Skip to Main Content

Bankstown Hospital - Grand Rounds - Further Reading

A guide to further information resources to support Grand Rounds and vocational education


Vaping/E-cigarette – An Emerging Public Health Issue”


Advani, I. N., et al. (2022). "E-liquids and vaping devices: public policy regarding their effects on young people and health." Med J Aust 216(1): 23-24 PDF @ URL


Erku, D. A., et al. (2019). "Policy Debates Regarding Nicotine Vaping Products in Australia: A Qualitative Analysis of Submissions to a Government Inquiry from Health and Medical Organisations." International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 16(22): 4555


Hall, W., et al. (2021). "Lessons from the public health responses to the US outbreak of vaping-related lung injury." Addiction 116(5): 985-993 FULL TEXT @ SWSLHD LIBRARIES

                Abstract Aim To describe an outbreak of lung injuries in 2019 among people who vaped in the United States (type of injuries, people afflicted, substances vaped and cause of the injuries) and to analyse critically the regulatory responses of public health authorities and the media reporting of the outbreak. Methods Case studies of the reporting of the e-cigarette or vaping product use associated lung injury (EVALI) outbreak. We examined data on the number of cases of lung injury provided by the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC), public advice on the causes of the outbreak provided by the CDC and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), major media reports of the outbreak and proposed regulatory responses by governments in the United States, Australia and the United Kingdom. Results The CDC initially suggested that the cause of the outbreak was nicotine vaping because the outbreak followed a large increase in nicotine vaping among US adolescents. Case–control studies revealed that the majority of cases had vaped illicit cannabis oils that were contaminated by vitamin E acetate. The CDC's public advice and the media were slow to report the evidence on the role of cannabis vaping. Popular government regulatory proposals—bans on sales of nicotine flavours and vaporizers—were based on the assumption that nicotine vaping was the cause of the outbreak. Conclusions Media reporting in the United States, Australia and the United Kingdom of the US Centers for Disease Control's analysis of the causes of the e-cigarette or vaping product use associated lung injury outbreak contributed to regulatory over-reactions to nicotine vaping by the public health community.

Levy, D. T., et al. (2022). "The Australia Smoking and Vaping Model: The Potential Impact of Increasing Access to Nicotine Vaping Products." Nicotine & Tobacco Research 25(3): 486-497

                We model the potential impact of relaxing current nicotine vaping product (NVP) restrictions on public health in Australia. A Restricted NVP Scenario was first developed to project current smoking and vaping rates, where a U.S. smoking model was calibrated to recent Australian trends. To model less restrictive NVP policies, a Permissive NVP Scenario applied rates of switching from smoking to vaping, initiation into NVP and cigarette use, and cessation from smoking and vaping based on U.S. trends. The model measures vaping risk relative to the excess mortality rate of smoking. The public health impacts are measured as the difference between smoking- and vaping-attributable deaths (SVADs) and life years lost (LYLs) in the Restricted and Permissive NVP Scenarios. Sensitivity analysis is conducted regarding the NVP excess risk and other factors. Assuming an NVP excess risk of 5% that of smoking, 104.2 thousand SVADs (7.7% reduction) and 2.05 million LYLs (17.3% reduction) are averted during 2017–2080 in the Permissive NVP Scenario compared to the Restricted NVP Scenario. Assuming 40% NVP excess risk, 70 thousand SVADs and 1.2 million LYLs are averted. The impact is sensitive to the rate at which smokers switch to NVPs and quit smoking, and relatively insensitive to the smoking initiation and NVP initiation and cessation rates. The model suggests the potential for public health gains to be achieved by relaxing NVP access regulations. However, the model would benefit from better information regarding the impact of NVPs on smoking under a relaxation of current restrictions. Australia has implemented a strong array of cigarette-oriented policies, but has restricted access to NVPs. The Smoking and Vaping Model offers a framework for modeling hypothetical policy scenarios. The Australian model shows the potential for public health gains by maintaining cigarette-oriented policies while relaxing the current restrictive NVP policy. Modeling results under a permissive NVP policy are particularly sensitive to the estimated rates of smoking cessation and switching to vaping, which are not well established and will likely depend on past and future cigarette-oriented policies and the specific NVP policies implemented in Australia.

Stone, E., et al. "Recreational vaping ban in Australia—policy failure or masterstroke?" The Lancet:  FULL TEXT @ SWSLHD LIBRARIES