Monday, 16 February 2026

SCIENCE: Back to the 6th edition of the Global Forum On Nicotine (GFN19)
Home
International

SCIENCE: Back to the 6th edition of the Global Forum On Nicotine (GFN19)

posted by
Date:
In : International, News, Science
Leave comments

It is a real event that takes place every year in June in Warsaw, Poland. For three days the Global Forum On Nicotine brings together the scientific community, politicians, the media and the curious around a single theme: Nicotine. The 6me edition of the Global Forum On Nicotine therefore took place 13th - 15th June 2019 and had for motto It's time to talk about nicotine ("It's time to talk about nicotine"). Impossible to ignore such an important event, which is why today we are offering you a complete feedback based on the work of our colleagues. Ecigarette Direct . In a second time we will propose you an exclusive interview de Zhou Zhenyi, tobacconist and only official French speaker at Global Forum On Nicotine 2019.

"IT'S TIME TO TALK ABOUT NICOTINE"

For the first time in the history of Global Forum On Nicotine, the conferences were sold out! More than 80 speakers were present to speak over the three days and leading specialists in tobacco risk reduction were present. Each year, the Global Forum On Nicotine is a unique event that brings together lawyers, researchers, policy experts, consumers gathered to discuss the latest research and regulatory barriers to reducing the risk of smoking.

1ERE DAY: « DISTINCTION MUST ONLY BE BETWEEN COMBUSTION AND NON-COMBUSTION« 

On the first day, the major event was Michael Russell Oratory delivered by the Dr. Ronald W.Dworkin, a practicing anesthesiologist with a doctorate in political philosophy and a lecturer in the honors program at George Washington University. As a reminder, the Michael Russell Oratory is an annual event organized to pay tribute to the work and memory of Professor Michael Russell, one of the pioneers in the study of smoking, clinical interventions and the actions of public authorities, who died in 2009.

But before that key moment was held the consumer advocacy alignment meeting with several important points including:

 

- WHO's opposition to vaping influencing regulation in much of the world
- Advocates who need to focus on networking, clarity of messages and telling their stories with passion and positivity

The consumer advocacy alignment meeting started with a discussion of COP9 (ninth WHO Conference of the Parties), and Clive Bates had the opportunity to explain how these kinds of conferences were going. According to him, it is " an environment that allows bad policies“He presents it as a bedroom-like environment where people congratulate themselves for doing things that will not benefit anyone. Obviously, the specter of the WHO position on vaping was present for a good part of the session.

Regarding other stakeholders, Tomás O'Gorman referred to the many anti-vaping arguments prevalent in Latin American countries, including his home country, Mexico. For Africa, Joseph Magero emphasized that people did not have the information needed to make informed decisions about nicotine use. For the Netherlands, Eveline Hondius highlighted the fact that there was no harm reduction policy, that the country was only focusing on prohibition and complete abstinence, even from vaping.

Unfortunately, the message is often that the alternatives don't work and that you have to be “smoke free” by 2040. And it's no wonder Australia has so many problems, Fiona Patten (a politician and leader of the Reason Party) pointed out that the Australian Medical Association supports supervised injection sites for heroin users but strongly opposes reducing the risks for smokers.

David Sweanor, professor of health at the University of Ottawa really summed up the problem by pointing to nefarious policies like Australia's, where vaping is banned, but cigarettes are readily available. On this day he declares: " We don't want people to play tennis, but it doesn't matter if they play back and forth with bombs “, Which in plain language amounts to questioning the reduction of risks even when smoking is authorized.

When speaking, Clive Bates took the opportunity to make it clear that there should be no distinction between the different products (heated tobacco, vaping, snus). On this subject he declares: " The key distinction is between combustion and non-combustion (…). As consumer advocates, you are advocates for all consumers, not just yourself. »


During his speech for the Michael Russell Oration, Dr Ronald Dworkin approached reduction as a "neophyte" would (confuse if the word is a little strong). According to him, vaping makes it possible to extract a key element of the pleasure of tobacco, thus offering something more targeted where there were once only "coarse" tools. It is therefore a question of pleasure in addition to the reduction of risks.

His point of view is that people do not necessarily enjoy vaping and / or consuming light (or low) alcoholic drinks because it does not involve any risk. However, according to him, vaping should have a future and should be appreciated by a large part of the population in the same way that one enjoys drinking a good beer.

2EME DAY: OFFICIAL OPENING OF GFN19 WITH DAVID SWEANOR AND AARON BIEBERT

If the first day was in a way an introduction to the Global Forum On Nicotine, the official opening took place on the second day presenting the speeches of David Sweanor et Aaron Biebert, director " A Billion Live " and " You do not know nicotine" 

In this lecture « It's time to talk about nicotine Many topics were discussed, the points to remember being:

 

 - Nicotine improves certain areas including attention and memory, but has drawbacks with regard to stress and mood.
 - The potential risks of pure nicotine are generally theoretical, only the dependence is well established.
 - Alternative sources of nicotine delivery help smokers to quit, but still attract opposition.

Lynne Dawkins, London psychology professor tackled this question by examining evidence regarding smokers and non-smokers. A review of 41 studies concluded that nicotine actually improves fine motor skills and aspects of attention and memory, showing benefits in six of the nine areas considered.
However, long-term effects especially later in life suggest that smoking is related to worse cognitive functioning in the long run. Smoking also has drawbacks with regard to stress (smoking does not reduce stress, as many people assume) and mood (relationship with depression).

For its part, Neal Benowitz, American physician and professor of medicine at the University of California at San Francisco, specializing in the pharmacology of nicotine and tobacco presented the long-term effects of pure nicotine by assessing each potential risk. According to him addiction is the only "real" problem with nicotine, cardiovascular problems are still considered "probable", while others, such as problems with adolescent brain development and cancer, are generally considered. as simple possibilities. He also specifies that while nicotine is not considered carcinogenic, certain effects of the product (for example, promoting cell growth) can theoretically lead to cancer. 

Peter Hajek, British professor of clinical psychology and director of the research unit on tobacco addiction did not seem to agree entirely with his counterpart. For him it is essential to use nicotine to help people quit smoking. He takes this opportunity to stress that the assertion that “ nicotine damages the brain of adolescents Does not appear in many discussions about the risks of smoking, yet it is one of the most common arguments against the product in the United States. The rest of his intervention concerns dual use (tobacco / vaping), according to him, double users who vapot regularly considerably reduce their consumption of toxins, and do not increase it. This is totally contrary to Stanton Glantz's claims that vaping reduces the rate of quitting smoking.

The following conference presented The regulation of nicotine“, The points to remember being that:

 

 - The FDA begins to recognize the huge potential drawbacks of its approach
 - The situation regarding both the rules of the World Trade Organization and the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control requires legal clarification
 - The way the TPD is applied varies considerably between EU countries

Regarding the regulation of vaping in the United States, Patricia Kovacevic, an expert in smoking risk reduction has reviewed the basics of FDA regulation, litigation updates and the current situation. Most importantly, it highlights the recent admission by the FDA (by Mitch Zeller, its director) that the disappearance of vaping products "would pose serious public health problems».

For the presentation of Dr. Marina Folteaexpert in international trade law and public affairs, the key question was whether electronic cigarettes weresimilar products»Cigarettes (in the legal sense of the term) for the rules of the World Trade Organization. If this were the case, it will be difficult to treat vaping differently from cigarettes under these rules, and since the legal "tests" for likeness are based on the fact that the products are competitive in the market, it is is more than possible that they are. In this situation, the bans could be considered discriminatory by the WTO, unless there is a justification based on scientific data that “does not exist”. In this context, it was pointed out that this could also pave the way for severe restrictions on vaping, as it would mean that they would need to be treated in the same way.

Concerning Europe, after a basic introduction to the TPD (European Tobacco Directive), Michal Dobrajc focused on the transpositions of the directive in the UK, France and Germany and the differences this created between countries. For example, in the UK the limit of 2ml on tanks is considered to apply to all tanks, while in France and Germany it only applies to disposable cartridges containing nicotine . Likewise, the UK and France did not list any additional 'banned ingredients', while Germany created a long list, so legal e-liquid in UK and France could easily become illegal in Germany.

« Beliefs and Practices: New Evidence on Actual Use of Electronic Cigarettes ”, the key points:

 

- Collaboration between healthcare professionals and the vaping industry could help fight smoking
- Evidence continues to emerge showing the effectiveness of vaping in quitting smoking
- Claims about "particles" in vapor are unnecessary and betray ignorance of daily sources of airborne particles
- US data from the NYTS does not support the reported epidemic, and the rates of vaporizer use could largely be explained by vaping marijuana.

At this conference, Emma ward presented the results of his interviews with vapers on the potential for collaboration between vape shops and healthcare professionals in the UK. The research covers several possible methods of creating this partnership, ranging from basic information displayed in-store to items such as promotion systems, smoking cessation training for store staff, and pay-per-view programs. 'act' for staff. Most respondents were generally in favor of the partnership saying it would reassure people about the potential health risks of vaping products and could help make e-cigarettes more affordable. While others felt that vaping should remain a personal choice, or even that it was “unethical” to fund vaping devices.

The research presented by the Dr. Christopher Russell, Psychologist and tobacco harm reduction researcher focused on the Juul e-cigarette, with a large sample of more than 15 vapers who had used the product for six months. The results showed that 000% of the participants had remained non-smokers three months and even six months after the start of the study.

The study of Karolein Adriaens was smaller, but the results were consistent with those in the Dr. Russell study. In particular, he looked at the impact of adding vaping products to the standard anti-smoking treatment offered by tobacco advisers in Belgium. The results showed that vapers were more likely to quit smoking at the end of the study than people using NRTs, and that vaping also appeared to reduce the risk of relapse.

Sarah Gentry also spoke about her survey with a year-long follow-up that looked at the impact of different device choices and nicotine level on the risk of smoking relapse. It was found that vapers using batteries and atomizers or clearomizers were less likely to resume smoking than cigalike users, and that higher concentrations of nicotine also lowered relapse.

Roberto Sussman gave a unique and forceful speech that shed light on concerns about passive vaping. According to him things are very clear: " If significant interventions were needed to protect the public from submicronic e-cigarette particles, we would also need even greater interventions for protection against candles, barbecues and even vacuum cleaners."

 

 

Konstantinos Farsalinos concluded the work by presenting a rational look at data from the US youth smoking surveys conducted in 2017 and 2018, which found there was ample evidence that an "epidemic" was observed. But as soon as the data is examined in more detail, that interpretation begins to crumble. He broke the data down into infrequent or frequent use, and although use at all frequencies increased, the vast majority of e-cigarette users rarely or even used it. The most interesting result, however, concerns the issue of vaporizing cannabis. NYTS results show that 60% of frequent vapers who have never smoked have ever used marijuana with a personal vaporizer. Could the epidemic be due to cannabis use?

There was also talk of transparency in the funding of studies. According to Clive Bates: " The funding problem has been treated as a weapon. It is simply a question of suppressing the results that tobacco control does not like. Unfortunately, and with great precision, he points out that "virtuous" funders who could support crucial work simply do not find the issue appealing. There is not much sympathy for smokers ". For the Pr David Abrams everyone is biased! People with "clean" money can also distort science. The only important thing should be the integrity of the scientific data and not who pays the bill.

DAY 3: SCIENCE ON "SMOKE-FREE" TOBACCO AND BAD SCIENCE ON VAPE

During the 3rd day, many topics were discussed including smoking among the homeless and minority communities like the Maori in New Zealand. But we will deal here with the next subject, ie "Junk Science" or bad science regarding vaping.

The different key points of the conference « The scourge of bad science around vaping "

 

 - Bad science about vaping is everywhere, but can be refuted by tackling repeated mistakes.
 - There is a lot of evidence showing that heated tobacco has enormous potential to reduce the harm from smoking.
 - The use of nicotine during pregnancy is not without risk but it is possible to reduce them immediately.
 - Passive steam releases fewer particles than tobacco, but this varies depending on the type of device

Le Professor Riccardo Polosa addressed the issue of bad science around vaping, but with an optimistic message that " it could be effectively corrected". He pointed out that the same mistakes are repeated over and over again. For example, cell studies ("in vitro" research) are frequently performed using unrealistic vaping protocols and without concern for realistic dosing. In animal research, the problem is similar: for example, mice, despite their tiny weight, often receive doses of nicotine similar to those of a human. The fact that these errors are repeated highlights a solution: refute recurring problems and you can eliminate tons of bad research in one place.

Brad Rodu, professor of medicine and harm reduction specialist at the University of Louisville gave a comprehensive overview of the evidence relating to the risks of "smokeless" tobacco. In summary, although dry snuff appears to carry risks (although less than something as common as driving a car), snus and heated tobacco are indeed safe, with the only detectable risks involved. a history of smoking. He says heated tobacco has enormous potential to reduce tobacco disease and death.


Marewa Glower, a professor specializing in smoking cessation, also spoke on the use of nicotine during pregnancy. She looked at 22 studies in detail, but the general conclusions remain that prematurity is probably related to nicotine consumption without there being other forms of risk. According to her, this opens up huge potential for preventing risks.


Maciej Goniewicz for his part dealt with the evidence concerning passive vaping. The focus was on particles but overall research shows vaping products are better than smoking, even though there is a seemingly unnecessary focus on “particles” without reference to their specific makeup.

Source : Ecigarettedirect.co.uk

 

Com Inside Bottom
Com Inside Bottom
Tags:

About the Author

Editor-in-chief of Vapoteurs.net, the reference site for vaping news. Engaged in the world of vaping since 2014, I work every day to ensure that all vapers and smokers are informed.