Stanton Glantz
@profglantz.com
Glantz retired from the University of California San Francisco faculty in 2020 after 45 years on the faculty and founding the UCSF Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education. Learn more at https://profglantz.com/about.
California Enacts World’s First Thirdhand Smoke Disclosure Law
California has enacted the first law, AB455, that requires sellers of single-family homes to disclose in writing any known indoor smoking, vaping, or thirdhand smoke contamination to prospective buyers. It also also directs the…
California has enacted the first law, AB455, that requires sellers of single-family homes to disclose in writing any known indoor smoking, vaping, or thirdhand smoke contamination to prospective buyers. It also also directs the…
California Enacts World’s First Thirdhand Smoke Disclosure Law
California has enacted the first law, AB455, that requires sellers of single-family homes to disclose in writing any known indoor smoking, vaping, or thirdhand smoke contamination to prospective buyers. It also also directs the California Department of Toxic Substances Control to update its Homeowner’s Guide to Environmental Hazards to include thirdhand smoke information, a task assigned to San Diego State University's Center for Tobacco and the Environment…
profglantz.com
November 21, 2025 at 4:13 PM
California Enacts World’s First Thirdhand Smoke Disclosure Law
California has enacted the first law, AB455, that requires sellers of single-family homes to disclose in writing any known indoor smoking, vaping, or thirdhand smoke contamination to prospective buyers. It also also directs the…
California has enacted the first law, AB455, that requires sellers of single-family homes to disclose in writing any known indoor smoking, vaping, or thirdhand smoke contamination to prospective buyers. It also also directs the…
Based on 4 year followup, dual use is rarely an intermediate condition on the way from cigarettes to “switching completely” or quitting. profglantz.com/2024/12/30/d...
Dual use is not an intermediate condition on the way from cigarettes to “switching completely” or quitting
Discussion of potential harm reduction associated with the use of e-cigarettes assumes that smokers will “switch completely” from cigarettes to e-cigarettes or stop both tobacco product…
profglantz.com
November 19, 2025 at 5:13 PM
Based on 4 year followup, dual use is rarely an intermediate condition on the way from cigarettes to “switching completely” or quitting. profglantz.com/2024/12/30/d...
Didn't you go to work for Philip Morris-funded FSFW in 2018, and work there for years when PM was the only financier? It's also important to note that PM dumped FSFW, not the other way around.
It WAS funded by PMI (no longer). I've also served as a Senior Advisor to the WHO, Direct of Child Health at the Optimus Foundation, Program Officer for Health Equity at the Rockefeller Foundation, Assistant Professor of Healthcare Ethics at Howard University Med School... So am I good or evil?
November 19, 2025 at 2:00 AM
Didn't you go to work for Philip Morris-funded FSFW in 2018, and work there for years when PM was the only financier? It's also important to note that PM dumped FSFW, not the other way around.
Another statement with no direct evidence to support it.
Unlikely they will remain dual users. US smoking will be approaching zero in 10 years.
In the 1990s, good vs. evil was clear. Back then, I focused on HIV, TB, malaria, dengue & child health, and avoided tobacco control because its go-to interventions were stigma, coercion and harm exaggerations.
In the 1990s, good vs. evil was clear. Back then, I focused on HIV, TB, malaria, dengue & child health, and avoided tobacco control because its go-to interventions were stigma, coercion and harm exaggerations.
November 18, 2025 at 6:35 PM
Another statement with no direct evidence to support it.
What the data from the RCTs show is that for every smoker who quits, 2-4 become dual users. That's what we know.
At least you now admit that you are promoting an assumption.
At least you now admit that you are promoting an assumption.
You assume they remain dual users. I assume they won't. I assume the US smoking rate will be approaching zero in ~10 years. That's what survey trends show. And that is consistent with what Goldman Sachs reports: Cigarette sales are now dropping 10% per year. This decline is increasing YOY.
November 18, 2025 at 4:52 PM
What the data from the RCTs show is that for every smoker who quits, 2-4 become dual users. That's what we know.
At least you now admit that you are promoting an assumption.
At least you now admit that you are promoting an assumption.
That's what ecig enthusiasts like to say, but not what the data shows. Read the RCTs carefully for people's status at the end of followup.
A medicine that is 100% efficacious, but which no one uses, is 0% "effective." You know this.
You seem to WANT dual use to be the most common outcome. But you know it's:
(a) smokers on the journey to quit
(b) smokers who sometimes vape
(c) vapers who sometimes still have a cig
You seem to WANT dual use to be the most common outcome. But you know it's:
(a) smokers on the journey to quit
(b) smokers who sometimes vape
(c) vapers who sometimes still have a cig
November 17, 2025 at 10:50 PM
That's what ecig enthusiasts like to say, but not what the data shows. Read the RCTs carefully for people's status at the end of followup.
You're ignoring the fact that people who use ecigs to quit cigs are 2-4 times more likely to become dual users than quitters, which means that the overall risk/benefit ratio is adverse. Why do you keep leaving out important details?
Smoking cessation efficacy estimates for Varenicline are around 18%. The low end of smoking cessation efficacy for nicotine vapes is also 18%.
But Americans who smoke are 20 times more likely to TRY to quit with a nicotine vape than with Varenicline.
link.springer.com/article/10.1...
But Americans who smoke are 20 times more likely to TRY to quit with a nicotine vape than with Varenicline.
link.springer.com/article/10.1...
November 17, 2025 at 10:47 PM
You're ignoring the fact that people who use ecigs to quit cigs are 2-4 times more likely to become dual users than quitters, which means that the overall risk/benefit ratio is adverse. Why do you keep leaving out important details?
Plain language summary of meta-analysis of ecigs and disease available
Last year we published "Population-Based Disease Odds for E-Cigarettes and Dual Use versus Cigarettes" that showed that some disease risks of e-cigarettes are indistinguishable from cigarettes and for others they on only…
Last year we published "Population-Based Disease Odds for E-Cigarettes and Dual Use versus Cigarettes" that showed that some disease risks of e-cigarettes are indistinguishable from cigarettes and for others they on only…
Plain language summary of meta-analysis of ecigs and disease available
Last year we published "Population-Based Disease Odds for E-Cigarettes and Dual Use versus Cigarettes" that showed that some disease risks of e-cigarettes are indistinguishable from cigarettes and for others they on only slightly lower. This paper continues to attract interest, so I prepared a one page plain language summary, together with some frequently asked questions. It is available…
profglantz.com
November 17, 2025 at 10:03 PM
Plain language summary of meta-analysis of ecigs and disease available
Last year we published "Population-Based Disease Odds for E-Cigarettes and Dual Use versus Cigarettes" that showed that some disease risks of e-cigarettes are indistinguishable from cigarettes and for others they on only…
Last year we published "Population-Based Disease Odds for E-Cigarettes and Dual Use versus Cigarettes" that showed that some disease risks of e-cigarettes are indistinguishable from cigarettes and for others they on only…
The fact that they are popular doesn't mean they work. Smokers who use ecigs to quit are more likely to end up dual users (both smoking cigs and ecigs) than to quit. And dual use is more dangerous than just smoking.
Nicotine vapes are more efficacious for smoking cessation than nicotine patches and gum (NRTs). And BY FAR the most popular smoking cessation tool USED in the USA and UK.
"Effective" = "efficacy" + USE
Efficacy: www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10....
Use: link.springer.com/article/10.1...
"Effective" = "efficacy" + USE
Efficacy: www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10....
Use: link.springer.com/article/10.1...
November 17, 2025 at 8:19 PM
The fact that they are popular doesn't mean they work. Smokers who use ecigs to quit are more likely to end up dual users (both smoking cigs and ecigs) than to quit. And dual use is more dangerous than just smoking.
E-cigarettes as consumer products are not effective for cessation. profglantz.com/2024/04/24/w...
November 17, 2025 at 4:06 PM
E-cigarettes as consumer products are not effective for cessation. profglantz.com/2024/04/24/w...
We found similar results in the USA: profglantz.com/2020/12/01/m...
November 17, 2025 at 3:49 PM
We found similar results in the USA: profglantz.com/2020/12/01/m...
If it's not obvious, "younger adult smokers" is an industry euphemism for "kids."
Here's the tobacco industry in 1984 spelling it out. legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/fet29d00
November 17, 2025 at 3:47 PM
If it's not obvious, "younger adult smokers" is an industry euphemism for "kids."
Reposted by Stanton Glantz
E-cigarettes increase harm to smokers, so should not be promoted as a harm reduction strategy (in 10 slides) now available in 10 other languages
My blog post "E-cigarettes increase harm to smokers, so should not be promoted as a harm reduction strategy (in 10 slides)" has attracted a lot of…
My blog post "E-cigarettes increase harm to smokers, so should not be promoted as a harm reduction strategy (in 10 slides)" has attracted a lot of…
E-cigarettes increase harm to smokers, so should not be promoted as a harm reduction strategy (in 10 slides) now available in 10 other languages
My blog post "E-cigarettes increase harm to smokers, so should not be promoted as a harm reduction strategy (in 10 slides)" has attracted a lot of interest, so I have translated it into 10 other languages. Click below to download. Español (Spanish) Français (French) Deutsch (German) Português (Portuguese) 中文 (Chinese) العربية (Arabic) Русский (Russian) 日本語 (Japanese) 한국어 (Korean)
profglantz.com
November 16, 2025 at 12:29 AM
E-cigarettes increase harm to smokers, so should not be promoted as a harm reduction strategy (in 10 slides) now available in 10 other languages
My blog post "E-cigarettes increase harm to smokers, so should not be promoted as a harm reduction strategy (in 10 slides)" has attracted a lot of…
My blog post "E-cigarettes increase harm to smokers, so should not be promoted as a harm reduction strategy (in 10 slides)" has attracted a lot of…
How e-cigarettes compromise children’s human rights
The new paper "How e-cigarettes compromise children’s human rights" by Tom Gatehouse and colleagues provides more evidence to inform e-cigarette policy making by reminding the delegates to the FCTC Conference of the Parties next week that they…
The new paper "How e-cigarettes compromise children’s human rights" by Tom Gatehouse and colleagues provides more evidence to inform e-cigarette policy making by reminding the delegates to the FCTC Conference of the Parties next week that they…
How e-cigarettes compromise children’s human rights
The new paper "How e-cigarettes compromise children’s human rights" by Tom Gatehouse and colleagues provides more evidence to inform e-cigarette policy making by reminding the delegates to the FCTC Conference of the Parties next week that they need to prioritize protecting kids over any "harm reduction" benefits for adults that the tobacco industry claims for adult smokers. They make the very strong points that youth dominate the e-cigarette market: "
profglantz.com
November 14, 2025 at 4:36 PM
How e-cigarettes compromise children’s human rights
The new paper "How e-cigarettes compromise children’s human rights" by Tom Gatehouse and colleagues provides more evidence to inform e-cigarette policy making by reminding the delegates to the FCTC Conference of the Parties next week that they…
The new paper "How e-cigarettes compromise children’s human rights" by Tom Gatehouse and colleagues provides more evidence to inform e-cigarette policy making by reminding the delegates to the FCTC Conference of the Parties next week that they…
Gardner still does not seem to have carefully read our paper. Ecigs are associated with disease in NEVER SMOKERS, where former smoking is not an issue. About 1/3 of studies controlled for former smoking, which didn't affect results. Read the paper at evidence.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/...
November 14, 2025 at 3:49 AM
Gardner still does not seem to have carefully read our paper. Ecigs are associated with disease in NEVER SMOKERS, where former smoking is not an issue. About 1/3 of studies controlled for former smoking, which didn't affect results. Read the paper at evidence.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/...
Reposted by Stanton Glantz
Plug the name "Farsalinos" into our Truth Tobacco Industry Documents #archive and you get over 6000 hits that chronicle a decade of work:
www.industrydocuments.ucsf.edu/all-industri...
www.industrydocuments.ucsf.edu/all-industri...
Industry Documents Library
www.industrydocuments.ucsf.edu
November 12, 2025 at 3:14 PM
Plug the name "Farsalinos" into our Truth Tobacco Industry Documents #archive and you get over 6000 hits that chronicle a decade of work:
www.industrydocuments.ucsf.edu/all-industri...
www.industrydocuments.ucsf.edu/all-industri...
Reposted by Stanton Glantz
Where are our fellows now? This month we spotlight Lucy Popova PhD, CTCRE alum and now Professor at Georgia State University who shows how our fellowship trains the next generation of tobacco control leaders. Learn more: tobacco.ucsf.edu/fellowship
November 12, 2025 at 5:04 PM
Where are our fellows now? This month we spotlight Lucy Popova PhD, CTCRE alum and now Professor at Georgia State University who shows how our fellowship trains the next generation of tobacco control leaders. Learn more: tobacco.ucsf.edu/fellowship
Reposted by Stanton Glantz
The 2025 Global Tobacco Industry Interference Index, which was released this week, ranks 100 countries based on how well they implement and comply with guidance and measures designed to prevent tobacco industry interference in policymaking.
Explore the Global Index: https://globaltobaccoindex.org/
Explore the Global Index: https://globaltobaccoindex.org/
November 13, 2025 at 2:01 PM
The 2025 Global Tobacco Industry Interference Index, which was released this week, ranks 100 countries based on how well they implement and comply with guidance and measures designed to prevent tobacco industry interference in policymaking.
Explore the Global Index: https://globaltobaccoindex.org/
Explore the Global Index: https://globaltobaccoindex.org/
WHO position on Tobacco Control and Harm Reduction
In the face of a major push by the tobacco companies and their allies to trick Parties to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) to integrate the industry's "harm reduction" marketing message into FCTC guidelines, the WHO has…
In the face of a major push by the tobacco companies and their allies to trick Parties to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) to integrate the industry's "harm reduction" marketing message into FCTC guidelines, the WHO has…
WHO position on Tobacco Control and Harm Reduction
In the face of a major push by the tobacco companies and their allies to trick Parties to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) to integrate the industry's "harm reduction" marketing message into FCTC guidelines, the WHO has issued a position paper on harm reduction (below). The WHO's bottom line: "When it comes to tobacco, nicotine and related products, a harm reduction agenda should never be a reason for light touch regulation or a deregulation agenda."
profglantz.com
November 13, 2025 at 5:04 PM
WHO position on Tobacco Control and Harm Reduction
In the face of a major push by the tobacco companies and their allies to trick Parties to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) to integrate the industry's "harm reduction" marketing message into FCTC guidelines, the WHO has…
In the face of a major push by the tobacco companies and their allies to trick Parties to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) to integrate the industry's "harm reduction" marketing message into FCTC guidelines, the WHO has…
What we did was a lot more sophisticated than difference-in-difference. We used cointegrating regressions that do not require the (often strong) assumption of parallel trends that difference-in-difference requires.
And his name is Lightwood.
And his name is Lightwood.
I've reviewed your papers before. Free advise, interrupted time series with a control group you can call diff-in-diff to avoid confusion. Ask Lighthouse or somebody with an active academic affiliation to submit natural experiment work like that to TOPS.
November 13, 2025 at 3:21 AM
What we did was a lot more sophisticated than difference-in-difference. We used cointegrating regressions that do not require the (often strong) assumption of parallel trends that difference-in-difference requires.
And his name is Lightwood.
And his name is Lightwood.
I guess you haven't read any of our papers that use advanced econometric methods. Check out pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36928830/, other papers with Lightwood or pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11114317/ among others. They all have control groups.
November 13, 2025 at 1:00 AM
I guess you haven't read any of our papers that use advanced econometric methods. Check out pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36928830/, other papers with Lightwood or pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11114317/ among others. They all have control groups.
A comment on my blog post on your paper stated, "the COI disclosures that Pesko lists the Kentucky Institute for the Study of Free Enterprise. That is funded by the Global Action to End Smoking." Did you know that GAES is the new name for Philip Morris' Foundation for SmokeFree World?
If you need to resort to personal attacks and trying to link me to the tobacco industry, you've clearly lost the scientific debate. I don't apologize for believing in causal study designs, and respect findings from these studies regardless of directionality.
November 12, 2025 at 11:52 PM
A comment on my blog post on your paper stated, "the COI disclosures that Pesko lists the Kentucky Institute for the Study of Free Enterprise. That is funded by the Global Action to End Smoking." Did you know that GAES is the new name for Philip Morris' Foundation for SmokeFree World?
And that's why enough time has passed for epidemiology to detect links between ecigs and disease that we quantified in our meta-analysis.
Hon Lik's patent was 2003. So 22 (nearly 23) years.
E-cigarettes entered both the US and UK markets 18 years ago.
Adult use has increased dramatically in both countries while adult smoking has plummeted... and lung cancer continued to drop. It IS enough time to see that, assuming a ~10 year lag.
E-cigarettes entered both the US and UK markets 18 years ago.
Adult use has increased dramatically in both countries while adult smoking has plummeted... and lung cancer continued to drop. It IS enough time to see that, assuming a ~10 year lag.
November 12, 2025 at 11:49 PM
And that's why enough time has passed for epidemiology to detect links between ecigs and disease that we quantified in our meta-analysis.
Interrupted time series are a fine method (I have published several), but not the only form of evidence. You are still refusing to engage the epidemiology linking ecigs to disease. You have also ignored the literature on psychophysiology of ecigs, i.e., how they cause disease. Why?
If you need to resort to personal attacks and trying to link me to the tobacco industry, you've clearly lost the scientific debate. I don't apologize for believing in causal study designs, and respect findings from these studies regardless of directionality.
November 12, 2025 at 11:44 PM
Interrupted time series are a fine method (I have published several), but not the only form of evidence. You are still refusing to engage the epidemiology linking ecigs to disease. You have also ignored the literature on psychophysiology of ecigs, i.e., how they cause disease. Why?