The Importance of Evidenced-Based Debate on E-Cigarettes

Aug.30.2022
The Importance of Evidenced-Based Debate on E-Cigarettes
eSmoking Institute highlights importance of evidence-based discussions on reducing harm and promoting safer e-cigarettes for smokers.

In public discourse, there is an increasing discussion around reducing the health damages associated with smoking, and further research confirms that approximately 95% of e-cigarettes are less toxic than traditional cigarettes, and may assist with smoking cessation.


Marcin Kozłowski, a member of the management board of the eSmoking Institute, a professional research and development center located in Poznan, emphasized the importance of using modern research techniques for reliable, evidence-based public debates. The institute has been dedicated to expanding its research field and has recently purchased equipment to support advanced technology development, including tools that allow for a wider range of testing of water content in nicotine liquids. The institute has also acquired a modern viscometer for dynamic viscosity testing, which will enable them to broaden the scope of their physical and chemical testing.


The head of eSI spoke about the institute's work, stating that their goal is to develop regulations and standards to help smokers better understand the products available in the market. This will further improve the safety of these products. They are also closely monitoring the research of other leading centers in this field. Most importantly, e-cigarette users can now identify that they are using verified, less harmful products and the institute is pleased that more and more people are gaining knowledge about these products.


Marcin Kozłowski is a member of the management board of the eSmoking Institute/Fot.


What is an electronic cigarette?


This is the idea behind the creation of the product, which does not contain tar substances that are known to cause many smoking-related diseases. It works like an inhaler, providing the body with nicotine through the process of evaporating a liquid (based on glycerin and propylene glycol). Therefore, no tobacco is burned, and the amount of toxic substances released in the aerosol compared to traditional tobacco products such as cigarettes is much lower. Clearly, electronic cigarettes are much less harmful than traditional cigarettes, as our research and independent international studies have shown. M. Kozłowski cited a report from the UK Public Health England, which concluded that 95% of the content in electronic cigarettes is tar-free and therefore less harmful compared to traditional cigarettes.


In this context, we often hear about "harm reduction." What exactly does that mean?


Against the backdrop of policies to reduce the harm caused by smoking, it is worth highlighting the role of electronic cigarettes. Some countries in the world, including New Zealand, the United States, and previously mentioned United Kingdom, have implemented policies suggesting that smokers who are unable to quit should switch to the less harmful alternative of electronic cigarettes, even in the form of prescriptions. Surprisingly, this has yielded impressive results. For instance, research conducted in the United Kingdom shows that as many as 52% of its 3.2 million adult electronic cigarette users have quit smoking. Conversely, Spain reports that nine out of ten electronic cigarette users in their country have either completely quit or significantly reduced their nicotine intake. Therefore we have increasingly strong reasons to believe that policies aimed at reducing harm will produce extremely positive results. However, it should be remembered that the products we use must be thoroughly tested.


What else should we know?


The electronic cigarette market offers a variety of options for users, including open or closed systems that only require the replacement of liquid cartridges, such as the Vuse ePod. In my opinion, it is important that we ensure consumers are unable to alter any aspect of the product, so that it can be thoroughly reviewed for its final formulation and ingredients. If we choose to use open systems, only single-use liquids should be permitted. The concept of the finished product would involve providing a substance that is constrained by the entire testing system with regards to its final formulation.


Statement


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


This article does not represent the views of 2FIRSTS and 2FIRSTS cannot confirm the authenticity or accuracy of the content of this article. The translation of this article is only intended for industry communication and research purposes.


Due to limitations in the level of translation, the compiled article may not fully express the content of the original text. Please refer to the original text for accuracy.


2FIRSTS maintains complete alignment with the Chinese government regarding any domestic, Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan, or foreign statements or positions.


The copyright of compiled information belongs to the original media and author. If there is any infringement, please contact us for immediate 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.

Australia Adds 6-Methylnicotine to Schedule 9 Prohibited Substances, Effective October 1
Australia Adds 6-Methylnicotine to Schedule 9 Prohibited Substances, Effective October 1
Australia's Therapeutic Goods Administration published a final decision on September 25 to classify 6-methylnicotine as a Schedule 9 prohibited substance under the Poisons Standard, effective October 1, 2026. TGA said the chemical has been reported in e-cigarette liquids sold in Australia and marketed as nicotine-free or nicotine alternatives, while evidence also indicates its use in preparations such as oral pouches. The government originally proposed a Schedule 7 classification but ultimately adopted the stricter Schedule 9 designation, citing acute toxicity, dependence risk, use in unapproved consumer products and misleading marketing.
News
Sep.29 by 2Firsts Perspectives
Pennsylvania Vape Directory Enforcement Starts Oct. 19, Barring Retail Sales of Unlisted Products
Pennsylvania Vape Directory Enforcement Starts Oct. 19, Barring Retail Sales of Unlisted Products
Pennsylvania's Act 57 vape directory regime will reach the end of its 120-day inventory transition period on Oct. 19. Nicotine-containing e-cigarettes intended for retail sale in the state that are not listed on the Attorney General's ENDS directory will then be barred from retail sale and treated as contraband subject to seizure, forfeiture and destruction. Manufacturers face annual product certification, brand- and style-based fees and a minimum $50,000 surety bond, while retailers and wholesalers must source through licensed channels and monitor the directory.
Regulations
Oct.08
Australia Brings in Deloitte to Support Illicit Tobacco and Vape Enforcement Across Data, Processes and Project Delivery
Australia Brings in Deloitte to Support Illicit Tobacco and Vape Enforcement Across Data, Processes and Project Delivery
Australia’s Department of Home Affairs has hired Deloitte to provide data analytics, business-process, communications and project-delivery support to the Office of the Illicit Tobacco and E-Cigarette Commissioner. The government says Deloitte personnel do not provide policy advice to the Commissioner or the Australian government, with policy development and decision-making remaining with public officials. The arrangement has nevertheless drawn scrutiny because Deloitte has previously provided professional services to several tobacco and vaping companies.
Sep.03
UK Vape Duty Starts in October as Hayati, DOJO and Others Launch Lower-Capacity Products With Lower Per-Unit Tax
UK Vape Duty Starts in October as Hayati, DOJO and Others Launch Lower-Capacity Products With Lower Per-Unit Tax
The UK's Vaping Products Duty will take effect on October 1, 2026, at a flat rate of £2.20 per 10ml of vaping liquid. Ahead of implementation, DOJO, PIXL and Hayati have introduced or been reported to be adding lower-capacity tiers alongside larger products. DOJO has added a 6ml BLAST7K Fresh below its 10ml BLAST10K Fresh, PIXL offers both a 12ml 8000 and a 6ml 5K, while retailer Ninja Vapes says Hayati is preparing a 7ml 4K alongside its existing 12ml 6K. The pattern points to a growing lower-capacity tier in the UK market, although the brands have not all explicitly linked the changes to the new duty.
Sep.23
Product | KIWI Launches Spark 2 and Spark 2 Pro in Germany, Two Hardware Tiers Share Backward-Compatible 2ml Pods
Product | KIWI Launches Spark 2 and Spark 2 Pro in Germany, Two Hardware Tiers Share Backward-Compatible 2ml Pods
KIWI has launched the Spark 2 and Spark 2 Pro refillable pod systems in Germany at official prices of €18 and €29, respectively. Spark 2 uses an 800mAh removable lithium-ion battery in a pen-style body, while Spark 2 Pro features a 1,400mAh removable battery, a box-shaped design and vibration feedback every 20 puffs. Both devices use the same 2ml Spark V2 pods in 0.8Ω and 1.2Ω versions, with AirSync airflow adjustment and a choice between Cotton Tips and conventional Drip Tips. The new pods also remain compatible with the original KIWI Spark.
News
Sep.29 by 2Firsts Perspectives
UK Directors Banned After 352,688 Vapes Imported From China Were Misdeclared as Medical Nebulizers in £15 Million Tax Case
UK Directors Banned After 352,688 Vapes Imported From China Were Misdeclared as Medical Nebulizers in £15 Million Tax Case
The UK Insolvency Service said YSK Enterprises imported large quantities of vapes from China in 2023, with a shipment addressed to the company declared as medical nebulizers before Border Force found 352,688 vaping products. HMRC calculated nearly £15 million ($20.3 million) in unpaid VAT and customs duty, alongside about £437,000 in corporation tax. Two directors were disqualified for nine years. The case predates the UK's Vaping Products Duty, which will introduce vape-specific excise and duty-stamp requirements from October 2026.
Regulations
Sep.11