This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/jan/02/figures-on-vaping-safety-need-clarifying
The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Previous version
1
Next version
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Figures on vaping safety need clarifying | Figures on vaping safety need clarifying |
| (14 days later) | |
| Public Health England’s use of smoking as a benchmark for the relative safety of vaping (Public Health England maintains vaping is 95% safer than smoking, 28 December) will puzzle many given that smoking is not, by any reckoning, “safe”. The key research finding, described in their own report in terms of estimated relative harms, is that the harm to vapers is around 5% of the harm to smokers. The “95% safer” figure arises because 100-5 = 95. However, this formulation is not intuitive; the use of “95% safer” risks confusion. Some assume it means that vaping is 95% as harmful as smoking; others that you are 95% more likely to suffer harm from smoking compared with vaping. Both interpretations hugely understate the relative harm of smoking compared to vaping; few people correctly appreciate that smoking is 20 times more harmful than vaping. Public health depends on the public understanding of risks – reporting that vaping is 5% (or 1/20th) as harmful as smoking is less ambiguous and acknowledges risk.Professor Peter AytonCity, University of London | Public Health England’s use of smoking as a benchmark for the relative safety of vaping (Public Health England maintains vaping is 95% safer than smoking, 28 December) will puzzle many given that smoking is not, by any reckoning, “safe”. The key research finding, described in their own report in terms of estimated relative harms, is that the harm to vapers is around 5% of the harm to smokers. The “95% safer” figure arises because 100-5 = 95. However, this formulation is not intuitive; the use of “95% safer” risks confusion. Some assume it means that vaping is 95% as harmful as smoking; others that you are 95% more likely to suffer harm from smoking compared with vaping. Both interpretations hugely understate the relative harm of smoking compared to vaping; few people correctly appreciate that smoking is 20 times more harmful than vaping. Public health depends on the public understanding of risks – reporting that vaping is 5% (or 1/20th) as harmful as smoking is less ambiguous and acknowledges risk.Professor Peter AytonCity, University of London |
| • Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com | • Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com |
| • Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters | • Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters |
| • Do you have a photo you’d like to share with Guardian readers? Click here to upload it and we’ll publish the best submissions in the letters spread of our print edition | • Do you have a photo you’d like to share with Guardian readers? Click here to upload it and we’ll publish the best submissions in the letters spread of our print edition |
| E-cigarettes | E-cigarettes |
| Smoking | Smoking |
| Health | Health |
| Health policy | Health policy |
| Public services policy | Public services policy |
| letters | letters |
| Share on Facebook | Share on Facebook |
| Share on Twitter | Share on Twitter |
| Share via Email | Share via Email |
| Share on LinkedIn | Share on LinkedIn |
| Share on Pinterest | Share on Pinterest |
| Share on WhatsApp | Share on WhatsApp |
| Share on Messenger | Share on Messenger |
| Reuse this content | Reuse this content |
Previous version
1
Next version