• Vancouver, BC.
MARK TYNDALL CONTRIBUTED TO THE GLOBE AND MAIL PUBLISHED AUGUST 29, 2016

The time is right to spark easier electronic-cigarette access

Getting Regulations Right on Vapour Products

MARK TYNDALLContributed to Vancouver Sun.Published Jun 04, 2014Source: click here The rapid increase in the use of e-cigarettes, along with

Reducing Harm with Electronic Cigarettes

MARK TYNDALLContributed to Ottawa Citizen.Published Jun 04, 2014Source: click here Instead of pursuing a national campaign with defined goals and

Let’s Clear the Air: Vaping Holds Great Promise for Smokers

MARK TYNDALLContributed to The Globe and MailPublished October 3, 2019Source: click here Mark Tyndall is a physician and researcher, specializing

Mark Tyndall is the executive medical director of the B.C. Centre for Disease Control and a professor at the University of British Columbia.

 

On Sept. 1, the Tobacco and Vapour Products Control Act will take effect in British Columbia. This provides a set of regulations for an electronic-cigarette industry that has been growing rapidly without any clear federal or provincial guidelines. The stated goal of this legislation is to ensure that youth are not encouraged to use vapour products. This is in response to concerns that direct marketing and access to youth will lead to nicotine addiction and be a gateway to tobacco smoking.

Smoking is one of the biggest public health challenges facing Canada and a great many countries around the world. It is hard to identify a disease that is not either caused or made worse by smoking. Because smoking has been with us so long and the health impacts are so insidious, it is not approached with the urgency it deserves. Cigarettes are a legal product that kill more than 50 per cent of the people who use them long term and are estimated to cost the Canadian health-care system $4.4-billion annually. While British Columbia can claim that its overall smoking rates are the lowest in Canada, there is little solace to be found in having 14 per cent of the population using a product that will kill more than half of them.

Although it may be argued that tobacco-control initiatives have been successful, including public education, increasing taxation, restrictions on advertising, graphic packaging, smoke-free workplaces, programs to help people quit and nicotine-replacement therapies, progress has been very slow and many of the current interventions have run their course or are becoming less effective. This is especially the case among the poor and disadvantaged who have disproportionately high smoking rates and are less influenced by current interventions. E-cigarettes should now be considered a valuable tool to reduce exposure to tobacco smoke while delivering the nicotine that drives the addiction.

It is not clear what this legislation will mean to the sales of e-cigarettes. Besides limiting sales to people 19 or older, blackening out shop windows and putting restrictions on the number of people vaping in the premises, these regulations would not require major changes at the retail level. Stores were not selling these products to minors in the first place and the vast majority of customers are people who want to reduce or quit smoking cigarettes and will, one hopes, not be dissuaded by an unattractive storefront. One effect may be increases in Internet sales as the regulations do not attempt to address the complex issue of restricting marketing and sales online.

 

While the regulation of e-cigarettes is timely and important, it should not be lost that e-cigarettes are an important alternative to smoking cigarettes. If all smokers were to switch to e-cigarettes, there would be a dramatic improvement in people’s health and massive cost savings to our health-care system. The demand for alternatives to smoking tobacco is not only driven by public health but by the majority of people who currently smoke. Most have tried to quit and although there is room to improve access to other forms of nicotine-replacement therapy, we know that this will not be an effective long-term solution for many smokers. It is a moral imperative that people be given alternatives that could improve their health and potentially save their lives while seeking to ensure that such products help to further de-normalize smoking.

Now that there are regulations in place to help prevent the use of e-cigarettes in young people, we must turn our attention to increasing access and uptake to e-cigarettes for the nearly five million chronic tobacco smokers in Canada. Regulations are needed to ensure that the e-cigarettes themselves meet quality standards, that the vapour is free from other toxins, that the advertised nicotine content is accurate and that the health and social impacts are closely monitored. The current regulations leave the door open for the use of e-cigarettes to reduce the harms of tobacco that could facilitate a major public health breakthrough.

It is the right of every smoker to use a product that is safer – up to 95-per-cent safer according to a report from Britain’s Royal College of Physicians. While we continue to collect information on the long-term health and social effects of e-cigarettes, it is very clear that the long-term effect of smoking tobacco is chronic illness and death. While this legislation is designed to prevent nicotine and vapour exposure among young people, it is now time to focus on how e-cigarettes can be used to help the people in our communities who will otherwise be dying of smoke inhalation.

 
MARK TYNDALL CONTRIBUTED TO THE GLOBE AND MAIL PUBLISHED OCTOBER 3, 2019

Let’s clear the air: Vaping holds great promise for smokers

Getting Regulations Right on Vapour Products

MARK TYNDALLContributed to Vancouver Sun.Published Jun 04, 2014Source: click here The rapid increase in the use of e-cigarettes, along with

Reducing Harm with Electronic Cigarettes

MARK TYNDALLContributed to Ottawa Citizen.Published Jun 04, 2014Source: click here Instead of pursuing a national campaign with defined goals and

Let’s Clear the Air: Vaping Holds Great Promise for Smokers

MARK TYNDALLContributed to The Globe and MailPublished October 3, 2019Source: click here Mark Tyndall is a physician and researcher, specializing

Mark Tyndall is a physician and researcher, specializing in infectious diseases, addiction and harm reduction. He is a professor at the School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia

 

The outbreak of vaping-related lung disease among youth in the United States, along with a recent case in London, Ont., has sparked calls for new regulations designed to protect our youth from vaping. These calls have ranged from placing tighter restrictions on youth advertising all the way to banning the sales of e-cigarettes completely.

Vaping among youth in Canada has increased dramatically in recent years. According to survey data, 20 per cent of youth have vaped in the past 30 days and some are daily users. Nicotine is known to be highly addictive and when people start using nicotine regularly, they will have difficulty stopping. Among youth, vaping now exceeds cigarette smoking in many communities.

What has been largely lost in the current discourse is that there are an estimated five million Canadians who continue to smoke combustible cigarettes, and this includes youth. The elimination of smoking in Canada should be a top public health priority, as smoking is by far the leading cause of preventable death and disease in the country.

If a safer way to deliver nicotine is available, then it only makes sense that people who are currently smoking cigarettes should be encouraged to transition. In fact, it should be the right of smokers to be provided with accurate information and easy access to these safer products. Instead, people have been bombarded with conflicting information around the safety of vaping and with the current outbreak of acute lung injury, it is likely that some people who have successfully transitioned to vaping will return to smoking cigarettes.

 

While we await the completion of the investigations around the cases of respiratory disease, it is becoming clear that the majority of the cases are linked to vaping bootleg liquids, many containing THC oil – the active ingredient in marijuana.

While the use of commercially available nicotine-containing vaping products could possibly cause acute lung injury, it is difficult to understand why this is happening now when vaping has been popular with youth for several years. Something has clearly changed, and the best explanation would be contaminated or newly introduced non-commercial products being distributed in specific geographic areas.

This makes the case for tighter regulations even more urgent. Regulation is a way to ensure that people are getting the best possible products – high quality devices and e-liquids. Further, as we strengthen regulations the warnings for e-cigarettes should be based on facts and the information that we do know.

For example, while the long-term health impact of delivering nicotine through e-cigarettes has not been established, we do know that the long-term health impacts of smoking cigarettes are severe, predictable and often fatal. If you are currently smoking cigarettes, you should eliminate your exposure to the known toxins released when burning tobacco, many of which are scientifically linked to a wide range of illnesses including cancer, heart disease and chronic lung diseases.

While quitting combustible cigarettes without the aid of e-cigarettes is recommended, e-cigarettes provide a much safer delivery option if you are unable to quit nicotine. For those people who do not currently smoke cigarettes, we strongly recommend that e-cigarettes are not used. However, if you do decide to try vaping always be sure that the delivery device is of high quality and that the e-liquid has been purchased from a reliable source. Using unregulated or bootleg sources can result in serious acute lung disease and even death.

 
Vaping products should not be promoted as lifestyle devices or their sales targeted to non-smokers. As with combustible cigarettes they are addictive and habit forming. Clearly, they are not without risk and there could still be unknown long-term health effects. However, compared with smoking cigarettes, commercially available vaping products remain a much safer option. This approach to risky behaviours is commonly called harm reduction and is practised widely in other areas of public health.

The role of public health leaders, medical professionals and government regulators are to protect the health of the public. When it comes to the health of young people there is added urgency.

The tragic outbreak of acute lung disease among youth in the United States, including at least 15 deaths, is not so much a wake-up call about the dangers of vaping nicotine. Rather, it is a lesson of what can go terribly wrong in an environment without adequate regulation, conflicting information, and the ongoing threat of adulterated and illicit products.

Mark Tyndall Publishing date:Jun 04, 2014

Reducing harm with electronic cigarettes

Getting Regulations Right on Vapour Products

MARK TYNDALLContributed to Vancouver Sun.Published Jun 04, 2014Source: click here The rapid increase in the use of e-cigarettes, along with

Reducing Harm with Electronic Cigarettes

MARK TYNDALLContributed to Ottawa Citizen.Published Jun 04, 2014Source: click here Instead of pursuing a national campaign with defined goals and

Let’s Clear the Air: Vaping Holds Great Promise for Smokers

MARK TYNDALLContributed to The Globe and MailPublished October 3, 2019Source: click here Mark Tyndall is a physician and researcher, specializing

Instead of pursuing a national campaign with defined goals and strategies, we have relied mainly on stigmatizing smokers and promoting an abstinence-only model of control.

Cigarette smoking remains the leading cause of preventable disease in Canada and is a huge drain on our health care system. The estimated direct health care costs of $4.4 billion annually does not begin to capture the progressive health decline of those who smoke prior to receiving a defining diagnosis like cancer, heart disease or chronic lung disease.

Mark Tyndall Publishing date: Aug 30, 2016

Getting Regulations Right on Vapour Products

Getting Regulations Right on Vapour Products

MARK TYNDALLContributed to Vancouver Sun.Published Jun 04, 2014Source: click here The rapid increase in the use of e-cigarettes, along with

Reducing Harm with Electronic Cigarettes

MARK TYNDALLContributed to Ottawa Citizen.Published Jun 04, 2014Source: click here Instead of pursuing a national campaign with defined goals and

Let’s Clear the Air: Vaping Holds Great Promise for Smokers

MARK TYNDALLContributed to The Globe and MailPublished October 3, 2019Source: click here Mark Tyndall is a physician and researcher, specializing

The rapid increase in the use of e-cigarettes, along with the proliferation of vape shops in the province, has occurred without any clear federal or provincial guidelines. On Thursday, British Columbia will enact the Tobacco and Vapour Products Control Act to provide a regulatory framework.

The rapid increase in the use of e-cigarettes, along with the proliferation of vape shops in the province, has occurred without any clear federal or provincial guidelines. On Thursday, British Columbia will enact the Tobacco and Vapour Products Control Act to provide a regulatory framework.

 

The stated goal of this legislation is to ensure that youth are not encouraged to use vapour products. As the vast majority of people who smoke begin in their teens, it is critical to prevent direct marketing and easy access to nicotine-containing products early on.

 

Mark Tyndall Latest Blog

Cigarette Smoking is the Public Health Crisis. Not Vaping.

Getting Regulations Right on Vapour Products

MARK TYNDALLContributed to Vancouver Sun.Published Jun 04, 2014Source: click here The rapid increase in the use of e-cigarettes, along with

Reducing Harm with Electronic Cigarettes

MARK TYNDALLContributed to Ottawa Citizen.Published Jun 04, 2014Source: click here Instead of pursuing a national campaign with defined goals and

Let’s Clear the Air: Vaping Holds Great Promise for Smokers

MARK TYNDALLContributed to The Globe and MailPublished October 3, 2019Source: click here Mark Tyndall is a physician and researcher, specializing

In response to an “epidemic” of vaping amongst youth, the province of British Columbia has released a new set of regulations designed to reverse this trend. It aims to position the government as a progressive champion for the health and well-being of young people and has been widely applauded by anti-smoking groups. As other provinces tackle the same issues, it is likely that similar legislation will be enacted across Canada. While vaping has been increasing amongst youth since 2015, the impetus to act now has been driven by the recent outbreak of over 2,000 cases of vaping related lung diseases in the United States, including 42 deaths. While there have been no reported deaths in Canada, there have been 6 reported cases of vaping associated illnesses, the details of which have not been released.

 

Public health officials at the Centers for Disease Control in the US have been extremely cautious in reporting out the cause of these acute lung injuries and for several months would only say that vaping should be avoided until investigations were complete. It is now clear that these illnesses had nothing to do with vaping commercially available nicotine-containing e-cigarettes.

 

At the outset, over 90% of the patients self-reported vaping THC and it was recently shown that 29 of 29 lung fluid specimens collected showed vitamin E acetate which has been an additive in THC vaping pods. Vitamin E acetate or other oils are not found in standard nicotine-containing vaping liquids. This tragic outbreak is a problem of illegal, boot-leg THC vaping pods that is driven by lax regulation, misinformation and uneven cannabis legislation across the US. Since these illnesses are unrelated to youth vaping in general, the regulations introduced in BC will not directly prevent any new cases of acute lung injury. In fact, prohibition invites alternative supply sources as seen in the US and the unintended consequences could actually be an upswing of cases.

What is even more problematic however, is that the announcement from the BC government did not even mention the potential of vaping as a harm reduction strategy to reduce the suffering and death caused by cigarettes. Even before the outbreak of lung disease in August of 2019, the voice and interests of smokers were largely ignored. Public health officials clung to the thinnest of arguments against the benefits of vaping over smoking cigarettes and essentially gave people the green light to continue smoking. How can a technology that allows people to use nicotine while essentially eliminating exposure to all of the known toxins and carcinogens be met with so much scepticism and opposition?

 

Ironically, many of the institutions and individuals speaking out the loudest against vaping do support other harm reduction measures like seatbelts and airbags to reduce traffic fatalities, designated driver programs to reduce impaired driving, bicycle helmets to reduce head injuries, condoms to prevent the transmission of sexually transmitted infections, and even needle exchange programs to reduce the transmission of HIV among people injecting drugs. These are pragmatic and common-sense approaches that reduce the risk of harm when engaging in activities that carry some degree of inherent risk. However, this standard public health approach has not been applied to vaping even though the direct health and societal impacts of cigarette smoking are far greater than all these other issues combined.

 

At the core of the opposition to vaping is the belief that we are actually doing a good job at helping people to quit smoking cigarettes. This is so far from the truth. The overall slow reduction in smoking prevalence seen in Canada is directly related to the relentless and predictable death of current smokers along with a reduction in smoking initiation by young people. Current smokers, most of whom have tried and failed to quit with the available interventions, have been left to either quit on their own or die prematurely. The impact of smoking related illness has fallen disproportionately on people living in poverty, people with mental illness, and those dealing with other substance use challenges, where the rates of smoking are high and the chance of quitting is extremely low.

Today alone, 100 Canadians will die directly and prematurely from smoking cigarettes. This is the public health emergency, not vaping. Any new legislation that restricts vaping without addressing cigarettes only serves to benefit tobacco sales and the companies that profit from it. Transitioning people from cigarettes to vaping should be the centre piece of our tobacco-free aspirations in Canada. Many people will be able to quit vaping nicotine overtime, but getting off cigarettes, the most dangerous nicotine delivery method known, should be the priority. In order to encourage this transition, vaping products must be incentivised for current smokers. This includes accurate information, lower cost, choice of flavors, and adequate nicotine dosing. This all can be done while discouraging the uptake of vaping among young non-smokers through education, youth-oriented promotional restrictions, and other measures to reduce youth access.

Mark Tyndall Latest Blog

The Power of Scientific Misinformation – Retracting a Scientific Paper

Getting Regulations Right on Vapour Products

MARK TYNDALLContributed to Vancouver Sun.Published Jun 04, 2014Source: click here The rapid increase in the use of e-cigarettes, along with

Reducing Harm with Electronic Cigarettes

MARK TYNDALLContributed to Ottawa Citizen.Published Jun 04, 2014Source: click here Instead of pursuing a national campaign with defined goals and

Let’s Clear the Air: Vaping Holds Great Promise for Smokers

MARK TYNDALLContributed to The Globe and MailPublished October 3, 2019Source: click here Mark Tyndall is a physician and researcher, specializing

This week the Journal of the American Heart Association retracted a widely cited study by Stanton Glantz that found vaping to be associated with an increased risk of heart attacks. The retraction of a scientific article is quite unusual as most flawed studies are rejected prior to publication. It should be noted however that there are many scientific papers that have methodological problems that make it through the peer-review process and get published. In most cases these papers are challenged by other academics following publication in the letter pages of the journal. In fact, this often leads to insightful comments and rebuttals which can make even flawed studies useful additions to the scientific discourse. Retractions are primarily made because the study results were later found to be fabricated or the methodological flaws were so egregious and the conclusions so distorted that the editors felt obligated to retract it. Such was the case with this particular study.

 

Stanton Glantz is very well-known for his career as an anti-tobacco researcher and advocate. In the last few years he has turned his attention to vaping and has become the main spokesperson for anti-vaping interests and often uses his own epidemiological research to back up his claims. He is one of the most influential researchers in the field and his findings and statements matter. The scientific literature surrounding vaping is heavily slanted towards finding unfavourable results. The media is also heavily biased against vaping and are always searching for sensational headlines to support this bias.

An association of vaping with heart attacks is exactly the sort of thing that makes headlines. The fact that these associations were driven by people who had not used e-cigarettes before their heart attack was not questioned. The end result is adding to the narrative that vaping offers no advantages over smoking and should be heavily restricted or even banned. For those who have already successfully transitioned from cigarette smoking to vaping, it raises serious doubts about their decision even though they may feel way better.

 

No matter which side of the vaping debate you are on, we should all be able to agree that policy should be driven by science and evidence. The past year has seen a rash of media stories, political statements and policy decisions that are largely driven by ideology, hysteria and misinformation. Studies that falsely claim that people who vape have equal or higher rates of heart attacks add to the misinformation. We should applaud the Journal of the American Heart Association for taking the unusual step of retracting the article and the scientific community for exposing the study for what it is. Research is certainly not our enemy and much more is needed around the place of vaping as a harm reduction intervention. People deserve unbiased studies that are done with rigour and integrity.

Mark Tyndall Latest Blog

Why Publish A Blog About Vaping?

Getting Regulations Right on Vapour Products

MARK TYNDALLContributed to Vancouver Sun.Published Jun 04, 2014Source: click here The rapid increase in the use of e-cigarettes, along with

Reducing Harm with Electronic Cigarettes

MARK TYNDALLContributed to Ottawa Citizen.Published Jun 04, 2014Source: click here Instead of pursuing a national campaign with defined goals and

Let’s Clear the Air: Vaping Holds Great Promise for Smokers

MARK TYNDALLContributed to The Globe and MailPublished October 3, 2019Source: click here Mark Tyndall is a physician and researcher, specializing

The first time that I heard about vaping as a safer alternative to smoking cigarettes was in 2012. At the time I was Head of the Infectious Diseases division at the University of Ottawa and was conducting research in harm reduction among people who used street drugs. I had established a group of eight community members to be part of an advisory committee for a large prospective cohort project designed to measure the impact of various harm reduction strategies to prevent HIV and Hepatitis C transmission. All were smokers.

Within the first three months we lost two committee members to smoking related diseases – one to severe COPD and one to a heart attack. It occurred to me that smoking would kill far more participants in this cohort study than HIV, Hepatitis C or all other infectious diseases combined, and we were doing nothing about it.

Now smoking cigarettes among people who use other drugs is extremely common – like 95% common. In fact, I have been doing research among people who use drugs for over twenty years and cigarette use is so ubiquitous that it is hardly even considered to be a health issue.

E-cigarettes are the very definition of harm reduction. To make an inherently risky behavior – in this case cigarette smoking – less harmful for people who are unable/unwilling/uninterested/unready to stop that behavior/habit/addiction/pleasure. In 2015, Public Health England came out with a comprehensive review of existing evidence and concluded that e-cigarettes were 95% less harmful than smoking cigarettes. There has been no information that has emerged over the past five years to refute that estimate. How could we not offer a safer way to deliver nicotine to people who are struggling with other drug dependencies, as well as the estimated five million Canadians who smoke cigarettes? How is providing access to a product much safer than cigarettes not a basic right?

The road to promote vaping as an alternative to smoking has faced many challenges over the past decade. In fact, public health leaders, medical associations, political leaders, the media and even the general public have increasingly taken a very negative stance toward vaping. E-cigarettes that were once positioned as a promising public health intervention have been turned into a public health threat. Reasonable dialogue has been drowned out by fear mongering, moral panic and blatant misinformation. The e-cigarette d

ebate provides a fascinating window into substance use, drug policy, public health and our health system in general. This blog is intended to explore and expose the major issues that inform and influence the policies surrounding vaping in Canada. The stakes are high.

Video Blogs

Presentations

Vaping

Getting Regulations Right on Vapour Products

MARK TYNDALLContributed to Vancouver Sun.Published Jun 04, 2014Source: click here The rapid increase in the use of e-cigarettes, along with

Vaping

Reducing Harm with Electronic Cigarettes

MARK TYNDALLContributed to Ottawa Citizen.Published Jun 04, 2014Source: click here Instead of pursuing a national campaign with defined goals and

Vaping

Let’s Clear the Air: Vaping Holds Great Promise for Smokers

MARK TYNDALLContributed to The Globe and MailPublished October 3, 2019Source: click here Mark Tyndall is a physician and researcher, specializing