To vape or not to vape,how safe is it really?

IT seems that not a weekgoes by without vaping or e-cigarettes being in the press,such that they have nowovertaken statins as the topicof discussion.

Confusingly, researchgroups often differ in theirfindings. Some of the latestevidence, from the Univer-sity of Dundee, showed thatin a group of 114 individu-als, those who switched fromtraditional smoking to e-cigarettes demonstrated animprovement in blood flowin just one month, comparedto those who continued to usetobacco.

Although the study lastedonly a short period, the re-searchers advised if thesechanges were maintained,this could lead to a signifi-cant drop in cardiovascularevents (heart attacks andstrokes).

Smoking remains one of thebiggest health concerns ofour time, with 100,000 deathsin the UK every year dueto lung cancer, obstructiveairways disease and heartdisease. Smoking is highlyaddictive. Many smokers willhave tried multiple times toquit the habit through tradi-tional routes.

A study published earlierthis year found that e-ciga-rettes were twice as effectiveas formal nicotine replace-ment therapies (NRT), with18 per cent of e-cigarette us-ers not smoking comparedto only 9.9 per cent of NRT

users at 12 months. So are e-cigarettes the way forward?

For a balanced view pointwe need to be aware of theevidence against and indeedhorror stories associatedwith e-cigarettes. These in-clude user injury from ex-ploding devices, as well asthe increasingly recognisede-cigarette associated lunginjury (EVALI).

A report from the US de-tails a 17 year old who re-quired double lung trans-plant as a result of vaping.Closer to home is the caseof the Nottingham teenager

Peopleurged to gettheir fluvaccinebefore peak

Air pollution ‘linked to higher glaucoma risk’

DELAYS to the nasal-sprayflu vaccine for schoolchil-dren have been resolved,Public Health England(PHE) said, as it urged alleligible people to take up thevaccine.

Earlier this month, someschools were told to resched-ule plans for vaccinatingchildren after AstraZenecasaid it needed “to repeat sometests” for the nasal spray.

The problems were not re-lated to the safety or efficacyof the vaccine itself and theadult flu programme was notaffected by the delay.

Now, the issue has been re-solved and primary school-age children will once againreceive their vaccines via re-scheduled clinics.

Parents of children in high-risk groups, such as thosewith asthma or diabetes, arestill being advised to contacttheir GP to be seen sooner.

Children who are aged twoand three are eligible for theflu vaccine nasal spray viatheir GP surgery.

People aged 65 and over,children and adults with un-derlying medical conditionsand pregnant women areurged to get their free vac-cine in the next few weeksbefore the flu season peaks,typically in January.

Dr Mary Ramsay, head ofimmunisation at PHE, said:“The flu vaccine is the bestdefence we have against whatcan be a serious and fatal ill-ness, and flu season is justaround the corner.

“If you are in an eligiblegroup, visit your GP or phar-macist as soon possible to en-sure you are protected.”

Professor Stephen Powis,NHS England national medi-cal director, said: “Flu can beextremely serious and evenkill in some cases, and get-ting vaccinated is the bestprotection against it.

“NHS services across Eng-land continue to work hardto prepare for the winter sea-son, including staff gettingtheir free flu jab, and nowwe’re appealing to the pub-lic to ‘Help Us, Help You’ byensuring that they and theireligible children or relativesget vaccinated, now.”

At-risk groups eligible forthe flu vaccine include peoplewith a chronic neurologicaldisease; respiratory, heart,kidney or liver disease; dia-betes and the over-65s.

Pregnant women have amuch higher risk of seriousillness if they get the flu,with possible complicationsincluding pneumonia, septicshock and encephalitis (in-flammation of the brain).

AIR pollution could be linkedto a higher risk of glaucoma,according to a new study.

Scientists observed thatliving in a more polluted areawas associated with a greaterlikelihood of having thedebilitating eye conditionthat can cause blindness.

The research team foundthat people in the most-polluted 25 per cent of areaswere at least six per centmore likely to report havingglaucoma than those in theleast-polluted quartile.

They were alsosignificantly more likely tohave a thinner retina, one of

the changes typical ofglaucoma progression.

Experts suggestparticulates may damage thenervous system andcontribute to inflammation.

According to the studypublished in InvestigativeOphthalmology & VisualScience, eye pressure was notassociated with air pollution.

The researchers say thissuggests air pollution mayaffect glaucoma risk througha different mechanism.

Lead author Professor PaulFoster, of University CollegeLondon’s Institute ofOphthalmology, said: “We

have found yet anotherreason why air pollutionshould be addressed as apublic health priority andthat avoiding sources of airpollution could beworthwhile for eye healthalongside other healthconcerns.

“While we cannot confirmyet that the association iscausal, we hope to continueour research to determinewhether air pollution doesindeed cause glaucoma, andto find out if there are anyavoidance strategies thatcould help people reducetheir exposure to air

pollution to mitigate thehealth risks.”

The findings were based on111,370 participants of theUK Biobank study cohortwho underwent eye testsfrom 2006 to 2010 at sitesacross Britain. Theparticipants were askedwhether they had glaucomaand underwent ocular testingwhich measured intraocularpressure, and a laser scan ofthe retina.

Their data was linked to airpollution measures for theirhome addresses, from theSmall Area Health StatisticsUnit, with the researchers

focusing on fine particulatematter - equal or less than 2.5micrometres in diameter, orPM2.5.

Dr Sharon Chua of UCL’sInstitute of Ophthalmologyand Moorfields Eye Hospital,said: “Air pollution may becontributing to glaucomadue to the constriction ofblood vessels, which ties intoair pollution’s links to anincreased risk of heartproblems.”

Particulate matterexposure is one of thestrongest predictors ofmortality among airpollutants, scientists say.

TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 26, 201916 The Northern Echo

LIKE US ON FACEBOOK facebook.com/thenorthernechoHEALTH

The advice from Public Health England remains that e-cigarettes are 95 per cent safer than traditional tobacco

Ewan Fisher who suffereda catastrophic reaction to e-cigarettes requiring life sup-port in an intensive care set-ting for his lungs to recover.

The advice from PublicHealth England (PHE) re-mains that e-cigarettes are95 per cent safer than tra-ditional tobacco. However,safer than does not equate toentirely safe. For those whohave tried other methods ofsmoking cessation and havenot managed to achieve thedesired effect, an e-cigarettecould be used in a further at-tempt.

Nicotine is the active chem-ical which causes smokers tomaintain the habit, and themethod by which e-cigarettesaim to lessen cravings for to-bacco.

While nicotine is mostlysafe in those who have nev-er smoked, those who havesmoked for some time willhave some blood vessel dis-ease. Nicotine increasesheart rate and blood pressureand may result in blood ves-sel wall changes that triggeran event such as angina or inthe worst case a heart attack.

In conclusion, e-cigarettes

are gaining popularity and itwould appear are here to stay,at least for the moment.

It is always worth explor-ing the traditional methodsof smoking cessation avail-able through the NHS, as thedirect support from a trainedprofessional is often part ofthat which helps individualsto stop completely.

If this has not worked foryou then e-cigarettes are cer-tainly an option though theyshould be hopefully viewedas a bridge to stopping alto-gether, with a stop date oftheir own.

HEALTH

withDr ZakUddin

By Jane KirbyPA Health Editornewsdesk@nne.co.uk