1,720,986 research outputs found
Waterpipe Tobacco and Cigarette Smoking. Direct Comparison of Toxicant Exposure
No full textBackground: Waterpipe (hookah, shisha) tobacco smoking has spread worldwide. Many waterpipe smokers believe that, relative to cigarettes, waterpipes are associated with lower smoke toxicant levels and fewer health risks. For physicians to address these beliefs credibly, waterpipe use and cigarette smoking must be compared directly. Purpose: The purpose of this study is to provide the first controlled, direct laboratory comparison of the toxicant exposure associated with waterpipe tobacco and cigarette smoking. Methods: Participants (N=31; M=21.4 years, SD=2.3) reporting monthly waterpipe use (M=5.2 uses-month, SD=4.0) and weekly cigarette smoking (M=9.9 cigarettes-day, SD=6.4) completed a crossover study in which they each smoked a waterpipe for a maximum of 45 minutes, or a single cigarette. Outcome measures included expired-air carbon monoxide (CO) 5 minutes after session's end, and blood carboxyhemoglobin (COHb), plasma nicotine, heart rate, and puff topography. Data were collected in 2008-2009 and analyzed in 2009. Results: On average, CO increased by 23.9 ppm for waterpipe use (SD=19.8) and 2.7 ppm for cigarette smoking (SD=1.8), while peak waterpipe COHb levels (M=3.9percent, SD=2.5) were three times those observed for cigarette smoking (M=1.3percent, SD=0.5; p's0.001). Peak nicotine levels did not differ (waterpipe M=10.2 ng-mL, SD=7.0; cigarette M=10.6 ng-mL, SD=7.7). Significant heart rate increases relative to pre-smoking were observed at 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, and 35 minutes during the cigarette session and at 5-minute intervals during the waterpipe session (p's0.001). Mean total puff volume was 48.6 L for waterpipe use as compared to 1.0 L for cigarette smoking (p0.001). Conclusions: Relative to cigarette smoking, waterpipe use is associated with greater CO, similar nicotine, and dramatically more smoke exposure. Physicians should consider advising their patients that waterpipe tobacco smoking exposes them to some of the same toxicants as cigarette smoking and therefore the two tobacco-smoking methods likely share some of the same health risks. © 2009 American Journal of Preventive Medicine.Al Mutairi SS, 2006, RESPIROLOGY, V11, P449, DOI 10.1111-j.1400-1843.2006.00873.x; Al Rashidi M, 2008, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V46, P3546, DOI 10.1016-j.fct.2008.09.007; Bacha Zeina Aoun, 2007, Inhal Toxicol, V19, P771, DOI 10.1080-08958370701401699; Baska T, 2008, TOB CONTROL, V17, P432, DOI 10.1136-tc.2008.027128; BENOWITZ NL, 1988, CLIN PHARMACOL THER, V44, P23; Blank MD, 2009, NICOTINE TOB RES, V11, P896, DOI 10.1093-ntr-ntp083; Breland AB, 2006, NICOTINE TOB RES, V8, P727, DOI 10.1080-14622200600789585; Cobb C, 2010, AM J HEALTH BEHAV, V34, P275; Eissenberg T, 2008, J ADOLESCENT HEALTH, V42, P526, DOI 10.1016-j.jadohealth.2007.10.004; El-Nachef WN, 2008, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V299, P36, DOI 10.1001-jama.2007.6; El-Roueiheb Z, 2008, NICOTINE TOB RES, V10, P309, DOI 10.1080-14622200701825775; Federal Trade Commission, 2000, TAR NIC CARB MON SMO; Fromme H, 2009, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V47, P1636, DOI 10.1016-j.fct.2009.04.017; Giuliani KKW, 2008, AM J PREV MED, V35, pS457, DOI 10.1016-j.amepre.2008.09.006; Greim H, 2008, TOXICOLOGY RISK ASSE; Harris JE, 2004, BRIT MED J, V328, P72, DOI 10.1136-bmj.37936.585382.44; HATSUKAMI D, 1992, PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY, V106, P60, DOI 10.1007-BF02253589; Jawaid A, 2008, INT J TUBERC LUNG D, V12, P1077; Keppel G., 1991, DESIGN ANAL RES HDB; Maziak W, 2009, NICOTINE TOB RES, V11, P806, DOI 10.1093-ntr-ntp066; Parna K, 2008, BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, V8, DOI 10.1186-1471-2458-8-392; Primack BA, 2009, PEDIATRICS, V123, pE282, DOI 10.1542-peds.2008-1663; Primack BA, 2008, ANN BEHAV MED, V36, P81, DOI 10.1007-s12160-008-9047-6; Roskin J, 2009, BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, V9, DOI 10.1186-1471-2458-9-10; Sepetdjian E, 2008, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V46, P1582, DOI 10.1016-j.fct.2007.12.028; Shafagoj YA, 2002, INT J CLIN PHARM TH, V40, P249; Shafagoj YA, 2002, SAUDI MED J, V23, P953; Shihadeh A, 2004, PHARMACOL BIOCHEM BE, V79, P75, DOI 10.1016-j.pbb.2004.06.005; Shihadeh A, 2003, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V41, P143, DOI 10.1016-S0278-6915(02)00220-X; Shihadeh A, 2005, BEHAV RES METHODS, V37, P186, DOI 10.3758-BF03206414; Shihadeh A, 2005, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V43, P655, DOI 10.1016-j.fct.2004.12.013; Smith-Simone S, 2008, NICOTINE TOB RES, V10, P393, DOI 10.1080-14622200701825023; Weglicki LS, 2008, AM J PREV MED, V35, P334, DOI 10.1016-j.amepre.2008.06.037; World Health Organization, 2005, TOBREG ADV NOT WAT T11210910
Waterpipe tobacco products: Nicotine labelling versus nicotine delivery
No full textBackground Waterpipe tobacco package labelling typically indicates 0.0percent tar and 0.05percent or 0.5percent nicotine. Objective To determine the extent to which nicotine labeling is related to nicotine delivery. Methods 110 waterpipe smokers engaged in a 45-minute waterpipe smoking session. Puff topography and plasma nicotine were measured. Three waterpipe tobacco brands were used: Nakhla (0.5percent nicotine), Starbuzz (0.05percent nicotine), and Al Fakher (0.05percent nicotine). Data were analyzed by one-way ANOVA. Results Topography did not differ across brands. Peak plasma nicotine varied significantly across brands. Al Fakher had the highest nicotine delivery (11.4 ng-ml) followed by Nakhla (9.8 ng-ml) and Starbuzz (5.8 ng-ml). Conclusions Nicotine labelling on waterpipe tobacco products does not reflect delivery; smoking a brand with a 0.05percent nicotine label led to greater plasma nicotine levels than smoking a brand with a 0.5percent nicotine label. Waterpipe tobacco products should be labelled in a manner that does not mislead consumers.Al Rashidi M, 2008, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V46, P3546, DOI 10.1016-j.fct.2008.09.007; Blank MD, 2011, DRUG ALCOHOL DEPEN, V116, P102, DOI 10.1016-j.drugalcdep.2010.11.026; Breland AB, 2006, NICOTINE TOB RES, V8, P727, DOI 10.1080-14622200600789585; Cobb CO, 2011, NICOTINE TOB RES, V13, P78, DOI 10.1093-ntr-ntq212; Eissenberg T, 2009, AM J PREV MED, V37, P518, DOI 10.1016-j.amepre.2009.07.014; Eissenberg T, 2008, J ADOLESCENT HEALTH, V42, P526, DOI 10.1016-j.jadohealth.2007.10.004; Hammal F, 2008, Tob Control, V17, pe3, DOI 10.1136-tc.2007.020529; Khabour OF, 2011, ENVIRON MOL MUTAGEN, V52, DOI 10.1002-em.20601; Nakkash R, 2010, TOB CONTROL, V19, P235, DOI 10.1136-tc.2009.031773; Pillsbury JC, 1969, J ASSOC OFF ANA CHEM, V52, P458; Raad D, 2011, CHEST, V139, P764, DOI 10.1378-chest.10-0991; Roskin J, 2009, BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, V9, DOI 10.1186-1471-2458-9-10; Sepetdjian E, 2008, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V46, P1582, DOI 10.1016-j.fct.2007.12.028; Shihadeh A, 2003, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V41, P143, DOI 10.1016-S0278-6915(02)00220-X; Shihadeh A, 2005, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V43, P655, DOI 10.1016-j.fct.2004.12.013; Smith-Simone S, 2008, NICOTINE TOB RES, V10, P393, DOI 10.1080-14622200701825023; Ward KD, 2007, NICOTINE TOB RES, V9, P1339, DOI 10.1080-14622200701705019; World Health Organization, 2005, TOBREG ADV NOT WAT T5111
Waterpipe tobacco smoking and cigarette smoking: A direct comparison of toxicant exposure and subjective effects
No full textIntroduction: Waterpipe tobacco smoking is increasing worldwide and is believed by many users to be less harmful and addictive than cigarette smoking. In fact, waterpipe tobacco and cigarette smoke contain many of the same chemicals, and users are exposed to the dependence-producing drug nicotine as well as other smoke toxicants. The subjective effect profile of these 2 tobacco use methods has not been compared directly, though this information is relevant to understanding the risk of dependence development. Methods: Fifty-four participants who reported waterpipe and cigarette smoking completed 2, 45-min, counter-balanced sessions in which they completed a waterpipe use episode (mean smoking time = 43.3 min) or a cigarette (mean = 6.1 min). Outcome measures included plasma nicotine, carboxyhemoglobin (COHb), and subjective effects, including those relevant to predicting dependence potential. Results: Mean (±SEM) peak plasma nicotine concentration did not differ by session (waterpipe = 9.8 ± 1.0 ng-ml; cigarette = 9.4 ± 1.0 ng-ml). Mean peak COHb concentration differed significantly (waterpipe = 4.5percent ± 0.3percent; cigarette = 1.2percent ± 0.1percent). Subjective effect changes for waterpipe and cigarette were comparable in magnitude but often longer lived for waterpipe. Conclusions: Relative to a cigarette, waterpipe tobacco smoking was associated with similar peak nicotine exposure, 3.75-fold greater COHb, and 56-fold greater inhaled smoke volume. Waterpipe and cigarette influenced many of the same subjective effect measures. These findings are consistent with the conclusion that waterpipe tobacco smoking presents substantial risk of dependence, disease, and death, and they can be incorporated into prevention interventions that might help deter more adolescents and young adults from experimenting with an almost certainly lethal method of tobacco use. © The Author 2010. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved.Akl EA, 2010, INT J EPIDEMIOL, V39, P834, DOI 10.1093-ije-dyq002; Aljarrah Khaled, 2009, Tob Induc Dis, V5, P16, DOI 10.1186-1617-9625-5-16; Bacha ZA, 2007, INHAL TOXICOL, V19, P71, DOI 10.1080-08958370701401699; Benowitz NL, 2008, CLIN PHARMACOL THER, V83, P531, DOI 10.1038-clpt.2008.3; Breland AB, 2006, NICOTINE TOB RES, V8, P727, DOI 10.1080-14622200600789585; Breland AB, 2002, TOB CONTROL, V11, P376, DOI 10.1136-tc.11.4.376; Carter LP, 2009, CANCER EPIDEM BIOMAR, V18, P3241, DOI 10.1158-1055-9965.EPI-09-0948; Carter LP, 2009, DRUG ALCOHOL DEPEN, V105, pS14, DOI 10.1016-j.drugalcdep.2009.04.003; Chambers DC, 1998, THORAX, V53, P677; Cobb C, 2010, AM J HEALTH BEHAV, V34, P275; Combrink A, 2010, SAMJ S AFR MED J, V100, P297; Cox L S, 2001, Nicotine Tob Res, V3, P7, DOI 10.1080-14622200020032051; Daher N, 2010, ATMOS ENVIRON, V44, P8, DOI 10.1016-j.atmosenv.2009.10.004; Dugas E, 2010, PEDIATRICS, V125, P1184, DOI 10.1542-peds.2009-2335; Eissenberg T, 2009, AM J PREV MED, V37, P518, DOI 10.1016-j.amepre.2009.07.014; Eissenberg T, 2008, J ADOLESCENT HEALTH, V42, P526, DOI 10.1016-j.jadohealth.2007.10.004; El-Nachef WN, 2008, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V299, P36, DOI 10.1001-jama.2007.6; Evans SE, 2006, EXP CLIN PSYCHOPHARM, V14, P121, DOI 10.1037-1064-1297.14.2.121; Federal Trade Commission, 2000, TAR NIC CARB MON SMO; FOULDS J, 1992, PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY, V106, P421, DOI 10.1007-BF02245429; HUGHES JR, 1986, ARCH GEN PSYCHIAT, V43, P289; Huynh H., 1976, J EDUC STATIST, V1, P69, DOI DOI 10.2307-1164736; Jackson D, 2008, BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, V8, DOI 10.1186-1471-2458-8-174; Jamil H, 2010, NICOTINE TOB RES, V12, P525, DOI 10.1093-ntr-ntq026; JASINSKI DR, 1989, NIDA RES MONOGRAPH, V92; Keppel G., 1991, DESIGN ANAL RES HDB; KHARITONOV SA, 1995, AM J RESP CRIT CARE, V152, P609; Kleykamp BA, 2008, EXP CLIN PSYCHOPHARM, V16, P99, DOI 10.1037-1064-1297.16.2.99; Knishkowy B, 2005, PEDIATRICS, V116, pE113, DOI 10.1542-peds.2004-2173; Maziak W, 2009, NICOTINE TOB RES, V11, P806, DOI 10.1093-ntr-ntp066; Maziak W, 2004, TOB CONTROL, V13, P327, DOI 10.1136-tc.2004.008169; Monn C, 2007, TOB CONTROL, V16, P390, DOI 10.1136-tc.2007.021097; Naidong W, 2001, J CHROMATOGR B, V754, P387, DOI 10.1016-S0378-4347(01)00021-4; *NAT I CLIN EXC, 2003, TECHN APPR GUID, V59, P1, DOI DOI 10.1136-THX.2004.022707; Neergaard J, 2007, NICOTINE TOB RES, V9, P987, DOI 10.1080-14622200701591591; Parna K, 2008, BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, V8, DOI 10.1186-1471-2458-8-392; PICKWORTH WB, 1994, PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY, V115, P9, DOI 10.1007-BF02244745; Primack BA, 2008, ANN BEHAV MED, V36, P81, DOI 10.1007-s12160-008-9047-6; Salameh P, 2008, NICOTINE TOB RES, V10, P149, DOI 10.1080-14622200701767753; Salameh P, 2009, TOBACCO USE INSIGHTS, V2, P1; Saleh R, 2008, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V46, P1461, DOI 10.1016-j.fct.2007.12.007; Shafagoj YA, 2002, INT J CLIN PHARM TH, V40, P249; Shihadeh A, 2005, BEHAV RES METHODS, V37, P186, DOI 10.3758-BF03206414; Shihadeh A, 2005, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V43, P655, DOI 10.1016-j.fct.2004.12.013; Smith-Simone S, 2008, NICOTINE TOB RES, V10, P393, DOI 10.1080-14622200701825023; Ward KD, 2007, NICOTINE TOB RES, V9, P1339, DOI 10.1080-14622200701705019; World Health Organization, 2005, WAT TOB SMOK HLTH EF41434
Waterpipe tobacco smoking: An emerging health crisis in the United States
No full textObjective: To examine the prevalence and potential health risks of waterpipe tobacco smoking. Methods: A literature review was performed to compile information relating to waterpipe tobacco smoking. Results: Waterpipe tobacco smoking is increasing in prevalence worldwide; in the United States, 10-20percent of some young adult populations are current waterpipe users. Depending on the toxicant measured, a single waterpipe session produces the equivalent of at least 1 and as many as 50 cigarettes. Misconceptions about waterpipe smoke content may lead users to underestimate health risks. Conclusion: Inclusion of waterpipe tobacco smoking in tobacco control activities may help reduce its spread. Copyright © PNG Publications 2011 All Rights Reserved.Al-Arifi M. N., 2005, J MED SCI, V5, P83; Al-Belasy FA, 2004, J ORAL MAXIL SURG, V62, P10, DOI 10.1016-j.joms.2002.11.001; ALFAYEZ SF, 1988, TROP GEOGR MED, V40, P115; Al Mutairi SS, 2006, RESPIROLOGY, V11, P449, DOI 10.1111-j.1400-1843.2006.00873.x; Al Rashidi M, 2008, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V46, P3546, DOI 10.1016-j.fct.2008.09.007; American Lung Association, 2007, TOB POL TREND AL EM; American Psychiatric Association, 2000, DIAGN STAT MAN MENT; Bacha Zeina Aoun, 2007, Inhal Toxicol, V19, P771, DOI 10.1080-08958370701401699; Bachir R, 2008, MATERN CHILD HLTH J, V12, P298, DOI 10.1007-s10995-007-0242-z; Bedwani R, 1997, INT J CANCER, V73, P64, DOI 10.1002-(SICI)1097-0215(19970926)73:164::AID-IJC113.0.CO;2-5; Breland AB, 2006, NICOTINE TOB RES, V8, P727, DOI 10.1080-14622200600789585; Breslau N, 1996, AM J PUBLIC HEALTH, V86, P214, DOI 10.2105-AJPH.86.2.214; Rock V. J., 2007, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, V56, P1157; Chaaya M, 2004, NICOTINE TOB RES, V6, P457, DOI 10.1080-14622200410001696628; Chattopadhyay A, 2000, Bull Indian Inst Hist Med Hyderabad, V30, P151; CIRCOSTA C, 2006, KENTNEWS NET 1114; COLEMAN W, 2006, OKLAHOMA DAILY 1022; DANDREA N, 2007, PHOENIX NEW TIM 0719; DiFranza JR, 2007, ARCH PEDIAT ADOL MED, V161, P704, DOI 10.1001-archpedi.161.7.704; DiFranza JR, 2002, TOB CONTROL, V11, P228, DOI 10.1136-tc.11.3.228; Djordjevic MV, 2000, J NATL CANCER I, V92, P106, DOI 10.1093-jnci-92.2.106; Eissenberg T, 2004, ADDICTION, V99, P5, DOI 10.1111-j.1360-0443.2004.00735.x; Eissenberg T, 2008, J ADOLESCENT HEALTH, V42, P526, DOI 10.1016-j.jadohealth.2007.10.004; Eissenberg T, 1999, Nicotine Tob Res, V1, P317, DOI 10.1080-14622299050011441; El-Nachef WN, 2008, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V299, P36, DOI 10.1001-jama.2007.6; El-Setouhy M, 2008, MUTAT RES-GEN TOX EN, V655, P36, DOI 10.1016-j.mrgentox.2008.06.014; ENENMOH I, 2005, IOWA STATE DAIL 0822; Grekin ER, 2008, J STUD ALCOHOL DRUGS, V69, P472; Hammal F, 2008, Tob Control, V17, pe3, DOI 10.1136-tc.2007.020529; Hildebrand BE, 1998, BRAIN RES, V779, P214, DOI 10.1016-S0006-8993(97)01135-9; HILLARY L, 2005, ARIZONA DAILY W 0222; HORN C, 2007, U DAILY KANSAN 0906; HUGHES JR, 1986, ARCH GEN PSYCHIAT, V43, P289; INHORN MC, 1994, SOC SCI MED, V39, P671, DOI 10.1016-0277-9536(94)90023-X; International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), 2004, IARC MON; Jabbour S, 2003, ANN EPIDEMIOL, V13, P570, DOI DOI 10.1016-S1047-2797(03)00165-0; KASPER A, 2005, SIGNPOST 1005; KATURJI M, 2008, THESIS AM U BEIRUT; KHALIL M, 2006, THESIS AM U BEIRUT; Khater AEM, 2008, J ENVIRON RADIOACTIV, V99, P1808, DOI 10.1016-j.jenvrad.2008.07.005; Kilthau G F, 1996, Radiol Technol, V67, P217; Knishkowy B, 2005, PEDIATRICS, V116, pE113, DOI 10.1542-peds.2004-2173; Kolb L, 1938, AM J PSYCHIAT, V94, P759; Köseoğlu Nalan, 2006, Tuberk Toraks, V54, P222; LUBIN JH, 1992, INT J CANCER, V51, P390, DOI 10.1002-ijc.2910510310; MARTELL EA, 1974, NATURE, V249, P215, DOI 10.1038-249215a0; MARTIN WR, 1977, DRUG ADDICTION, V1, P43; Maziak W, 2007, COCHRANE DB SYST REV, DOI 10.1002-14651858.CD005549.pub2; Maziak W, 2004, ANN EPIDEMIOL, V14, P646, DOI 10.1016-j.annepidem.2003.11.003; Maziak W, 2004, TOB CONTROL, V13, P327, DOI 10.1136-tc.2004.008169; Maziak W, 2005, PHARMACOL BIOCHEM BE, V80, P173, DOI 10.1016-j.pbb.2004.10.026; Maziak W, 2008, NICOTINE TOB RES, V10, P519, DOI 10.1080-14622200801901989; Monn C, 2007, TOB CONTROL, V16, P390, DOI 10.1136-tc.2007.021097; Nafae A, 1973, Indian J Chest Dis, V15, P285; Nasrollahzadeh D, 2008, BRIT J CANCER, V98, P1857, DOI 10.1038-sj.bjc.6604369; Natto S, 2005, J PERIODONTOL, V76, P1919, DOI 10.1902-jop.2005.76.11.1919; Neergaard J, 2007, NICOTINE TOB RES, V9, P987, DOI 10.1080-14622200701591591; Nuwayhid IA, 1998, AM J EPIDEMIOL, V148, P375; Pope CA, 2002, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V287, P1132, DOI 10.1001-jama.287.9.1132; Primack BA, 2006, AM J PUBLIC HEALTH, V96, P1339, DOI 10.2105-AJPH.2006.090381; Primack BA, 2009, PEDIATRICS, V123, pE282, DOI 10.1542-peds.2008-1663; Primack BA, 2008, ANN BEHAV MED, V36, P81, DOI 10.1007-s12160-008-9047-6; Rice VH, 2003, PREV MED, V37, P492, DOI 10.1016-S0091-7435(03)00175-0; Rice VH, 2006, MERRILL PALMER QUART, V52, P327, DOI 10.1353-mpq.2006.0020; ROSACKER C, 2006, DAILY NEBRASKAN 0920; Sajid Khan Mohammad, 2007, J Pak Med Assoc, V57, P595; Sajid KM, 2008, HARM REDUCT J, V5, DOI 10.1186-1477-7517-5-19; Schroeder SA, 2005, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V294, P482, DOI 10.1001-jama.294.4.482; Sepetdjian E, 2008, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V46, P1582, DOI 10.1016-j.fct.2007.12.028; Shafagoj YA, 2002, SAUDI MED J, V23, P953; Shihadeh A, 2004, PHARMACOL BIOCHEM BE, V79, P75, DOI 10.1016-j.pbb.2004.06.005; Shihadeh A, 2006, J AEROSOL MED, V19, P137, DOI 10.1089-jam.2006.19.137; Shihadeh A, 2003, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V41, P143, DOI 10.1016-S0278-6915(02)00220-X; Shihadeh A, 2005, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V43, P655, DOI 10.1016-j.fct.2004.12.013; Smith SY, 2007, NICOTINE TOB RES, V9, P977, DOI 10.1080-14622200701540796; Smith-Simone S, 2008, NICOTINE TOB RES, V10, P393, DOI 10.1080-14622200701825023; Steentoft Johnna, 2006, Ugeskr Laeger, V168, P904; SUKUMAR A, 1992, BIOL TRACE ELEM RES, V34, P99, DOI 10.1007-BF02783902; Tamim H, 2007, AM J HEALTH BEHAV, V31, P56; Tamim H, 2008, BJOG-INT J OBSTET GY, V115, P91, DOI 10.1111-j.1471-0528.2007.01568.x; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2004, HLTH CONS SMOK REP S; VARSANO S, 2003, HAREFUAH, V142; Ward KD, 2006, PREV MED, V43, P92, DOI 10.1016-j.ypmed.2006.03.010; Ward K D, 2006, Tob Control, V15 Suppl 1, pi24, DOI 10.1136-tc.2005.014860; Ward KD, 2007, NICOTINE TOB RES, V9, P1339, DOI 10.1080-14622200701705019; Ward KD, 2005, NICOTINE TOB RES, V7, P149, DOI 10.1080-14622200412331328402; Watkins S S, 2000, Nicotine Tob Res, V2, P19; Weglicki LS, 2007, ETHN DIS S3, V17, pS3; White JL, 2001, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V39, P499, DOI 10.1016-S0278-6915(00)00155-1; *WHO, 2007, FACTSH 310 TOP 10 CA; *WHO, 2006, PUBLICATION WHO EMRO; World Health Organization, 2005, WAT TOB SMOK HLTH EF; Yunis K, 2007, INT J PUBLIC HEALTH, V52, P223, DOI 10.1007-s00038-007-6087-9; 2004, SMOKESHOP86939
CO exposure, puff topography, and subjective effects in waterpipe tobacco smokers
No full textIntroduction: Waterpipe tobacco smoking is increasing in popularity though the toxicant exposure and effects associated with this tobacco use method are not well understood. Methods: Sixty-one waterpipe tobacco smokers (56 males; mean age ± SD, 30.9 ± 9.5 years; mean number of weekly waterpipe smoking episodes, 7.8 ± 5.7; mean duration of waterpipe smoking 8.5 ± 6.1 years) abstained from smoking for at least 24 hr and then smoked tobacco from a waterpipe ad libitum in a laboratory. Before and after smoking, expired-air carbon monoxide (CO) and subjective effects were assessed; puff topography was measured during smoking. Results: The mean waterpipe use episode duration was 33.1 ± 13.1 min. Expired-air CO increased significantly from a mean of 4.0 ± 1.7 before to 35.5 ± 32.7 after smoking. On average, participants took 169 ± 100 puffs, with a mean puff volume of 511 ± 333 ml. Urge to smoke, restlessness, craving, and other tobacco abstinence symptoms were reduced significantly after smoking, while ratings of dizzy, lightheaded, and other direct effects of nicotine increased. Discussion: Expired-air CO and puff topography data indicate that, relative to a single cigarette, a single waterpipe tobacco smoking episode is associated with greater smoke exposure. Abstinent waterpipe tobacco smokers report symptoms similar to those reported by abstinent cigarette smokers, and these symptoms are reduced by subsequent waterpipe tobacco smoking. Taken together, these data are consistent with the notion that waterpipe tobacco smoking is likely associated with the risk of tobacco-nicotine dependence. © The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved.Breland AB, 2006, NICOTINE TOB RES, V8, P727, DOI 10.1080-14622200600789585; Buchhalter AR, 2005, ADDICTION, V100, P550, DOI 10.1111-j.1360-0443.2005.01030.x; Cox L S, 2001, Nicotine Tob Res, V3, P7, DOI 10.1080-14622200020032051; Djordjevic MV, 2000, J NATL CANCER I, V92, P106, DOI 10.1093-jnci-92.2.106; Eissenberg T, 2008, J ADOLESCENT HEALTH, V42, P526, DOI 10.1016-j.jadohealth.2007.10.004; El-Nachef WN, 2008, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V299, P36, DOI 10.1001-jama.2007.6; GROSS J, 1989, PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY, V98, P334, DOI 10.1007-BF00451684; Hammal F, 2008, Tob Control, V17, pe3, DOI 10.1136-tc.2007.020529; HATSUKAMI DK, 1984, PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY, V84, P231, DOI 10.1007-BF00427451; HUGHES JR, 1986, ARCH GEN PSYCHIAT, V43, P289; HUGHES JR, 1990, RES ADV ALCOHOL DRUG, V10, P317; Jackson D, 2008, BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, V8, DOI 10.1186-1471-2458-8-174; JOHN U, 2004, PREV MED, V38, P35; Kassel JD, 2007, J ADOLESCENT HEALTH, V40, P54, DOI 10.1016-j.jadohealth.2006.08.006; Kleykamp BA, 2008, EXP CLIN PSYCHOPHARM, V16, P99, DOI 10.1037-1064-1297.16.2.99; Knishkowy B, 2005, PEDIATRICS, V116, pE113, DOI 10.1542-peds.2004-2173; Maziak W, 2004, DRUG ALCOHOL DEPEN, V76, P101, DOI 10.1016-j.drugalcdep.2004.04.007; Maziak W, 2008, ADDICTION, V103, P1763, DOI 10.1111-j.1360-0443.2008.02327.x; Maziak W, 2004, TOB CONTROL, V13, P327, DOI 10.1136-tc.2004.008169; Maziak W, 2005, PHARMACOL BIOCHEM BE, V80, P173, DOI 10.1016-j.pbb.2004.10.026; Neergaard J, 2007, NICOTINE TOB RES, V9, P987, DOI 10.1080-14622200701591591; Salameh P, 2008, NICOTINE TOB RES, V10, P149, DOI 10.1080-14622200701767753; Saleh R, 2008, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V46, P1461, DOI 10.1016-j.fct.2007.12.007; Shafagoj YA, 2002, INT J CLIN PHARM TH, V40, P249; Shihadeh A, 2004, PHARMACOL BIOCHEM BE, V79, P75, DOI 10.1016-j.pbb.2004.06.005; Shihadeh A, 2003, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V41, P143, DOI 10.1016-S0278-6915(02)00220-X; Shihadeh A, 2005, BEHAV RES METHODS, V37, P186, DOI 10.3758-BF03206414; Smith-Simone S, 2008, NICOTINE TOB RES, V10, P393, DOI 10.1080-14622200701825023; Strasser AA, 2004, CANCER EPIDEM BIOMAR, V13, P1800; Ward KD, 2005, NICOTINE TOB RES, V7, P149, DOI 10.1080-14622200412331328402; World Health Organization, 2005, TOBREG ADV NOT WAT T; ZACNY JP, 1988, J PHARMACOL EXP THER, V246, P61957585
CO exposure and puff topography are associated with Lebanese waterpipe dependence scale score
No full textIntroduction: Waterpipe tobacco smoking involves self-administration of the dependence-producing drug nicotine. Few studies have examined if dependence in waterpipe smokers influences toxicant exposure and smoking behavior. Method: Current waterpipe tobacco smokers were categorized based on Lebanese Waterpipe Dependence Scale-11 (LWDS-11) score (LWDS-11: LOW 7; N = 59; HIGH 13; N = 59). Participants abstained from smoking for 12 hr and then completed a single 30-min waterpipe tobacco smoking episode. Expired-air carbon monoxide (CO) was measured before and 5 min after smoking and puff topography was measured during smoking. Results: Total mean smoking time was 30.9 min (SD = 3.5) and did not differ significantly by LWDS-11 score. CO boost was greater for participants in the HIGH versus LOW groups (62.3 vs. 43.6 ppm, p .01). Similarly, those in the HIGH versus LOW group took more puffs (198.6 vs. 157.1 puffs, p .01), longer duration puffs (2.7 vs. 2.3 s, p .05), puffs with lower flow rate (10.3 vs. 12.6 L-min, p .01), and less time between puffs (8.0 vs. 12.4 s, p .001). Conclusion: The puff topography of waterpipe tobacco smokers can be predicted by LWDS-11 score, with those scoring higher taking longer duration and lower velocity puffs at a higher frequency. These behavioral differences may underlie the 40percent greater CO exposure observed for those with higher LWDS-11 scores. To the extent that waterpipe dependence is associated with more smoke inhalation, more dependent smokers will be exposed to greater amounts of toxic smoke constituents. © The Author 2013. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved.Akl EA, 2010, INT J EPIDEMIOL, V39, P834, DOI 10.1093-ije-dyq002; Al Rashidi M, 2008, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V46, P3546, DOI 10.1016-j.fct.2008.09.007; Alsatari ES, 2012, INT J OCCUP MED ENV, V25, P218, DOI 10.2478-S13382-012-0027-5; Blank MD, 2011, DRUG ALCOHOL DEPEN, V116, P102, DOI 10.1016-j.drugalcdep.2010.11.026; Eissenberg T, 2009, AM J PREV MED, V37, P518, DOI 10.1016-j.amepre.2009.07.014; Fagerstrom K, 2012, NICOTINE TOB RES, V14, P1382, DOI 10.1093-ntr-nts007; Hakim F, 2011, CHEST, V139, P775, DOI 10.1378-chest.10-1833; Hammal F, 2008, Tob Control, V17, pe3, DOI 10.1136-tc.2007.020529; Jackson D, 2008, BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, V8, DOI 10.1186-1471-2458-8-174; Jacob P, 2011, CANCER EPIDEM BIOMAR, V20, P2345, DOI 10.1158-1055-9965.EPI-11-0545; Khabour OF, 2012, INHAL TOXICOL, V24, P667, DOI 10.3109-08958378.2012.710918; Khabour OF, 2011, ENVIRON MOL MUTAGEN, V52, DOI 10.1002-em.20601; Maziak W, 2008, ADDICTION, V103, P1763, DOI 10.1111-j.1360-0443.2008.02327.x; Neergaard J, 2007, NICOTINE TOB RES, V9, P987, DOI 10.1080-14622200701591591; Parna K, 2008, BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, V8, DOI 10.1186-1471-2458-8-392; Poyrazoglu S, 2010, UPSALA J MED SCI, V115, P210, DOI 10.3109-03009734.2010.487164; Primack BA, 2013, NICOTINE TOB RES, V15, P29, DOI 10.1093-ntr-nts076; Raad D, 2011, CHEST, V139, P764, DOI 10.1378-chest.10-0991; Radwan G, 2013, NICOTINE TOB RES, V15, P130, DOI 10.1093-ntr-nts099; Rastam S, 2011, ADDICT BEHAV, V36, P555, DOI 10.1016-j.addbeh.2011.01.021; Salameh P, 2008, NICOTINE TOB RES, V10, P149, DOI 10.1080-14622200701767753; Saleh R, 2008, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V46, P1461, DOI 10.1016-j.fct.2007.12.007; Shaikh R B, 2008, J Prev Med Hyg, V49, P101; Shihadeh A, 2005, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V43, P655, DOI 10.1016-j.fct.2004.12.013; Shihadeh A, 2012, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V50, P1494, DOI 10.1016-j.fct.2012.02.041; WALD NJ, 1981, THORAX, V36, P366, DOI 10.1136-thx.36.5.366; Ward KD, 2005, NICOTINE TOB RES, V7, P149, DOI 10.1080-14622200412331328402; Zielińska-Danch Wioleta, 2010, Przegl Lek, V67, P103313
Acute effects of waterpipe tobacco smoking: A double-blind, placebo-control study
No full textBackground: Waterpipe tobacco smoking usually involves heating flavored tobacco with charcoal and inhaling the resulting smoke after it has passed through water. Waterpipe tobacco smoking increases heart rate and produces subjective effects similar to those reported by cigarette smokers. These responses are thought to be nicotine-mediated, though no placebo-control studies exist. Accordingly, this double-blind, placebo-control study compared the acute physiological and subjective effects of waterpipe tobacco smoking to those produced when participants used a waterpipe to smoke a flavor-matched, tobacco-free preparation. Methods: Occasional waterpipe tobacco smokers (n= 37; 2-5 monthly smoking episodes for ≥6 months) completed two double-blind, counterbalanced sessions that differed by product: preferred brand-flavor of waterpipe tobacco or flavor-matched, tobacco-free preparation. For each 45-min, ad lib smoking episode blood and expired air CO were sampled, cardiovascular and respiratory response were measured, and subjective response was assessed. Results: Waterpipe tobacco smoking significantly increased mean (±SEM) plasma nicotine concentration (3.6. ± 0.7. ng-ml) and heart rate (8.6. ± 1.4. bpm) while placebo did not (0.1. ± 0.0. ng-ml; 1.3. ± 0.9. bpm). For carboxyhemoglobin (COHb) and expired air CO, significant increases were observed for tobacco (3.8. ± 0.4percent; 27.9. ± 2.6. ppm) and for placebo (3.9. ± 0.4percent; 27.7. ± 3.3. ppm) with no differences across condition. Independent of condition, symptoms of nicotine-tobacco abstinence (e.g., urges to smoke, anxious) were reduced and direct effects (e.g., dizzy, satisfy) increased. Discussion: These results from the first placebo-control study of waterpipe tobacco smoking demonstrate that waterpipe-induced heart rate increases are almost certainly mediated by nicotine though the subjective effects observed in these occasional smokers were not. © 2011.ALFAYEZ SF, 1988, TROP GEOGR MED, V40, P115; Aljarrah Khaled, 2009, Tob Induc Dis, V5, P16, DOI 10.1186-1617-9625-5-16; Al Rashidi M, 2008, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V46, P3546, DOI 10.1016-j.fct.2008.09.007; Aydin A, 2004, ANN NUCL MED, V18, P285, DOI 10.1007-BF02984465; BRANDON TN, 2004, ADDICT S, V1, P51; Breland AB, 2006, NICOTINE TOB RES, V8, P727, DOI 10.1080-14622200600789585; Buchhalter AR, 2005, ADDICTION, V100, P550, DOI 10.1111-j.1360-0443.2005.01030.x; Chambers DC, 1998, THORAX, V53, P677; Cobb C, 2010, AM J HEALTH BEHAV, V34, P275; Cox L S, 2001, Nicotine Tob Res, V3, P7, DOI 10.1080-14622200020032051; Donny EC, 2007, ADDICTION, V102, P324, DOI 10.1111-j.1360-0443.2006.01670.x; Eissenberg T, 2004, ADDICTION, V99, P5, DOI 10.1111-j.1360-0443.2004.00735.x; Eissenberg T, 2009, AM J PREV MED, V37, P518, DOI 10.1016-j.amepre.2009.07.014; El-Nachef WN, 2008, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V299, P36, DOI 10.1001-jama.2007.6; Evans SE, 2006, EXP CLIN PSYCHOPHARM, V14, P121, DOI 10.1037-1064-1297.14.2.121; FALK JL, 1995, PHARMACOL BIOCHEM BE, V50, P71, DOI 10.1016-0091-3057(94)00256-I; FOULDS J, 1992, PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY, V106, P421, DOI 10.1007-BF02245429; Ghasemi A, 2010, SCAND J CLIN LAB INV, V70, P116, DOI 10.3109-00365511003611282; HUGHES JR, 1986, ARCH GEN PSYCHIAT, V43, P289; Huynh H., 1976, J EDUC STATIST, V1, P69, DOI DOI 10.2307-1164736; Jensen PD, 2010, SUBST USE MISUSE, V45, P1245, DOI 10.3109-10826081003682909; Keppel G., 1991, DESIGN ANAL RES HDB; KHARITONOV SA, 1995, AM J RESP CRIT CARE, V152, P609; Kiter G, 2000, RESP MED, V94, P891, DOI 10.1053-rmed.2000.0859; Lim Beng Leong, 2009, Int J Emerg Med, V2, P121, DOI 10.1007-s12245-009-0097-8; Louhelainen Noora, 2008, Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis, V3, P585; Maziak W, 2009, NICOTINE TOB RES, V11, P806, DOI 10.1093-ntr-ntp066; Maziak W, 2004, TOB CONTROL, V13, P327, DOI 10.1136-tc.2004.008169; Mohammad Yousser, 2008, Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis, V3, P405; Monzer B, 2008, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V46, P2991, DOI 10.1016-j.fct.2008.05.031; Naidong W, 2001, J CHROMATOGR B, V754, P387, DOI 10.1016-S0378-4347(01)00021-4; *NAT I CLIN EXC, 2003, TECHN APPR GUID, V59, P1, DOI DOI 10.1136-THX.2004.022707; Parna K, 2008, BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, V8, DOI 10.1186-1471-2458-8-392; Pickworth W B, 1999, Nicotine Tob Res, V1, P357, DOI 10.1080-14622299050011491; Primack BA, 2010, J ADOLESCENT HEALTH, V46, P45, DOI 10.1016-j.jadohealth.2009.05.004; Roskin J, 2009, BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, V9, DOI 10.1186-1471-2458-9-10; SEIGEL S, 1982, SCIENCE, V216, P436; Sepetdjian E, 2008, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V46, P1582, DOI 10.1016-j.fct.2007.12.028; Shafagoj YA, 2002, INT J CLIN PHARM TH, V40, P249; Shafagoj YA, 2002, SAUDI MED J, V23, P953; Shihadeh A, 2003, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V41, P143, DOI 10.1016-S0278-6915(02)00220-X; Shihadeh A, 2005, BEHAV RES METHODS, V37, P186, DOI 10.3758-BF03206414; Shihadeh A, 2005, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V43, P655, DOI 10.1016-j.fct.2004.12.013; Smith-Simone S, 2008, NICOTINE TOB RES, V10, P393, DOI 10.1080-14622200701825023; Ward KD, 2007, NICOTINE TOB RES, V9, P1339, DOI 10.1080-14622200701705019; Weglicki LS, 2007, ETHN DIS, V17; World Health Organization, 2005, WAT TOB SMOK HLTH EF22282
Waterpipe tobacco and cigarette smoking among university students in Jordan
No full textSETTING: While waterpipe and cigarette smoking have been well studied in Syria and Lebanon, data from Jordan are limited. OBJECTIVES: To characterize the relative prevalence of waterpipe tobacco and cigarette smoking among university students in Jordan, and to compare the demographic and environmental factors associated with each form of tobacco use. DESIGN: We surveyed 1845 students randomly recruited from four universities in Jordan. We used multivariable logistic regression controlling for clustering of individuals within universities to determine associations between demographic and environmental covariates and waterpipe tobacco and cigarette use. RESULTS: Waterpipe tobacco smoking rates were 30percent in the past 30 days and 56percent ever, while cigarette smoking rates were 29percent in the past 30 days and 57percent ever. Past 30-day waterpipe tobacco smoking rates were 59percent for males and 13percent for females. Females had substantially lower odds than males of being current waterpipe (OR 0.12, 95percentCI 0.10-0.15) or cigarette (OR 0.08, 95percentCI 0.05-0.14) smokers. Current cigarette smoking was more significantly associated with markers of high socioeconomic status (SES) than waterpipe tobacco smoking. CONCLUSION: Waterpipe tobacco smoking is as common as cigarette smoking among Jordanian university students. While cigarette smoking is consistently associated with high SES, waterpipe tobacco smoking is more evenly distributed across various populations. © 2012 The Union.Afifi RA, 2010, EUR J PUBLIC HEALTH, V20, P456, DOI 10.1093-eurpub-ckp173; Akl EA, 2010, INT J EPIDEMIOL, V39, P834, DOI 10.1093-ije-dyq002; Almerie MQ, 2008, INT J TUBERC LUNG D, V12, P1085; Al Rashidi M, 2008, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V46, P3546, DOI 10.1016-j.fct.2008.09.007; Azab M, 2010, NICOTINE TOB RES, V12, P606, DOI 10.1093-ntr-ntq055; Barnett TE, 2009, AM J PUBLIC HEALTH, V99, P2014, DOI 10.2105-AJPH.2008.151225; Cobb C, 2010, AM J HEALTH BEHAV, V34, P275; Dar-Odeh NS, 2010, HARM REDUCT J, V7, DOI 10.1186-1477-7517-7-10; Dugas E, 2010, PEDIATRICS, V125, P1184, DOI 10.1542-peds.2009-2335; Eissenberg T, 2009, AM J PREV MED, V37, P518, DOI 10.1016-j.amepre.2009.07.014; Eissenberg T, 2008, J ADOLESCENT HEALTH, V42, P526, DOI 10.1016-j.jadohealth.2007.10.004; Jensen PD, 2010, SUBST USE MISUSE, V45, P1245, DOI 10.3109-10826081003682909; Khabour OF, 2011, ENVIRON MOL MUTAGEN, V52, DOI 10.1002-em.20601; Khader Y. S., 2008, Eastern Mediterranean Health Journal, V14, P897; Knishkowy B, 2005, PEDIATRICS, V116, pE113, DOI 10.1542-peds.2004-2173; Lee D, 2007, ADDICT BEHAV, V32, P332, DOI 10.1016-j.addbeh.2006.05.002; Mandil Ahmed, 2010, J Infect Public Health, V3, P179, DOI 10.1016-j.jiph.2010.10.003; Maziak W, 2009, NICOTINE TOB RES, V11, P806, DOI 10.1093-ntr-ntp066; Maziak W, 2004, INT J TUBERC LUNG D, V8, P882; Maziak W, 2004, TOB CONTROL, V13, P327, DOI 10.1136-tc.2004.008169; Memon A, 2000, B WORLD HEALTH ORGAN, V78, P1306; Mohammed H. R., 2010, Eastern Mediterranean Health Journal, V16, P1115; Neergaard J, 2007, NICOTINE TOB RES, V9, P987, DOI 10.1080-14622200701591591; Noar SM, 2005, HEALTH EDUC RES, V20, P275, DOI 10.1093-her-cyg113; Parna K, 2008, BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, V8, DOI 10.1186-1471-2458-8-392; Primack BA, 2010, J ADOLESCENT HEALTH, V46, P45, DOI 10.1016-j.jadohealth.2009.05.004; Primack BA, 2009, PEDIATRICS, V123, pE282, DOI 10.1542-peds.2008-1663; Primack BA, 2008, ANN BEHAV MED, V36, P81, DOI 10.1007-s12160-008-9047-6; Saade Georges, 2009, J Med Liban, V57, P243; Sepetdjian E, 2008, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V46, P1582, DOI 10.1016-j.fct.2007.12.028; Shafagoj YA, 2002, INT J CLIN PHARM TH, V40, P249; Shihadeh A, 2005, FOOD CHEM TOXICOL, V43, P655, DOI 10.1016-j.fct.2004.12.013; Smith-Simone S, 2008, NICOTINE TOB RES, V10, P393, DOI 10.1080-14622200701825023; Tamim H, 2003, ADDICTION, V98, P933, DOI 10.1046-j.1360-0443.2003.00413.x; Ward KD, 2006, TOB CONTROL, V15, pi248111
Interventions for waterpipe smoking cessation
No full textWaterpipe tobacco smoking is a traditional method of tobacco use, especially in the Eastern Mediterranean Region (EMR), but its use is now spreading worldwide. Recent epidemiological data, for example, show that waterpipe smoking has become the most prevalent tobacco use method among adolescents in the EMR, and the second most prevalent in the US. Waterpipes are used socially, often being shared between friends or family at home, or in dedicated bars and cafes that provide waterpipes to patrons. Because the smoke passes through a reservoir of water, waterpipe tobacco smoking is perceived as being less harmful than other methods of tobacco use. At least in some cultures, women and girls are more likely to use a waterpipe than to use other forms of tobacco, and it is popular among younger smokers. Accumulating evidence suggests that some waterpipe smokers become addicted, have difficulty quitting, and experience similar health risks as cigarette smokers
- …
