doi: 10.1097/OPX.0b013e3181d95188.Ward SK1, Dogru M, Wakamatsu T, Ibrahim O, Matsumoto Y, Kojima T, Sato EA, Ogawa J, Schnider C, Negishi K, Tsubota K.Author information1Johnson and Johnson, Department of Ocular Surface and Visual Optics, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.AbstractPURPOSE: To prospectively investigate the effects of passive cigarette smoke exposure on the ocular surface and tear film in soft contact lens (SCL) wearers.METHODS: Twelve right eyes of 12 SCL wearers without any ocular or systemic diseases and 10 right eyes of 10 subjects who never wore CLs were examined before and 2 h after 5 min of passive cigarette smoke exposure in a controlled smoke chamber.Tear evaporation rate measurement, tear film break-up time (TBUT) examination, ocular surface fluorescein, rose bengal stainings, and Schirmer I test were performed at each visit.RESULTS: The mean tear evaporation rates, TBUTs, and vital staining scores were significantly worse in CL wearers compared with healthy control subjects.

TBUTs showed significant worsening after passive smoke exposure in both groups.The mean tear evaporation rate and vital staining scores showed a significant increase with brief passive smoke exposure in subjects not wearing CLs but not in CL wearers.CONCLUSION: Even brief passive exposure to cigarette smoke is associated with adverse effects on the ocular surface as evidenced by an increase in tear instability and damage to the ocular surface epithelia in SCL wearers and non-CL wearers.PMID: 20351603 DOI: 10.1097/OPX.0b013e3181d95188 [Indexed for MEDLINE] Publication typeComparative StudyMeSH termsAdultContact Lenses, Hydrophilic*Cornea/drug effects*Cornea/metabolismDry Eye Syndromes/chemically inducedDry Eye Syndromes/metabolismDry Eye Syndromes/rehabilitationFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMalePrognosisProspective StudiesReference ValuesRisk FactorsTears/drug effectsTears/metabolism*Tobacco Smoke Pollution/adverse effects*SubstanceTobacco Smoke PollutionFull Text SourcesLippincott Williams & WilkinsOvid Technologies, Inc.MedicalTears - MedlinePlus Health InformationSecondhand Smoke - MedlinePlus Health Information

The IP address used for your Internet connection is part of a subnet that has been blocked from access to PubMed Central.Addresses across the entire subnet were used to download content in bulk, in violation of the terms of the PMC Copyright Notice.Use of PMC is free, but must comply with the terms of the Copyright Notice on the PMC site.For additional information, or to request that your IP address be unblocked, For requests to be unblocked, you must include all of the information in the box above in your message.E-cigarettes are battery-operated handheld devices which, upon inhalation, vaporize a solution of propylene glycol or glycerin (with or without added nicotine) to produce smoke-like vapor.E-cigarettes have grown to be extremely popular recreational devices, with many people using them to stop smoking.However, research has not conclusively shown them to be effective for smoking cessation, and their long-term safety profile remains unknown.Public opinion is strongly divided concerning the risks and benefits of e-cigarette use.

However, because they are free of combustion, most scientists agree that e-cigarettes are significantly less harmful than tobacco cigarettes.e cigarette galvestonE-cigarettes may therefore constitute a form of harm reduction, a relatively safer alternative to tobacco cigarette smoking.e cigarette herbal vaporizerMany nevertheless believe there are risks involved with their largely unregulated use, including unknown long-term safety concerns, their possible impact on children and youth, increased nicotine addiction in the population at large, and the renormalization of a smoking culture.e cigarette fleetThe aim of our review was to use an ethical lens to examine the arguments both for and against the use of e-cigarettes for tobacco harm reduction.e cigarette kemptville

We used a public health framework that balanced tensions between utilitarianism, which posits that actions are desirable if they benefit the majority, and liberalism, which maintains above all that individuals have the right to self-determination in health.e cigarette leclerc olivetOverall, we found that the ethical arguments in support of e-cigarette use for tobacco harm reduction largely outweigh the arguments against them.e cigarette joinville le pontRelative to the known harms of tobacco cigarettes, e-cigarettes are unlikely to warrant serious long-term public health concerns.Therefore, it is likely that the public health gains obtained from tobacco harm reduction among current smokers would outweigh any population-level harms that result from non-smoker uptake.However, while the existence of a gateway effect for youth remains uncertain, e-cigarette use in this population should be discouraged, with policies and regulations aligned to this effect.

We concluded that in light of the current evidence, interventions aimed at promoting e-cigarettes as attractive and competitive alternatives to cigarette smoking are ethically sound.There is an urgent need for data from high-quality randomized controlled trials to conclusively establish the safety and efficacy of e-cigarettes for smoking cessation.This data would allow government agencies to define the regulatory profile of e-cigarettes as either smoking cessation aids or consumer products, which would in turn impact on their availability, and use.As well, longitudinal data will be required to examine the long-term safety of frequent and prolonged inhalation of propylene glycol or glycerin, with and without nicotine.Why you should careBecause the e-cig issue is heating up.OZY was first to this story, putting you ahead of the curve.View More OZY Originals “Fake news” is a two-word combination that’s been more popular in 2016 and 2017 than “Beyoncé’s baby.” The criticisms of duplicity swing both ways, right and left.

President Trump leveled the critique at CNN in his early days in office.Then again, former national security adviser Michael Flynn was accused of populating his feeds with alternative facts.And nonpartisan companies like Google and Facebook are planning to call fake news when they see it on their sites to dispel confusion.The latest topic in the fake-news whirlwind is a surprising one: e-cigarettes, with both libertarians and staunch conservatives weighing in.In February, the Washington Examiner, a conservative-leaning source, blasted the headline: “Why fake news plagues the e-cigarette debate.” According to the article, the cause for concern was twofold — studies that claim e-cigarettes are harmful, and journalists who bait readers with preposterous headlines that vilify e-cigarettes.An article by a commentator on the conservative website The Rebel ran below the headline “#FakeNews: One CNN tweet spreads two lies about vaping to millions.” At a SXSW panel in March titled “A New Leaf: Vaping, E-Cigs & the Future of Tobacco,” the four panelists from places like the American Enterprise Institute and TechFreedom spoke out about the fake news that shrouds e-cigarettes.

“If anyone denies the basic signs of this issue, I guess you could think of it as fake news,” Evan Swarztrauber at TechFreedom says.“Things like alternative facts, false information.” When the smoke clears, the hero of the day may be President Trump, another fan of calling fake news when he sees it.What basic signs?Proponents say e-cigarettes are far healthier than regular cigarettes, in line with Nicorette levels of danger, and that the industry is overly regulated.Critics like Stanton Glantz, a medical professor at the University of California, San Francisco, have reportedly said that e-cigarettes may disperse vapor that could be dangerous to the heart.When the smoke clears, the hero of the day may be Trump, another fan of calling fake news when he sees it.The argument that fake news drives e-cigarettes research goes back to at least 2015 and has increased its presence since the last election cycle.Mike Siegel, a professor of community health sciences at Boston University, sees the newly appointed FDA commissioner as a clear step up from Obama’s choice; this new one, he says, could pave a way forward for less stringent regulations on the e-cigarette market.

The conservative site Heat Street wrote that “God sent electronic-cigarette users a savior on November 8th: Donald Trump.” On his fifth day in office, Trump reportedly received a letter from California Republican Rep.Duncan Hunter, stating that 2016 regulations needed to go or be delayed.According to AEI resident scholar Sally Satel, the backlash against e-cigarettes largely falls on the left side of the political spectrum.In 2012–13, sales of disposable e-cigarettes grew about 320 percent, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.But in 2016 the FDA expanded regulations to include a premarket approval process for all tobacco e-cigarette products.Some industry spokespeople say the regs are too harsh and might cost at least $2 million for each product.This wouldn’t hurt big tobacco, many e-cigarette supporters say, but it might price small producers out of this monetary commitment.It’s likely that Trump will add e-cigarettes to his long list of items to deregulate.

Perhaps his administration will take a page from ally Theresa May’s country, which has historically allowed e-cigarettes easily into the market.Just as the U.S.cracked down on e-cigarettes, the Royal College of Physicians in the U.K.issued a report that summarized e-cigarette research and concluded that the benefits (reducing cigarette consumption) outweighed the dangers (teenagers becoming addicted to nicotine).Not every country, like Australia and Scotland, wants easy access to vaping, fearful of what it might do to the next generation that is already less addicted to nicotine than previous generations.Grover Norquist, the president of Americans for Tax Reform, says the e-cigarette community will become powerful — at least as powerful as the marijuana legalization cohort, if it isn’t already.It’s certainly happening: When New Mexico state representative Liz Thomson advocated a tax on e-cigarettes and a ban on their use in some businesses, the vaping lobby rallied, and Thomson lost in November by fewer than 500 votes.