Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users
to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response
is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual
response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the
browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published
online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed.
Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles.
The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being
wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our
attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not
including references and author details. We will no longer post responses
that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
The aim of the news story titled “E-cigarette makers under fire for marketing to young people” is puzzling.(1)
First, could it be anews that a cigarette company has targeted young people? Reuters’ investigation not only discovered warm water but also missed the target. Its investigation should have been about the marketing approval by the FDA of the heat-not-burn tobacco Philip Morris International!
Second, the so-called “harm reduction” with new products has not been evidenced yet despite they have been on the market since 2008; this is a decade. Further, experience from France is simple: a) French Key Opinion Leaders have been recommending e-cigarette use, and calls for a rational debate only resulted in personal attacks;(2,3) b) governments deliberately failed to relevantly increase cigarette price from 2005 to 2016. Coincidentally, during this period daily smoking prevalence increased from 27,5% to 29,4%.
Third, warnings about e-cigarettes were late, after the marketing,(4) and were overlooked in most countries. However, experience seems a gloomy lantern that does not even illuminate its bearer: How can we forget the devastating consequences of previous hypes from the tobacco industry for harm reduction with filters and low-tar or light cigarettes?(5) Sadly, even early warnings announcing the marketing of heat-not-burn tobacco were useless.(6)
Last, whose interests are served when reporting that a cigarette company “has a marketing code of conduct ruling out promotions involving youth oriented celebrities…” and “claims to demonstrate its commitment to customer survival by creating a new life insurance company for smokers with a 50% discounts on premiums to customers who quit smoking.”(1) Should, the fox be in charge of the hen house?
Could Dyer explain the aim of this news? If the aim was to show Reuters only blew in the wind, why no data showing that the investigation had no effect on stock price? Personally I fear this could be window dressing for a broken system. Indeed, since becoming a public company in 2008, Philip Morris International has increased its annual dividend every year, representing a total increase of 147.8%, or a compound annual growth rate of 9.5%.(https://pmiwebsitetest.pconnect.biz/investor-relations/stock-and-bond-in...) From 2014 to 2018, its current assets and total assets have increased from 16 to 20 $ billions and from 35 to 40, respectively (https://www.stock-analysis-on.net/NYSE/Company/Philip-Morris-Internation...).
1 Dyer O. E-cigarette makers under fire for marketing to young people. BMJ 2019;365:l2261.
2 Braillon A.[e-cigarette: who cannot see the wood for the tree? Letter on the article "Electronic cigarette: reliable and efficient?"]. Presse Med 2015;44:124-5.
3 Dautzenberg B, Dautzenberg MD. Electronic-cigarette grows faster than the harmful tobacco products and will dominate. Author's response to the letter on the article: "Electronic cigarette: reliable and efficient?"]. Presse Med 2015;44:125-7.
4 Pauly J, Li Q, Barry MB. Tobacco-free electronic cigarettes and cigars deliver nicotine and generate concern. Tob Control 2007;16:357
5 Braillon A. Electronic cigarettes: from history to evidence-based medicine. Am J Prev Med 2014;47:e13.
6 Braillon A. Electronic cigarettes and insanity. Am J Prev Med 2016;50:e27.
Competing interests:
AB's opinion is the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control is a smokescreen (Braillon A. The Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Lancet 2016;387:1907)
Heat-not-burn tobacco: living in cloud cuckoo land?
The aim of the news story titled “E-cigarette makers under fire for marketing to young people” is puzzling.(1)
First, could it be anews that a cigarette company has targeted young people? Reuters’ investigation not only discovered warm water but also missed the target. Its investigation should have been about the marketing approval by the FDA of the heat-not-burn tobacco Philip Morris International!
Second, the so-called “harm reduction” with new products has not been evidenced yet despite they have been on the market since 2008; this is a decade. Further, experience from France is simple: a) French Key Opinion Leaders have been recommending e-cigarette use, and calls for a rational debate only resulted in personal attacks;(2,3) b) governments deliberately failed to relevantly increase cigarette price from 2005 to 2016. Coincidentally, during this period daily smoking prevalence increased from 27,5% to 29,4%.
Third, warnings about e-cigarettes were late, after the marketing,(4) and were overlooked in most countries. However, experience seems a gloomy lantern that does not even illuminate its bearer: How can we forget the devastating consequences of previous hypes from the tobacco industry for harm reduction with filters and low-tar or light cigarettes?(5) Sadly, even early warnings announcing the marketing of heat-not-burn tobacco were useless.(6)
Last, whose interests are served when reporting that a cigarette company “has a marketing code of conduct ruling out promotions involving youth oriented celebrities…” and “claims to demonstrate its commitment to customer survival by creating a new life insurance company for smokers with a 50% discounts on premiums to customers who quit smoking.”(1) Should, the fox be in charge of the hen house?
Could Dyer explain the aim of this news? If the aim was to show Reuters only blew in the wind, why no data showing that the investigation had no effect on stock price? Personally I fear this could be window dressing for a broken system. Indeed, since becoming a public company in 2008, Philip Morris International has increased its annual dividend every year, representing a total increase of 147.8%, or a compound annual growth rate of 9.5%.(https://pmiwebsitetest.pconnect.biz/investor-relations/stock-and-bond-in...) From 2014 to 2018, its current assets and total assets have increased from 16 to 20 $ billions and from 35 to 40, respectively (https://www.stock-analysis-on.net/NYSE/Company/Philip-Morris-Internation...).
1 Dyer O. E-cigarette makers under fire for marketing to young people. BMJ 2019;365:l2261.
2 Braillon A.[e-cigarette: who cannot see the wood for the tree? Letter on the article "Electronic cigarette: reliable and efficient?"]. Presse Med 2015;44:124-5.
3 Dautzenberg B, Dautzenberg MD. Electronic-cigarette grows faster than the harmful tobacco products and will dominate. Author's response to the letter on the article: "Electronic cigarette: reliable and efficient?"]. Presse Med 2015;44:125-7.
4 Pauly J, Li Q, Barry MB. Tobacco-free electronic cigarettes and cigars deliver nicotine and generate concern. Tob Control 2007;16:357
5 Braillon A. Electronic cigarettes: from history to evidence-based medicine. Am J Prev Med 2014;47:e13.
6 Braillon A. Electronic cigarettes and insanity. Am J Prev Med 2016;50:e27.
Competing interests: AB's opinion is the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control is a smokescreen (Braillon A. The Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Lancet 2016;387:1907)