Search

Exposure to secondhand tobacco smoke (SHS) is a global health threat that causes diseases and kills more than 1.2 million people each year, including 65000 children1-4. The World Health Organization (WHO) Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) urges countries to establish comprehensive smoke-free environments5. Although European Union (EU) member states have implemented smoke-free laws, challenges persist with designated smoking rooms (e.g. in hospital venues and in airports) and neglect of emerging products, such as electronic cigarettes (e-cigarette) and heated tobacco products (HTP)6,7. This editorial provides concise recommendations on smoke- and aerosol-free environments (SAFE) in the EU, focusing on evidence-based strategies for SAFE. Promoting the expansion of SAFE throughout EU countries was a key objective of the JATC-2, a project co-funded by the European Commission. To address this objective, WP8 focused on the current framework and potential expansion of SAFE in Europe. As part of this effort, a consultation was conducted in 2022, engaging 110 experts from 27 EU member states, along with Norway, Serbia, and the United Kingdom. The sources to identify experts were the JATC-2 contact list of all authorities and stakeholders working with tobacco regulation (policymakers and regulators, researchers and tobacco inspectors) for countries of the EU; the Catalan Institute of Oncology/WHO Collaborating Center for Tobacco Control list of contacts, including speakers and attendees to five editions of ICO-WHO Symposia on tobacco control; and lists of contacts from Smoke-Free Partnership and the European Network for Smoking and Tobacco Prevention. The responses from these experts provided valuable information on the barriers, opportunities, and best practices associated with SAFE policies across different countries. This collective knowledge, combined with findings from a systematic literature review (covering articles published between January 2010 and August 2022) and dedicated discussions (including a symposium satellite of the 9th European Conference on Tobacco or Health), forms the basis for recommendations on effective strategies and interventions to safeguard individuals from SHS and secondhand aerosol (SHA). The expert consultations are summarized in the following recommendations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Smoke-free legislation has been shown to positively impact reducing secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure, especially in countries that have implemented comprehensive legislation rather than partial bans. Also, secondhand aerosols (SHA) that come from the heating of tobacco or liquids, with or without nicotine, in electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) have been proven to increase levels of harmful substances in the air. Therefore, protection against SHS and SHA exposure and expansion of smoke- and aerosol-free environments (SAFE) should be taken into account when creating or trying to expand or enforce clean air policies. This article aims to present the protocol for a consultation with experts on tobacco and nicotine control in order to identify best practices, barriers, and opportunities for the expansion of SAFE in Europe. We identified experts among policymakers, researchers, and tobacco regulators in European countries and invited them to participate in the consultation by completing an online survey designed, programmed, and pilot-tested using Survey Monkey. The responses to the questionnaire contained quantitative and qualitative information that was thematically analyzed. The experts’ consultation allowed us to produce a report on barriers and opportunities for SAFE, a report and a position paper on SAFE best practices, a web-based repository of best practices, and a weight of evidence paper that assembles evidence supporting the expansion of SAFE on indoor and outdoor spaces. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Compared to cigarette smoke, heated tobacco product (HTP) aerosol contains significantly fewer and lower levels of harmful and potentially harmful constituents (HPHCs). However, the impact on environmental air is relatively unexplored. Therefore, this study compared levels of secondhand aerosol (SHA) constituents in air following glo HTP use with secondhand smoke (SHS) constituents following cigarette smoking in an environmental test chamber (ETC). Extracted ETC air samples following product use sessions were analyzed for 27 SHS/SHA constituents, including HPHCs. The use of glo HTPs resulted in significantly lower SHA HPHC levels in the ETC air relative to SHS HPHC levels from cigarette smoking. Some aerosol constituents (benzene, CO, formaldehyde, nicotine, respirable suspended particles, toluene, ethylbenzene, fine particulate matter, m- and p-cresol, o-cresol, pyridine, styrene, and ultraviolet particulate matter) were either below the limit of detection in ETC air or at significantly low levels following glo HTP use relative to cigarette smoking. Mean concentrations of the assessed constituents were at least 90 % lower following use of glo HTPs compared to smoking combustible cigarettes. These results suggest that glo HTP use would not contribute significantly to indoor air contamination and would reduce non-user exposure to HPHCs and other harmful constituents relative to combustible cigarettes. Such reductions in non-user exposure should be considered when assessing the tobacco harm reduction potential of glo HTPs.

We assessed the prevalence and factors associated with living with tobacco/nicotine product users among nicotine-naïve adolescents. Data were from the 2018 Florida Youth Tobacco Survey that included 34,183 adolescents who were never-tobacco product users and provided information about living with tobacco/nicotine users. More than a quarter of adolescents lived with a tobacco/nicotine user. Girls were more likely than boys and middle-schoolers were more likely than high-schoolers to live with someone who uses cigarettes, cigars, and poly-tobacco. Compared to non-Hispanic Whites, Hispanics were less likely to live with someone who uses cigarettes, electronic nicotine delivery systems, cigars, and poly-tobacco. Adolescents who reported currently having asthma were more likely to report living with someone who smokes cigarettes, hookah, and poly tobacco. To reduce and ideally eliminate exposure to smoke/aerosol emitted from tobacco products in nicotine-naïve adolescents, individual and family-centered interventions, coupled with state-wide tobacco prevention strategies are warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

E-cigarette use among youth remains a public health concern. Although extant literature has examined the perceived harms of cigarette use and secondhand smoke, perceptions of harms associated with secondhand e-cigarette aerosol (SHA) are not well understood. Therefore, we used data from the 2020 U.S. National Youth Tobacco Survey (n = 13,292) in which participants indicated whether SHA caused no harm, little harm, some harm, or a lot of harm. We dichotomized SHA harm perceptions as harmless vs harmful. We included sociodemographics (i.e., age, sex, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, urbanicity), e-cigarette use characteristics, and SHA exposure as covariates and estimated associations between SHA harm perceptions and each covariate using adjusted logistic regression. Most youth perceived SHA as harmful (87.9 %) compared to harmless (12.1 %). Older youth (vs younger youth) had higher odds of perceiving SHA as harmless, whereas male (vs female) youth had 49 % higher odds (95 % CI: 1.29-1.72) of perceiving SHA as harmless. As the number of days of e-cigarette use in the past 30 days increased (vs non-users), odds of perceiving SHA as harmless increased. Youth exposed to SHA (vs no exposure) in the past 30 days had 35 % higher odds of perceiving SHA as harmless (95 % CI: 1.16-1.57). To conclude, youth SHA harm perceptions varied overall and by sociodemographic characteristics, e-cigarette use, and SHA exposure. Educational campaigns to inform youth of the health risks associated with e-cigarettes and SHA are needed to reduce overall nicotine intake and disparities in nicotine exposure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is too early to provide a clear answer on the impact of exposure to the second-hand aerosol of heated tobacco products (HTPs) in the planning of policy for smoke-free indoors legislation. Here, we conducted a preliminary study to evaluate indoor air quality with the use of HTPs. We first measured the concentration of nicotine and particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) in the air following 50 puffs in the use of HTPs or cigarettes in a small shower cubicle. We then measured these concentrations in comparison with the use equivalent of smoking 5.4 cigarettes per hour in a 25 m 3 room, as a typical indoor environment test condition. In the shower cubicle test, nicotine concentrations in indoor air using three types of HTP, namely IQOS, glo, and ploomTECH, were 25.9-257 μg/m 3 . These values all exceed the upper bound of the range of tolerable concentration without health concerns, namely 3 µg/m 3 . In particular, the indoor PM 2.5 concentration of about 300 to 500 μg/m 3 using IQOS or glo in the shower cubicle is hazardous. In the 25 m 3 room test, in contrast, nicotine concentrations in indoor air with the three types of HTP did not exceed 3 μg/m 3 . PM 2.5 concentrations were below the standard value of 15 μg/m 3 per year for IQOS and ploomTECH, but were slightly high for glo, with some measurements exceeding 100 μg/m 3 . These results do not negate the inclusion of HTPs within a regulatory framework for indoor tolerable use from exposure to HTP aerosol, unlike cigarette smoke.

The revised Promotion Act, enforced in April 2020, allows the establishment of dedicated smoking rooms for heated tobacco products (HTPs). Since carcinogenicity assessment is unable to determine the safe level of secondhand smoke, we estimated excess lifetime cancer risk using previously reported risk factors. Assuming that nicotine inhalation is proportional to cancer potency, the lifetime cancer risk for HTP IQOS is expected to be below 10 -5 (1/100,000), which is three orders of magnitude lower than that for cigarettes.