Tag Archives: quitting

Link Between E-Cigarette Use After Quitting Smoking and Lung Cancer Risk

Posted on by
Reply
E-cigarettes health risks

Increasing Evidence of E-Cigarette Health Risks

Image Credit: Dead Mitiei/Shutterstock.

A recent study involving over 4.5 million participants indicates that smokers who switch to vaping after quitting cigarettes are more than 50% more likely to develop lung cancer compared to those who successfully quit smoking altogether. However, it still underscores that e-cigarettes may present less risk than continuing to smoke.

“This study contributes to a growing body of evidence indicating that e-cigarettes are not as low-risk as previously believed,” says Becky Freeman from the University of Sydney, Australia, who was not involved in the research. “[It’s] crucial for those attempting to quit smoking to seek safer options first, and only use e-cigarettes after exhausting other methods.”

In the UK by 2024, over 40% of smokers who quit are expected to use e-cigarettes. Notably, 20% of ex-smokers were still vaping more than a year after quitting. Although many advocate for e-cigarettes as an effective smoking cessation tool, they have been associated with airway inflammation, reduced lung function, and even lung cancer in animal studies.

To further investigate the effects of e-cigarettes, Kim Young Wook and researchers from Seoul National University followed more than 4.5 million adult smokers as part of South Korea’s National Health Checkup Program from 2018 to 2023.

Participants were categorized as current smokers, short-term quitters (those who hadn’t smoked since at least 2018), or long-term quitters (those who hadn’t smoked since at least 2014). Over the study period, 35,887 participants developed lung cancer, with 12,807 related deaths recorded.

Analysis of this data revealed that ex-smokers who vape are at a significantly greater risk of lung cancer death compared to their counterparts who stopped smoking completely. “Ex-smokers who continued vaping faced a 56% higher risk of lung cancer,” Kim stated.

While long-term studies are essential, some chemicals found in e-cigarettes have been associated with DNA damage. Vaping has also been linked to oxidative stress, meaning an imbalance between free radicals and antioxidants in the body, as well as epigenetic changes affecting genes and inflammation of respiratory and oral tissues.

Nonetheless, Kim and his team emphasize that they cannot definitively conclude that e-cigarettes cause lung cancer, and that further research is warranted, especially in populations outside of South Korea.

Remarkably, ex-smokers who vape experienced a significantly lower risk of death from all causes in comparison to active smokers, reinforcing the broader health benefits of quitting smoking altogether.

Nicole Lee from Curtin University in Perth, Australia, pointed out that the study’s findings suggest that completely quitting both smoking and vaping is more effective for preventing lung cancer than continuing to vape while attempting to quit smoking. “The results of this study are vital for individuals who have quit smoking,” she emphasized.

“Our recommendation to smokers remains that the safest choice is to quit entirely, but if quitting is challenging, [without the use of e-cigarettes] or if they prefer not to use them, transitioning to e-cigarettes is a safer alternative,” Lee stated. “As a harm reduction strategy, it certainly is preferable to continuing to smoke.”

Professor Bernard Stewart from the University of New South Wales in Sydney added that further research is necessary before implementing public health policies that may impose additional restrictions on e-cigarettes.

Topics:

Source: www.newscientist.com

Reducing Cancer Risks: How Quitting Cigarettes and Vaping Can Mitigate Smoking’s Impact

Posted on by
Reply

Emerging Evidence: E-Cigarettes and Health Risks

Credit: Dead Mitiei/Shutterstock.

A groundbreaking study involving over 4.5 million participants reveals alarming statistics: smokers who switched to vaping post-cessation face more than a 50% increased risk of developing lung cancer compared to those who quit smoking entirely. Nonetheless, the research also emphasizes that using e-cigarettes to aid in quitting is a safer alternative than continued cigarette smoking.

As noted by Becky Freeman from the University of Sydney, Australia, who was not part of the study, “This research contributes to a growing body of evidence indicating that e-cigarettes may not be as low-risk as initially suggested. It’s essential for those attempting to quit smoking to explore safer options, yet effective cessation methods should be prioritized first.”

In the UK, over 40% of smokers are expected to use e-cigarettes in 2024, with 20% of ex-smokers continuing to vape over a year after quitting. Although e-cigarettes are often praised as a cessation tool, research links them to airway inflammation, diminished lung function, and increased cancer risk in animal studies.

To delve deeper into the effects of e-cigarettes, Kim Young Wook and a team from Seoul National University analyzed data from South Korea’s National Health Checkup Program from 2018 to 2023, tracking participants classified as current smokers, short-term quitters, or long-term quitters. Throughout the five-year span, 35,887 individuals developed lung cancer, leading to 12,807 related deaths.

Upon analyzing e-cigarette usage among different participant groups, researchers discovered that ex-smokers who continued to vape exhibited a significantly higher risk of dying from lung cancer compared to non-vapers. “Those who used e-cigarettes after quitting had a 56% elevated risk when compared to individuals who quit smoking completely,” Kim noted.

While the need for extended research is clear, certain studies suggest that e-cigarette chemicals may cause DNA damage, and vaping has been associated with oxidative stress, epigenetic changes, and inflammation in respiratory and oral tissues.

However, Kim’s team emphasizes that causation cannot be definitively established, stressing the necessity for further investigations, particularly involving diverse populations outside South Korea.

Remarkably, it was found that ex-smokers who utilized e-cigarettes had a significantly lower overall mortality risk compared to current smokers, reinforcing the substantial health benefits of quitting smoking altogether.

According to Nicole Lee from Curtin University in Perth, Australia, the study underscores that quitting both smoking and vaping entirely is more effective in preventing lung cancer than merely transitioning to e-cigarettes during the quitting phase. “The implications of this study are crucial for those who have stopped smoking,” she stated.

“Our ongoing recommendation to smokers is that complete cessation is the safest option. However, if quitting is unachievable for some, switching to e-cigarettes is certainly a less harmful alternative compared to continued smoking,” Lee advised.

Lastly, Bernard Stewart, a professor at the University of New South Wales in Sydney, emphasized the need for further research before implementing public health policies that may introduce additional e-cigarette regulations.

Topics:

Source: www.newscientist.com

Did former Twitter users find what they were seeking on alternative platforms after quitting the app? | Social Media

Posted on by
Reply

“Bcontinue
@thread
“This week has felt like sitting on a half-empty train early in the morning as gradually more people board with horror stories of how awful the service is on the other line,” actor David Harewood wrote on Meta’s Twitter/X rival, which, judging by the number of “Hey, how does this work?” questions from newcomers, seems to be seeing echoes, at least in the UK, following last week’s far-right riots.

Newcomers to the thread might be wondering why it took so long. To say Elon Musk’s tenure as owner of the social network formerly known as Twitter and now renamed X has been outrageous would be a criminal understatement. Recent highlights include the unbanning of numerous far-right and extremist accounts, as well as his own misinformation campaign regarding far-right anti-immigrant riots in the UK.

Before Musk bought the company in 2022, few alternatives to Twitter existed, but several have emerged in the past few years. Today, there are the generally left- and liberal-leaning Blue Sky and Mastodon, the right-leaning Gab, and Donald Trump’s Truth Social Network.

But perhaps the biggest threat to X is Threads, in part because it was launched by Meta, the giant behind Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp. But a simple question remains: is Threads any good?

For Satnam Sanghera, an author and journalist, the reason for the move is simple: “This place is corroding the very fabric of British society so I am trying to avoid it as much as possible and hoping it will be regulated,” he explained in a direct message on X. “Systemic abuse has been an issue for me, and for many people of colour, for years.”

But the force behind the switch is not so much the allure of Threads, a popular new social network, but the power to drive people away from X. “Threads has some great things, especially the fact that it links with Instagram, which is probably the most convenient social media platform,” Sanghera says. “But a lot of my loved ones aren’t on it. I’m hoping that will change, or maybe it’s just that it’s time to quit social media altogether.”

The integration with Instagram allows Insta users to open a Threads account with just a few clicks, which seems to have really accelerated Threads’ growth. Threads hit the milestone of 200 million active users earlier this month, just one year after its initial release. In comparison, Bluesky has just 6 million registered accounts and 1.1 million active users, while Mastodon has 15 million registered users, but no public data on active users.




Social media outlet Bluesky is one of X’s current alternatives. Photo: Jaap Arrians/NurPhoto/Shutterstock

“Threads has one big advantage,” says Emily Bell, director of the Center for Digital Journalism at Columbia University in New York. “It has a built-in user base of celebrities and athletes. If you really want to kick everyone off Twitter, you can have Taylor Swift, Chapel Rowan, [Italian sports journalist] “Fabrizio Romano”

Bell believes that because all of these users are already on Instagram, it may be easier to attract them to Threads than to convince them to start from scratch with an entirely new social network.

But she says this is a shame, and thinks Threads is a terrible product. “To me, Threads is a platform designed to compete with Twitter, and it feels like it was designed by a company that hates everything about Twitter,” she says. “Threads is boring as hell – presentation, participation, everything.”

From my personal experience trying out Threads for this article, it seems like Meta doesn’t see Threads as a huge, exciting new product that they want new users to use. Having around 88,000 followers on X has always made me hesitant to join other social networks, which is why I’ve never had an Instagram account.

To join Threads, I had to join Instagram first, which took about 24-36 hours because I got some weird error messages while signing up. I finally managed to create a Threads account, but after following five accounts I was limited. A few hours later the limit was lifted, I was able to follow three more accounts, and then I was limited again. I quickly gave up.

Those who found it easy to join the site say that once they were on it, it was more comfortable than X, but that’s mainly for the simple reason that it still has moderation staff and doesn’t actively try to attract the far right.

“Threads have a different vibe because they’re almost always participated in by small, self-organized groups,” says misinformation researcher Nina Jankowitz. “They’re usually want Something different than Twitter/X. It definitely helps that they are actively moderating it and that the site’s leadership is not actively promoting conspiracy theories.”

Both potential rivals to X are keen to differentiate themselves from the original. Meta has said it doesn’t want Threads to focus on news and current events like X. Mastodon is perhaps the most consciously “woke” of the alternatives, with very different norms around content warnings and sharing. As such, Bluesky offers the closest experience to the “rebellious” and playful “old Twitter” that many still miss.

Even some of the early successes on Threads are a bit sceptical about its actual value: Stella Creasy, the Labour MP for Walthamstow, has more than 20,000 followers on Threads (166,300 on X), but she confesses that she never actually posts there.

“I just cross-post it to Instagram,” she says, sounding a little guilty. “So I [following] Nothing happens and there is no involvement whatsoever.”

That’s not to say Chrissy has shunned social media: she still posts on X, and is now in a local WhatsApp group with up to 700 members, where her supporters can interact with her directly. While she says she “doesn’t understand” TikTok (“I don’t feel like dancing in public”), she created an account there because “local Asian moms told me that’s where it’s at.”

Chrissie noted that this fragmentation of social media has made her job as a member of Congress more difficult during the recent turmoil: Trying to connect with an audience and provide accurate information is harder on six platforms than it is on one.

Threads’ success may be due to the ease of joining by default: If you use Instagram, it’s the easiest thing to join, and once you’re there, it’s… fine. But if other users seem to be operating on autopilot, they probably are.

“It’s a little bit overloaded here, you’re just in the media and you don’t know what to do,” Creasy says, “and ironically, that’s why I don’t do threads. I know that’s where I get my momentum and that’s where I’m not doing anything.”

Source: www.theguardian.com