Abstract
Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are battery-powered devices that heat a liquid containing either vegetable glycerin or propylene glycol in combination with nicotine and/or flavours; an aerosol is produced that is inhaled by the user. Health Canada currently prohibits the importation, marketing or selling of e-cigarettes containing nicotine, although they can be easily purchased. Because of the availability of e-cigarettes, patients and visitors to health care organizations (HCOs) are inquiring about their use within and on the grounds of those facilities. We contend that in provinces or municipalities where e-cigarette use has not been restricted, HCOs should develop institutional policies to do so. We argue that the following reasons collectively justify measures to restrict the use of e-cigarettes within HCOs: unknown long-term safety, uncertain effectiveness in harm reduction, the conflict with the mission of HCOs to promote health, the potential negative health impacts on vulnerable patients with a compromised health status, and the risk of re-normalization of smoking. However, because of the rapidly developing evidence base in this area, HCOs should remain responsive to emerging evidence regarding the status of e-cigarettes as an effective harm reduction tool.
Keywords: Public health, electronic cigarettes, health policy, bioethics, nicotine
Résumé
Les cigarettes électroniques sont des dispositifs à piles qui réchauffent un liquide contenant soit de la glycérine végétale, soit du propylèneglycol combinés avec de la nicotine et/ou des arômes; le dispositif produit un aérosol qui est inhalé par l’utilisateur. Santé Canada interdit encore l’importation, la commercialisation et la vente des cigarettes électroniques contenant de la nicotine, mais celles-ci s’achètent quand même facilement. En raison de la disponibilité des cigarettes électroniques, les patients et visiteurs des organismes de soins de santé (OSS) s’interrogent sur leur usage à l’intérieur et sur le terrain de ces établissements. Nous soutenons que dans les provinces ou les municipalités où l’usage de la cigarette électronique n’est pas contrôlé, les OSS devraient élaborer des politiques internes pour ce faire. Selon nous, les raisons suivantes justifient collectivement que l’on prenne des mesures pour contrôler l’usage des cigarettes électroniques dans les OSS: leur innocuité inconnue à long terme; leur efficacité incertaine en matière de réduction des méfaits; la contradiction avec la mission des OSS, qui est de promouvoir la santé; les effets sanitaires négatifs possibles sur les patients vulnérables à la santé fragile; et le risque de renormalisation du tabagisme. Cependant, vu l’évolution rapide des fondements scientifiques dans ce domaine, les OSS devraient rester ouverts aux nouvelles données probantes sur le statut de la cigarette électronique comme outil efficace de réduction des méfaits.
Mots Clés: santé publique, cigarettes électroniques, politique sanitaire, bioéthique, nicotine
Footnotes
Conflict of Interest: None to declare.
References
- 1.Canadian Public Health Association. Policy Brief: E-cigarettes - A smoking problem? CPHA Health Digest. 2014. [Google Scholar]
- 2.Bean S. E-cigarettes: Exploring associated ethical and policy implications for hospitals. Lung Assoc Ontario Respir Care Soc Update. 2014;30(3):4–5. [Google Scholar]
- 3.Bean S, Smith M A. Hastings Centre Report. 2015. Vaping Matter: E-cigarette Use in Health Care Organizations; pp. 11–12. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Health Canada. Notice - To All Persons Interested in Importing, Advertising or Selling Electronic Smoking Products in Canada. 2009. [Google Scholar]
- 5.Can J Public Health. 2014.
- 6.E-cigarette regulations across Canada. Winnipeg Free Press On-Line. 2014. [Google Scholar]
- 7.Obourn E. E-cigarette use slapped with growing provincial regulation. 2014. [Google Scholar]
- 8.Ferreira V. Ontario to restrict e-cigarettes, ban flavoured tobacco and require calorie counts in restaurants. National Post, 2015 May 27.
- 9.Bill 45 (Chapter 7, Statutes of Ontario, 2015). An Act to Enhance Public Health by Enacting the Healthy Choices Menu Act, 2015 and the Electronic Cigarettes Act, 2015 and by Amending the Smoke-Free Ontario Act (May 28, 2015).
- 10.Malas M. Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems: An Ethical and Policy Analysis of the Drug and Tobacco Regulatory Frameworks (unpublished).
- 11.House of Commons Standing Committee on Health. Report 9 - Vaping: Toward a Regulatory Framework for E-cigarettes. (Adopted by the Committee on February 24, 2015; presented to the House on March 10, 2015).
- 12.Richtel M. The New York Times. 2014. Selling a poison by the barrel: Liquid nicotine for e-cigarettes. [Google Scholar]
- 13.Gostin LO, Glasner AY. E-cigarettes, vaping, and youth. JAMA. 2014;312(6):595–96. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.7883. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.McRobbie H, Bullen C, Hartmann-Boyce JH. The Cochrane Collaboration. 2014. Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation and reduction. Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Stanbrook M. Regulate e-cigarettes as drug delivery devices. CMAJ. 2013;185(16):1379. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.131469. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Non-Smokers’ Rights Association/Smoking and Health Action Foundation. Position Statement on Electronic Cigarettes. Toronto, ON: Non-Smokers’ Rights Association, 2013.
- 17.Mill JS. On Liberty and Other Essays. New York, NY: Kaplan Publishing; 2009. [Google Scholar]
- 18.Holland S. Public Health Ethics. Cambridg, UK: Polity Press; 2007. [Google Scholar]
- 19.Jensen KK. The moral foundation of the precautionary principle. J Agric Environ Ethics. 2002;15:39–55. doi: 10.1023/A:1013818230213. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 20.ScienceEnvironmental Health Network. Wingspread Conference on the Precautionary Principle. 1998. [Google Scholar]
- 21.Public Health England. E-cigarettes around 95% less harmful than tobacco estimates landmark review. 2015. [Google Scholar]