New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

WHO Calls for Electronic Cigarette Regulation

The World Health Organization says it’s necessary to check the “booming” market and ban indoor use

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Even in the absence of definitive science on the potential hazards surrounding the use of electronic cigarettes, regulations are needed now to head off health concerns. One such restriction should be a ban on indoor use of the devices. That’s according to the World Health Organization in a new report the international body published on August 26. Electronic cigarettes, the organization states, “represent an evolving frontier, filled with promise and threat for tobacco control.” The popular devices deliver an aerosolized solution to users by a heating a nicotine solution that users inhale.
 
In the past nine years the e-cigarette industry has exploded to include more than 400 brands in a roughly $3-billion industry. Yet flavorings that attract children, poor quality control between brands and apparent rapid experimentation among adolescent users (with e-cig use doubling in that group from 2008 to 2012) has triggered growing fears that e-cigs are the new gateway drug. Just in the U.S. the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported earlier this week that more than a quarter million youth who had never smoked traditional tobacco cigarettes used e-cigs last year—representing a roughly three-fold increase from 2011 to 2013.
 
The WHO report details potential regulatory options countries could consider, including blocking e-cig manufacturers from making health claims about the devices that suggest they are effective smoking cessation aids (unless and until they are scientifically proved as such), banning e-cig use in public places and restricting advertising for the products. Other recommendations from the roughly 100 scientists and regulators that contributed to the report include subjecting the devices to the same surveillance and monitoring typical for tobacco products, restricting sales to minors and possibly requiring health warnings on the packaging.
 
E-cig aerosol “is not merely water vapor as is often claimed in the marketing for these products,” WHO wrote. Most of these gadgets “have not been tested by independent scientists, but the limited testing has revealed wide variations in the nature of the toxicity of contents and emissions.” Factors including how long and deep users puff on e-cigarettes, the lack of uniformity in the e-cig flavoring solutions and the possibility that users could potentially overdose on the nicotine found in the liquid—or that the drug may contribute to other health risks—must all be considered, the agency says.
 
The international health organization recommends that smokers attempting to quit should first turn to tried-and-true methods such as the patch and nicotine gum before turning to e-cigarettes. The 13-page report was published in six languages.
 
The organization’s dispatch, commissioned by the governing body of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, was published even as the U.S. government continues to grapple with deciding how it will approach the devices. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration in April proposed regulations for e-cigarettes that have not yet been finalized. Those regulations, if enacted, would block youths from buying e-cigarettes and require health warnings on the products. They would not, however, ban advertising nor online sales, which critics contend allow minors easy access to the devices.
 

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe