Competing interests:
No competing interests
10 January 2014
Paul Danaher
General Practitioner
Leicester City CCG
Groby Rd Medical Centre, 9 Groby Rd Leicester, LE3 9ED
Rapid Response:
Re: Hold the line against tobacco
We have a smoking cessation service in Leicester City which is relatively effective.In the more deprived areas where smoking prevalence is over 30%,up to 20% of the smoking population engages with the service; of these 50% are successful in quitting. So 10% of smokers are successful in quitting; 90% therefore, continue to smoke.
The reality is that despite our intensive efforts to encourage tobacco cessation we are not succeeding. However, with electronic cigarettes there is a new option, we can now encourage committed smokers to switch,an action akin to a brand change that does not produce the resistance typified by the addict.
Whilst there is no long term data about the potential for harm from heavy use of propylene glycol, it is undoubtedly the case that it will be less harmful than continued tobacco smoking.
There is no evidence of electronic cigarette consumption resulting in conversion to tobacco consumption, all the evidence to date points in the opposite direction.
The proposal from the EU and MHRA to regulate these products is fundamentally flawed. Currently there is advertising from the commercial sector which will effectively drive down tobacco consumption. This is at no cost to the public purse through public health campaigns. The proposal to require classification of electronic cigarettes as medical devices effectively medicalises a lifestyle choice and adds to the financial burden on the health service.
We in the medical profession need to take a step away from "Doctor knows best" and give up on shock strategies which are of limited effectiveness and move to a place where we meet the smokers where they are and recommend "smart" or "21st century" smoking. From my own anecdotal experience, my committed smokers have been a lot more receptive to this approach. If smokers switch to exclusive electronic cigarette use, from a health perspective they are quitters.
The profession needs to wise up and support this innovation and its maintained liberalisation. Anything less is a sop to the tobacco industry.
Competing interests: No competing interests