RJ Reynolds has not published a negative randomised clinical trial of Camel Snus for smoking cessation

Analysis of mainstream emissions, secondhand emissions and the environmental impact of IQOS waste: a systematic review on IQOS that accounts for data source

OBJECTIVE

To highlight the general features of IQOS literature focusing on the chemical analysis of IQOS emissions.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus databases were searched on 8 November 2021 using the terms 'heated tobacco product', 'heat-not-burn', 'IQOS' and 'tobacco heating system' with time restriction (2010-2021). The search yielded 5480 records.

STUDY SELECTION

Relevant publications on topics related to IQOS assessment were retrieved (n=341). Two reviewers worked separately and reached agreement by consensus.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data on author affiliation and funding, article type and date of publication were extracted. Publications were categorised depending on their focus and outcomes. Data on IQOS emissions from the chemical analysis category were extracted.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Of the included publications, 25% were published by Philip Morris International (PMI) affiliates or PMI-funded studies. PMI-sponsored publications on emissions, toxicology assessments and health effects were comparable in number to those reported by independent research, in contrast to publications on IQOS use, market trends and regulation. Data on nicotine yield, carbonyl emissions, other mainstream emissions, secondhand emissions and IQOS waste were compared between data sources to highlight agreement or disagreement between PMI-sponsored and independent research.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis showed agreement between the data sources on nicotine yield from IQOS under the same puffing conditions. Also, both sources agreed that IQOS emits significantly reduced levels of some emissions compared with combustible cigarettes. However, independent studies and examination of PMI's data showed significant increases in other emissions from and beyond the Food and Drug Administration's harmful and potentially harmful constituents list.

A conflict of interest is strongly associated with tobacco industry-favourable results, indicating no harm of e-cigarettes

Researchers reach contradictory results when trying to assess the potential harm of e-cigarettes. This study investigated whether the findings and conclusions in papers published on e-cigarettes and health differ depending on whether the authors had a financial conflict of interest (COI) or not. A total of 94 studies (identified in a previous systematic review) that investigated the content of fluid/vapor of e-cigarettes or in vitro experiments were included. The type, level and direction of the financial COI were coded. Abstracts were blinded and evaluated by two assessors. Fischer's Test and Logistic regression analyses were used to investigate the associations between findings of harm/conclusions and COI. All three dimensions of COI showed the same tendency: studies with industry-related COI found potential harm significantly less often than studies without a COI. 95.1% of papers without and 39.4% of papers with a COI found potential harmful effects/substances. Only 7.7% of tobacco industry-related studies found potential harm. The odds of finding of no harm were significantly higher in studies with an industry-related COI (OR 66.92 (95% CI 8.1-552.9)) than in studies without a COI. A strong/moderate COI was associated with very high odds (OR 91.50 (95% CI 10.9-771.4)) of finding of no harm compared with studies with no/weak COI. This blinded assessment showed that almost all papers without a COI found potentially harmful effects of e-cigarettes. There was a strong association between industry-related COI and tobacco- and e-cigarette industry-favourable results, indicating that e-cigarettes are harmless.