A Risk Assessment Matrix for Public Health Principles: The Case for E-Cigarettes
- PMID: 28362360
- PMCID: PMC5409564
- DOI: 10.3390/ijerph14040363
A Risk Assessment Matrix for Public Health Principles: The Case for E-Cigarettes
Abstract
Besides nicotine replacement therapies, a realistic alternative for smoking cessation or for smoking substitution may come from electronic cigarettes (ECs), whose popularity has been steadily growing. As for any emerging behaviour associated with exposure to inhalational agents, there is legitimate cause for concern and many health organizations and policy makers have pushed for restrictive policy measures ranging from complete bans to tight regulations of these products. Nonetheless, it is important to reframe these concerns in context of the well-known harm caused by cigarette smoking. In this article, we discuss key public health principles that should be considered when regulating ECs. These include the concept of tobacco harm reduction, importance of relative risk and risk continuum, renormalization of smoking, availability of low-risk product, proportionate taxation, and reassessment of the role of non-tobacco flavours. These public health principles may be systematically scrutinized using a risk assessment matrix that allows: (1) to determine the measure of certainty that a risk will occur; and (2) to estimate the impact of such a risk on public health. Consequently, the ultimate goal of responsible ECs regulation should be that of maximizing the favourable impact of these reduced-risk products whilst minimizing further any potential risks. Consumer perspectives, sound EC research, continuous post-marketing surveillance and reasonable safety and quality product standards should be at the very heart of future regulatory schemes that will address concerns while minimizing unintended consequences of ill-informed regulation.
Keywords: cigarette smoking; electronic cigarettes; public health; regulation; risk assessment; risk continuum; tobacco harm reduction.
Conflict of interest statement
None of the authors have any competing financial interests to declare, with the exception of Riccardo Polosa and Azim Chowdhury. Riccardo Polosa has received lecture fees and research funding from Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKline, manufacturers of stop smoking medications. He has also served as a consultant for Pfizer, Global Health Alliance for treatment of tobacco dependence, and ECITA (Electronic Cigarette Industry Trade Association, in the UK). Lectures fees from a number of European electronic cigarette industry and trade associations (including FIVAPE in France and FIESEL in Italy) were directly donated to vaper advocacy organizations. He is currently scientific advisor for LIAF, Lega Italiana Anti Fumo (Italian acronym for Italian Anti Smoking League) and Convenor for the Working Group on “Requirements and test methods for emissions of electronic cigarettes”, within the European Committee for Standardization (CEN/TC 437). AC is a practicing attorney in the area of food, drug and tobacco regulatory law and currently represents tobacco and e-cigarette companies in matters of FDA regulatory compliance.
References
-
- Caponnetto P., Campagna D., Cibella F., Morjaria J.B., Caruso M., Russo C., Polosa R. EffiCiency and Safety of an eLectronic cigAreTte (ECLAT) as Tobacco Cigarettes Substitute: A Prospective 12-Month Randomized Control Design Study. PLoS ONE. 2013;8:e66317. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0066317. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Research Materials
