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.

Arizona Turns to a 50% Retail Vape Tax as Tobacco Tax Revenue Falls 47% From 2008
Arizona Turns to a 50% Retail Vape Tax as Tobacco Tax Revenue Falls 47% From 2008
Arizona's First Things First is pushing for an excise tax equal to 50% of the retail price of vaping products, estimating that the measure could generate about $100 million annually. The agency says its tobacco-tax revenue has fallen 47% from 2008 levels. Arizona has attempted to broaden its nicotine tax base in each of the past two years: a 2025 bill proposed a 50% wholesale-price tax, while a 2026 measure shifted to a 50% retail-price tax covering alternative nicotine products and vapor products. Separately, the state enacted HB 4001 this year to establish a new licensing and sales framework for alternative nicotine products.
Sep.21
UK HMRC Unveils Red and Yellow Transitional Vape Duty Stamps Ahead of October Tax Launch
UK HMRC Unveils Red and Yellow Transitional Vape Duty Stamps Ahead of October Tax Launch
HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) has released sample images of the UK’s transitional vaping duty stamps, showing red and yellow versions ahead of the new Vaping Products Duty and Vaping Duty Stamps Scheme starting on October 1, 2026. Transitional stamps contain physical security features but no digital scanning function. Approved businesses may purchase them through November 30 and affix them through December 31. HMRC has not stated that the red and yellow samples represent different product categories or tax statuses.
Regulations
Sep.02
Huabao International Buys Indonesian HNB Manufacturer for RMB 90 Million, Adding OEM/ODM Capacity
Huabao International Buys Indonesian HNB Manufacturer for RMB 90 Million, Adding OEM/ODM Capacity
Huabao International Holdings Limited will acquire 100% of PT Broad Far Indonesia through two wholly owned subsidiaries for approximately RMB 90 million. The Indonesian company manufactures and sells heat-not-burn tobacco sticks and provides OEM/ODM services. The sellers are part of a related-party group controlled by Huabao International Chair and controlling shareholder Zhu Linyao. PT Broad Far Indonesia generated $4.37 million in revenue and $177,000 in profit after tax in the first half of 2026, while net assets stood at about $326,000 at June-end. An independent valuer assessed the company’s equity at approximately RMB 93.06 million. Following completion, the HNB manufacturing operation will be consolidated into Huabao International.
News
Sep.29 by 2Firsts Perspectives
Australia Extends Illicit Tobacco Crackdown From Tougher Penalties to Customs and Logistics Supply Chains
Australia Extends Illicit Tobacco Crackdown From Tougher Penalties to Customs and Logistics Supply Chains
Australia's federal government introduced a new illicit tobacco enforcement bill on September 10 that would strengthen evidentiary presumptions, representative sampling, seizure and forfeiture procedures, proceeds-of-crime powers and obligations for customs and logistics operators. The proposal follows the Combatting Illicit Tobacco Act 2026, which took effect in August and increased penalties while expanding investigative and asset-recovery tools. Together, the reforms extend Australia's crackdown from tougher criminal sanctions into import, logistics and evidentiary enforcement.
Sep.14
U.S. Health Groups Seek to Overturn FDA Enforcement Discretion for Pending PMTAs as Altria's Helix, NJOY and AVM Move to Intervene
U.S. Health Groups Seek to Overturn FDA Enforcement Discretion for Pending PMTAs as Altria's Helix, NJOY and AVM Move to Intervene
American Vapor Manufacturers (AVM) and Altria subsidiaries Helix Innovations and NJOY filed separate motions on October 7, 2026, seeking to intervene on the FDA's side in a lawsuit challenging its enforcement guidance for certain e-cigarette and nicotine pouch products with pending premarket tobacco product applications (PMTAs). Seven public health and tobacco-control organizations, including the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, sued the agency in July to overturn the policy. AVM argues that vacating the guidance could disrupt orders, inventory, retail distribution and investments in regulatory submissions.
Regulations
Oct.09
Smoore Seeks to Toss CCELL Price-Fixing Claim as Court Weighs Vertical Distribution Versus Horizontal Conspiracy
Smoore Seeks to Toss CCELL Price-Fixing Claim as Court Weighs Vertical Distribution Versus Horizontal Conspiracy
Smoore and four authorized U.S. CCELL distributors are asking a California federal court to permanently dismiss a core antitrust claim brought by direct purchasers. Plaintiffs allege that Smoore coordinated minimum wholesale prices, customer allocation and limits on price competition among distributors, amounting to a per se unlawful horizontal conspiracy. The defendants say the alleged conduct reflects ordinary vertical relationships between a manufacturer and its distributors. The court previously dismissed a similar claim, and the latest dispute centers on whether the second amended complaint adds sufficient facts to establish a horizontal agreement.
Sep.14