Switching to E-Cigarettes and Heated Tobacco Products Reduces Vascular Damage and Smoking-Related Illnesses: Study

Aug.16.2022
Switching to E-Cigarettes and Heated Tobacco Products Reduces Vascular Damage and Smoking-Related Illnesses: Study
CoEHAR researchers found using e-cigarettes and heated tobacco products can reduce smoking-related diseases. Their study challenges misconceptions about vaping.

Researchers from the Center of Excellence for the Acceleration of Harm Reduction (CoEHAR) involved in the Replica project have discovered that switching to electronic cigarettes and heated tobacco products can reduce the incidence of vascular damage and smoking-related diseases. The findings challenge the prevailing misconception that using e-cigarettes and heated tobacco products is just as harmful as smoking.


The study has been published by an independent laboratory affiliated with the Replica Project, whose scientists are world leaders in harm reduction. The latest research assessed the damage caused to endothelial cells, which release substances that control the dilation and contraction of blood vessels, by cigarette smoke compared to electronic cigarettes and heated tobacco products.


Damage to the inner lining of blood vessels known as endothelial damage is a primary pathology that leads to diseases such as atherosclerosis, with smoking being the main culprit. Smoking can impair the normal function of the endothelium, cause damage to the vascular system, and lead to the development of high blood pressure and atherosclerosis. Smoking and exposure to smoke toxins are related to the impairment of the repair mechanism needed for endothelial homeostasis, such as the inhibition of endothelial cell migration.


Reducing exposure to smoke toxins may mitigate the harmful effects on endothelial and cardiovascular disease development. Numerous international studies have investigated the impact of smoking on endothelial cell migration and associated vascular damage, particularly a study by Taylor et al. (2017). Compared to cigarette smoke, exposure to electronic cigarette aerosol significantly reduces inhibition of in vitro (in a test tube) endothelial cell migration. This means that endothelial cells exposed to electronic cigarette aerosol retain their ability to effectively heal small wounds in blood vessels, unlike those exposed to cigarette smoke and toxins, which severely limit their wound repair capacity.


One of CoEHAR's most successful projects is the Replica project, in which researchers have replicated some of the most significant international studies in the field of reducing tobacco harm via an independent laboratory network. They have demonstrated a reduction in the toxicity of electronic cigarettes and have established reference standards for scientific research. The goal of CoEHAR's scientists is to conduct a multicenter replication study to validate the results of Taylor and his colleagues.


A study titled "Comparative evaluation of e-cigarette aerosol and cigarette smoke on endothelial cell migration: a replication study" compared the effects of three commercial e-cigarette delivery systems and traditional cigarettes. Following international scientific standards and utilizing the latest technology and tools, the data collected by researchers at CoEHAR confirmed the findings of Taylor and colleagues: e-cigarettes do not induce inhibition of endothelial cell migration in vitro compared to cigarette smoke, thus reducing harm caused by tobacco smoke. Furthermore, CoEHAR researchers compared the results of two different heated tobacco products, which demonstrated significantly less impact than observed with cigarette smoke.


According to Professor Massimo Caruso, co-project leader of the Replica initiative, "As previously demonstrated by the Replica research team, the harm caused by electronic nicotine delivery systems is significantly lower than the harm caused by cigarette smoke. An interesting fact is that using non-combustible products can reduce vascular damage and prevent the likelihood of smoking-related diseases such as atherosclerosis and hypertension. Our research once again challenges the notion that electronic cigarettes or heated tobacco will cause similar damage to combustible cigarettes.


Statement:


This article is compiled from third-party information and is only meant for industry-related communication and learning purposes.


This article does not represent the views of 2FIRSTS and 2FIRSTS cannot confirm the truthfulness and accuracy of its content. The translation of this article is only intended for industry exchange and research.


Due to limitations in the translation process, the translated article may not fully reflect the original expression. Therefore, please refer to the original article for accuracy.


2FIRSTS is fully aligned with the Chinese government on any domestic, Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan, and foreign-related statements and positions.


The compilation of information is subject to the copyright ownership of the original media outlet and author. If there is any infringement, please contact us to request removal.



Disclaimer

This article is provided solely for professional research, industry discussion, and informational purposes. Any references to brands, companies, products, technologies, or policies are made for factual reporting and analytical purposes only, and do not constitute endorsement, recommendation, promotion, or advertising by 2Firsts.

Nicotine-containing products, including but not limited to cigarettes, e-cigarettes, heated tobacco products, and nicotine pouches, carry significant health risks. Readers are responsible for complying with all applicable laws and regulations in their respective jurisdictions, including age restrictions and access limitations.

The information contained in this article should not be regarded as investment, legal, medical, regulatory, or commercial advice. While 2Firsts strives to ensure the accuracy and reliability of its content, it does not assume liability for any direct or indirect loss arising from errors, omissions, inaccuracies, or reliance on the information contained herein.

This article is not intended for individuals below the legal age for accessing tobacco or nicotine-related information in their jurisdiction.

 

Copyright Notice

This article is either original content produced by 2Firsts or content reproduced, translated, summarized, or adapted from third-party sources with attribution where applicable. The intellectual property rights of the original content remain with 2Firsts or the respective original rights holders.

No individual or organization may copy, reproduce, distribute, republish, modify, translate, or otherwise use this content without prior authorization. Any unauthorized use may result in legal action.

For copyright-related inquiries, corrections, or removal requests, please contact: info@2firsts.com.

 

AI-Assisted Translation and Editing Notice

Portions of this article may have been translated, edited, or reviewed with the assistance of artificial intelligence tools to improve efficiency and readability. Due to the limitations of AI-assisted translation and editing, discrepancies, omissions, or inaccuracies may exist when compared with the original source.

Where applicable, readers are advised to refer to the original source for the most complete and accurate information. If you identify any errors or believe that any content infringes upon your rights, please contact us at info@2firsts.com, and we will review and address the matter promptly.

Scottish Vape Display Rules Could Cost Businesses £61 Million, Affecting More Than 11,000 Retail Outlets
Scottish Vape Display Rules Could Cost Businesses £61 Million, Affecting More Than 11,000 Retail Outlets
A Scottish government impact assessment estimates that proposed vape display and packaging rules could create up to £61 million ($82 million) in compliance costs for businesses, affecting more than 11,000 retail outlets. The estimated costs are mainly linked to inventory adjustments, retail storage changes and the resources required for businesses to understand and implement the new requirements. The measures form part of the UK’s broader efforts to tighten vape regulation, particularly around product displays, packaging and sales practices.
Aug.10
U.S. Ninth Circuit Upholds FDA Denial of MH Global’s Flavored Vape PMTA Applications
U.S. Ninth Circuit Upholds FDA Denial of MH Global’s Flavored Vape PMTA Applications
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the FDA’s denial of MH Global LLC’s applications to market flavored electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS). The court ruled that FDA’s comparative-efficacy framework, which requires applicants to show that flavored products provide greater cessation or switching benefits than tobacco-flavored alternatives, is consistent with the Tobacco Control Act’s “appropriate for the protection of the public health” standard. The court also found that FDA was not required to establish the framework through notice-and-comment rulemaking.
Aug.26
EU ‘TPD3’ Enters Next Phase on Aug. 14 as Fragmented Vape and Nicotine Pouch Rules Push the Single Market Toward Regulatory Overhaul
EU ‘TPD3’ Enters Next Phase on Aug. 14 as Fragmented Vape and Nicotine Pouch Rules Push the Single Market Toward Regulatory Overhaul
A 12-week European Commission consultation on revising the Tobacco Products Directive and Tobacco Advertising Directive is due to close on Aug. 14, 2026. The Commission has identified e-cigarette flavours, disposable vapes, tobacco heating devices, nicotine pouches, nicotine-free e-cigarettes, packaging and digital marketing among areas for possible new EU rules. National regulations already vary significantly across the bloc, a fragmentation the Commission says creates internal-market barriers and distorts competition. No formal revised TPD/TAD legislative text has yet been published, with the Commission currently indicating December 2026 for the legislative initiative.
Aug.14
Philip Morris Malaysia Again Meets Religious Authority Over Cigarette Alternatives as Perlis Mufti Responds on Halal Criteria
Philip Morris Malaysia Again Meets Religious Authority Over Cigarette Alternatives as Perlis Mufti Responds on Halal Criteria
Philip Morris Malaysia Managing Director Naeem Shahab Khan met Perlis Mufti Mohd Asri Zainul Abidin on September 17 and presented the company's shift from conventional cigarettes toward alternative products. The mufti said a product could be considered halal if it is clean, its side effects are not harmful or can be controlled, and it does not involve excessive waste. His remarks did not mention IQOS or any other specific PMI product and did not amount to a new product-specific religious ruling. It was at least the second publicly reported engagement between Philip Morris Malaysia and a Malaysian religious institution over cigarette alternatives within six months.
Regulations
Sep.18 by 2Firsts Perspectives
Retail Case Study | Wisconsin Vape Market One Year After New Regulations: Johnny Vapes Reports 80% Sales Decline as Consumers Shift Online and Across State Lines
Retail Case Study | Wisconsin Vape Market One Year After New Regulations: Johnny Vapes Reports 80% Sales Decline as Consumers Shift Online and Across State Lines
According to WNCY on August 24, 2026, some independent vape retailers in Wisconsin say they have faced significant business pressure one year after new vape regulations took effect. Johnny Vapes, a retailer operating in northeast Wisconsin, said its store count fell from seven locations to four, sales declined by about 80%, and roughly 90% of its inventory was affected. Retailers said some consumers have shifted to online purchases or traveled to neighboring Michigan to buy vape products. The case highlights how local regulations can reshape retail operations, inventory management and consumer purchasing patterns.
Aug.28
Reynolds Seeks to Join Altria Lawsuit Challenging FDA PMTA Rule and Calculation of 180-Day Deadline
Reynolds Seeks to Join Altria Lawsuit Challenging FDA PMTA Rule and Calculation of 180-Day Deadline
Three R.J. Reynolds companies are seeking to intervene in a lawsuit filed by Altria subsidiaries Helix Innovations and NJOY challenging the FDA's 2021 PMTA final rule. The companies dispute how the agency uses Acceptance and Filing reviews and completeness determinations to establish when the Tobacco Control Act's 180-day decision period begins. Reynolds has also linked prolonged PMTA reviews to competition from unauthorized vaping products. The FDA, meanwhile, has been accelerating reviews and reducing its backlog.
Sep.14