Posted on

FDA vote is a setback – but not a disaster – for iQOS

Yesterday was an important day for PMI’s iQOS device, and for the whole future of Heat not Burn in the USA. Following a long bureaucratic process an FDA advisory panel discussed, then voted on, PMI’s claim that iQOS is a Modified Risk Tobacco Product (MRTP), a decision that could decide whether or not it goes on sale in the United States. It went better than it might have done, but unfortunately the results were still disappointing.

PMI submitted their MRTP application in December 2016; the reason it’s taken so long to come to a vote is that the application came to over a million pages of data. Achieving MRTP status would be a significant advantage for iQOS; it would allow PMI to market the product as less harmful than cigarettes, and to alter the warning labels on packaging to make clear that it’s a safer alternative. The final decision on granting MRTP status will be made by senior FDA management, probably some time in the next few months – and, while they’re free to ignore the recommendations of the advisory panel, they rarely do.

What was decided?

Yesterday’s panel voted on three issues. Firstly, have PMI proven that switching to iQOS will cut the risk of developing a smoking related disease? Secondly, is using iQOS healthier than continuing to smoke? Finally, does switching to iQOS reduce exposure to harmful and potentially harmful chemicals? In a slightly confusing mixed decision the panel rejected the first two claims, but voted strongly in favour of the third.

On the first question, reducing the risk of smoking-related disease, eight of the panel’s nine members voted that PMI hadn’t provided evidence for this; the last member abstained. The main issue seems to be that most of PMI’s clinical testing was carried out on rats, and the panel want to see results from human tests. To be blunt about it, this is not very reasonable. iQOS is a relatively new product, so there hasn’t been time for long-term trials on humans.

However, when it comes to the chemicals involved in iQOS vapour, this isn’t exactly a leap into the scientific unknown. All the potentially harmful substances found in iQOS vapour are also found, at much higher levels, in cigarette smoke – and of course the most harmful ingredients of smoke, carbon monoxide and tar, aren’t found at all.

On its own the panel’s rejection of this claim isn’t too surprising, although it’s certainly not justifiable. The FDA has a huge institutional hostility to tobacco products; even Swedish snus, which appears to pose no health risks at all, hasn’t been able to make its way through the MRTP process yet. However, put the decision into context with the FDA’s finding that PMI are right about iQOS users being exposed to fewer, and less abundant, toxins and it makes no sense at all. After all, it’s exposure to these chemicals that causes smoking-related disease, so if the chemicals are reduced or eliminated the risk of disease will fall. That’s basic toxicology – “The dose makes the poison”. This isn’t exactly a radical idea either; it’s been universally accepted since Paracelsus wrote it in 1538.

Exactly the same applies to the panel’s decision that using iQOS hasn’t been proven healthier than continuing to smoke. If they accept that the vapour is far less toxic than cigarette smoke – and they did, by eight votes to one – then why not also accept that inhaling vapour is much less risky than inhaling smoke?

So what’s going on?

On the face of it the panel rejecting two of PMI’s claims, but accepting a third that backs up the first two, doesn’t make any sense. After all the reduction in harmful chemicals is the whole point of iQOS, and the reason behind it is to reduce risks.

It does start to make sense if you look at it from an ideological, rather than a scientific, perspective. The panel can’t really argue with the fact that iQOS vapour has a fraction of the problematic chemicals found in tobacco smoke; that’s hard data, collected by independent labs and published in peer-reviewed journals. It cannot be disputed. Denying it is equivalent to Flat Earthism, so it’s actually impressive that only one member of the panel went down that road.

On the other hand, the claims about reduced risks to health are tentative. They’re based on the best analysis of the data, but – hypothetically, at least – they could be wrong. They aren’t, of course; that would require what tobacco control expert Clive Bates called “a novel and implausible theory of the human body”. But, nevertheless, the panel seem to have seized the chance to show how much they hate the tobacco industry.

Now what?

As annoying as it is, the panel’s conclusions aren’t the end of the road for iQOS. When the FDA makes its final decision there are still two open questions. One is whether or not to grant MRTP status anyway, despite the vote. Recommendations from the advisory panel carry a lot of weight, but the agency can disregard them. It’s definitely possible that under director Scott Gottlieb, who at least on paper is committed to harm reduction, they’ll decide to grant it.

Even if they don’t award MRTP, the FDA can decide to let iQOS go on sale anyway. In that scenario the packaging would have to carry standard health warnings and PMI wouldn’t be able to market it as a safer option, but word would get round anyway and we could expect to see a lot of smokers make the switch. iQOS is demolishing the cigarette market in Japan at an impressive rate and there’s no reason why it couldn’t do the same in the USA; it would be hard for even the USA to object to that.

The worst case scenario is that Gottlieb decides not to allow iQOS to be sold in the USA. That seems unlikely, but if it does happen the result is likely to be disastrous for HnB in America. PMI have spent a vast amount of money preparing this application, and if it’s rejected on openly ideological grounds it’s hard to see other companies lining up to apply. There’s a lot of lives hanging on the FA’s decision, so let’s hope that unlike their advisory panel they get it right.

Posted on

Buy an iQOS with 100 HEETS for just £89.

Here at Heat Not Burn UK we are very passionate about harm reduction and that is one of the reasons that we have embraced the iQOS more than any other heated tobacco device, it is in our own humble opinion the best heated tobacco device currently on the market bar none.

Well we have now teamed up with a very good UK dealer and are able to offer up a fantastic deal on the PMI iQOS.

The deal we are able to offer is a complete iQOS starter kit in either navy or white complete with 5 packs of HEETS (100 sticks) for the fantastic price of only £89. The R.R.P of the iQOS is £99 and the cheapest you can get HEETS for is around £7 so this deal would normally be retailing at around £134 but right here on this website you can get that all for just £89.

If you are fed up of smoking traditional cigarettes then this is the perfect opportunity to take advantage of a great offer. PMI (Philip Morris International) already know that the traditional cigarettes days are numbered, why not come and join the revolution?

All iQOS starter kits are genuine, come with a one year “no quibble” guarantee, our shipping is very quick and our customer service is second to none, what’s not to like?

As for the HEETS they are available in 3 different flavours: Amber is for the smoker who prefers the full strength taste, yellow is more of a smoother flavour and for any fans of menthol then our Turquoise HEETS are perfect!

Also if you are just looking for HEETS on their own we sell them too and you can buy a carton of ten packs for just £70, which works out at £7 a pack.

Click here to be taken to our online store!

Posted on

PMI want to give up cigarettes – but not everyone’s happy

In the last post we talked about New Year resolutions and how switching to heated tobacco might be one of yours. That turned out to be quite prophetic, because somebody else made a resolution that features HnB products, and they didn’t exactly keep it quiet either. That somebody was Philip Morris, the world’s largest and most successful tobacco company, and they announced their resolution with a series of full-page ads in major newspapers.

On the 2nd of January, a large PMI advert appeared in three of the UK’s best-selling papers, The Times, The Sun and The Daily Mirror. To say it was attention-grabbing doesn’t really do it justice. The banner headline read:

OUR NEW YEAR’S RESOLUTION

WE’RE TRYING TO GIVE UP CIGARETTES

Just to make sure everyone got the message there was a big, bold PMI logo at the bottom of the ad, which certainly must have piqued a lot of people’s interest. After all, PMI are pretty much famous for one thing, and that thing is selling cigarettes. So why on Earth would they want to give them up?

If you read on, you’ll find out. The next line says “Philip Morris is known for cigarettes. Every year, many smokers give them up. Now it’s our turn.” That doesn’t leave a lot of room for doubt – PMI are saying, very clearly, that they want to stop selling cigarettes.

Predictably, this has sparked a lot of comments. Many people are very supportive – we at Heat not Burn UK are, for example. So are most libertarians, many vaping advocates and at least one major tobacco control group, the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World.

Equally predictably, not everyone is so happy. A whole alphabet of agencies, pressure groups and nanny state advocates are jumping up and down, squeaking in outrage. How very dare Philip Morris say they’re going to stop selling cigarettes! Isn’t it awful that they’re allowed to say such horrible things?

Well, maybe not. Let’s look at exactly what PMI are proposing, seeing as they helpfully listed it all in their adverts:

  • Launch a new website, with an associated marketing campaign, to give smokers information on how to quit and what safer alternatives are available.
  • Offer support to smoking cessation services in areas where smoking rates are highest.
  • Put a card with information on how to quit or switch to a safer product in packs of cigarettes.
  • Make more safe alternatives available to British smokers.

Of course PMI have already spent more than £2.5 billion on the last of these, and the first products are on sale in the UK right now – iQOS and the Mesh e-cigarette. Over the next year or two more will follow, including at least one more heated tobacco product and a completely different one that uses chemical reactions to create a nicotine mist.

So what’s the problem? Why are people like Deborah Arnott, the perpetually outraged CEO of Action on Smoking and Health, so angry that PMI are willing to spend a lot of money helping smokers to quit? Well, that’s where it gets complicated. There seem to be two main themes at work here, so let’s look at those.

PMI don’t mean it!

The first objection is that Philip Morris don’t really mean it. After all, if they want to stop selling cigarettes they could just stop, couldn’t they? In fact tobacco control come out with this argument every time a tobacco company does anything related to harm reduction or alternative products – “Why don’t you just stop making cigarettes, then?”

Well, mostly because it’s not that simple. Last Tuesday, when the PMI advert appeared, the BBC asked a company spokesman the same question, and it got an obvious answer: Basically, “Because if we stopped selling cigarettes tomorrow, smokers would just buy them from someone else.”

I suppose you could argue that if all the tobacco companies stopped selling cigarettes there would be nobody else to buy them from, but let’s be realistic here: There’s a large, organised criminal industry making counterfeit cigarettes already, despite the tobacco companies selling over five trillion real ones every year.

Just imagine what would happen if the legitimate supply dried up. Does anyone seriously think all of the world’s one billion smokers would just quit? Not a chance; most of them would start buying on the black market. The people who run that black market would become, overnight, the richest and most powerful criminals in the history of the world. Cocaine, heroin, even America’s Prohibition-era bootleggers would pale into insignificance.

There’s another point, too. Tobacco companies have a legal duty to their shareholders to make a profit, so if they all trashed their businesses tomorrow they’d go to jail. Meanwhile the pension funds who are the biggest owners of tobacco shares would collapse, leaving millions of pensioners in poverty. The economic damage alone could trigger another global recession.

So, for a couple of reasons, PMI can’t just stop making cigarettes. It’s only going to work once the majority of smokers have either quit or switched to reduced risk products, like Heat not Burn or e-cigarettes. Philip Morris have already spent a lot of time and money encouraging that, and now they’re offering to spend more.

 

It’s against the rules!

Arnott also claims that PMI’s second proposal – offering support to stop smoking services – is illegal. The basis for this claim is that under Article 5.3 of the WHO’s tobacco control treaty, governments aren’t allowed to accept donations from the tobacco industry. This obviously looks like a problem, except for one tiny detail: Somebody is lying here, and it isn’t PMI.

Article 5.3 says no such thing, and Deborah Arnott knows that. All the article actually says is that any interaction between government and the tobacco industry must be transparent, so as long as PMI are supporting stop-smoking services openly there’s no problem. I’ve met Arnott more than once and it would be safe to say she is not my favourite person (I’m not hers, either), but it’s still unpleasant to have to state that she is being completely dishonest here.

Arnott says that, instead of donating to stop smoking services, tobacco companies should be forced to give the government more of their profits. It’s not hard to guess why: ASH has lost a significant amount of its government funding in the last year, and its response has been to push for a Tobacco Levy. This would be an extra tax on the industry, with a big chunk of the proceeds going to – you guessed it! – ASH.

Back to reality

The truth is, it’s not hard to understand why PMI are serious about moving to safer products. Why wouldn’t they be? There’s obviously a demand for safer ways to use nicotine – just look at the way vaping has taken off in the UK, and how fast iQOS is growing in Japan. If PMI don’t sell those products they’ll lose out to companies that do, and if they are selling them, why not work to steer customers towards them and away from the more dangerous ones?

What it comes down to is that smoking isn’t good for you, and everyone knows that. The tobacco companies know it, although they denied it once – but that was decades ago and the people who did it are all long gone. Arnott knows it; after all, she’s made a lot of money telling people. You know it, too; that’s why you’re on this site reading about safer products.

Heated tobacco, and other reduced-risk products like e-cigarettes, have turned the world of tobacco control upside down. Now we have Philip Morris offering to spend their own money to help people quit smoking, while the old guard like Deborah Arnott shout abuse from the sidelines because it’s not all about them anymore. At Heat not Burn UK we’re just interested in safer alternatives to smoking, and we’re on the side of anyone that makes them available. So well done on your New Year’s resolution, PMI – we’re sure you’ll do all you can to make it happen.

Posted on

Quit smoking in 2018 with Heat not Burn

Quit Smoking 2018

So the first of January is almost here, and most of us will be thinking about New Year resolutions. What are we going to do better in 2018? If you’re a smoker, it’s pretty likely that your resolution is to quit the habit. Every year, about 9% of British adults say their New Year resolution is to quit smoking – that’s more than half of all Britain’s smokers.

The problem is, most of them won’t succeed. In fact most won’t even try very hard to quit smoking because, whatever health campaigners say, most smokers don’t really want to quit. They know they should quit, but that’s not the same as actually wanting to. The truth is, smokers usually enjoy it. They like the taste, they like the effects of nicotine and they like the social aspects of it. For many people the positives outweigh the harm, especially as that’s all uncertain and probably years in the future.

Harm reduction

Obviously, if smokers enjoy the habit and only feel they should quit because of the health risks, there’s a place in the market for something that’s just as enjoyable but doesn’t have the risks. That’s why e-cigarettes have grown so quickly; a quarter of British smokers have now started vaping, and more than half of those have switched completely.

The problem is, vaping doesn’t work for everyone. Some ex-smokers like the variety of flavours you can get, but others want something that tastes like their favourite cigarette – and there’s no way to do that with an e-cig. It just isn’t possible to recreate the flavour of burned tobacco. The devices can also be quite fiddly, especially if you want good performance. The best e-cigs need a bit of work to get the coils set up properly and the liquid blended to your taste. Even the simplest ones aren’t quite as simple as smoking.

That’s where Heat not Burn comes in. Because HnB products use actual tobacco, instead of a flavoured liquid, they can get much closer to the taste of a real cigarette. The tobacco isn’t actually burned, of course, but it’s still heated enough to recreate the flavour very closely. The latest HnB devices are also very simple to use – sometimes exactly the same as a cigarette; you just take one out the pack and light the end.

So HnB can match the taste, sensation and convenience of smoking, but how does it stack up in terms of health? There’s been a lot of debate about that, because the products are so new, but this year we’ve seen some data starting to appear – and it’s all looking like good news.

How safe is HnB?

It isn’t nicotine that causes the health problems associated with smoking. It isn’t really tobacco, either. It’s smoke. When you burn something you create a whole list of toxic by-products. If it doesn’t burn with perfect efficiency – which is almost never will – the worst chemical that gets created is carbon monoxide. This is what causes almost all the heart disease in smokers.

As well as carbon monoxide, burning tobacco produces tar. This isn’t the same as the tar that goes on the roads, but it’s close enough – dark, sticky and oily. Tiny droplets of it boil off from the burning tobacco and condense in your lungs. Unfortunately, tar is riddled with chemicals that cause cancer and other lung diseases.

Tar and carbon monoxide are both bad for you, but there’s something else they have in common and you probably spotted it – they’re produced by burning. With Heat not Burn the clue is in the name – they don’t burn anything. That means there’s no tar and no carbon monoxide – and, right away, most of the danger of smoking is eliminated.

You’ll hear people say that, because HnB products are so new, there’s no way to know how safe they are – and they might be even worse than cigarettes. That simply isn’t true. Science has come a long way in the 140 years since modern cigarettes were invented, and the vapour from the latest HnB devices has already been very thoroughly studied. Right now, experts are saying that it’s about as safe as e-cigarette vapour, and the best estimate is that e-cigs are at least 95% safer than smoking.

Does it work?

So HnB is very similar to smoking, but a lot safer. But does it really work as an alternative? Yes it does. The most popular device right now is PMI’s iQOS, which was released in the UK just over a year ago. It’s been on sale in Japan for nearly two years – and it’s already made a huge difference to smoking rates. In the first half of this year alone cigarette sales fell by 11%, as millions of smokers switched to HnB. That figure is probably a lot higher by now, and PMI are saying that over 70% of Japanese smokers who’ve tried iQOS have quit smoking by completely switching to it.

Heat not Burn has been tried before, but it’s never really worked out. Two things have changed that. One is that, thanks to vaping, most smokers are now more willing to at least try an alternative; the other is that the technology is just better now. iQOS really works, and BAT’s rival Glo is likely to appear in British shops next year. There are other new products on the way, too. Before long there will be a range of HnB options for any smoker who wants them.

 

There’s no doubt that quitting smoking is one of the best things you can do for your health, but for most smokers it’s not easy; they struggle to quit, most will fail, and even those who succeed are likely to miss it. If you’ve decided to make quitting your New Year resolution for 2018, but you’re not really looking forward to the attempt, maybe it’s time to try something smarter. Instead of putting yourself through the misery of withdrawal, go for a solution that lets you keep the positive aspects of smoking but eliminate almost all the risk.

Quitting is hard; switching to Heat not Burn is easy, because you’re not really giving anything up. If you think it’s time to stop smoking, but you’re not exactly bursting with enthusiasm at the thought, grab yourself an iQOS starter kit and get started. Don’t quit – upgrade!

Posted on

PAX 3 Review – Does it match the hype?

A couple of weeks ago I mentioned that the next device we looked at on Heat not Burn UK would be the PAX 3 from Pax Labs. That’s sparked some excitement from just about everyone I know who’s ever used a loose-leaf vaporiser to inhale anything, which didn’t really come as a surprise. After all, if there’s a device that every other vaporiser on the market ends up being measured against, the PAX 3 is it.

This gadget is the follow-on to the already legendary PAX 2, and it follows the same basic principles. There are some significant upgrades, though, including improved battery life and better software. It also adds the ability to use wax concentrates, but that isn’t something we’ll be looking at – our only interest in the device is how good it is for vaping tobacco.

Last month we reviewed the Vapour 2 Pro Series 7, which works on the same principle as the PAX 3; it has an internal chamber that you can load up with tobacco, and when you power it up the contents of the chamber get heated enough to release a vapour that you can inhale. It doesn’t get heated enough to actually burn the tobacco, so you avoid all the tar, carbon monoxide and other assorted cag that cigarettes create.

Although the basic principle is the same as the Series 7, the PAX 3 has a few major differences in how it’s laid out. In fact, while the Series 7 turned out to be pretty impressive after I figured out how to use it, the PAX feels like it’s in a whole different class. The question is, did its performance measure up? Let’s find out.

The Review

I think I mentioned in one of my videos that HnB products tend to come in really nice boxes. Well, the PAX 3 takes that to a whole new level. This is the nicest box I’ve seen for any kind of vaporiser. In fact it’s probably the nicest box I’ve ever seen for anything that didn’t come from a jeweller’s shop and cost a month’s wages.

The usual cardboard sleeve slides off to reveal a box that opens like a book, revealing two fold-out covers. One has a discreet Pax logo in the middle; the other side says, equally discreetly, “Accessories”. The two halves of the box don’t flap about, by the way. They stay respectably closed, although there aren’t any visible magnets. I investigated with a magnetic field detector (I have some odd stuff) and, sure enough, there are two small but powerful magnets actually embedded in the sides of the box.

Desperate to get to the good stuff, I opened the flap with the Pax logo and there was the vaporiser, sitting all alone in a little cut-out. It’s much simpler than the Vapour 2 Pro, bordering on minimalist; the body is a single piece of anodised aluminium, polished to a glassy finish, with a rubber top cap and plastic base. It’s slightly chunkier than the PAX 2 but still very compact and slim. There are no visible controls; on the front there’s just a Pax logo illuminated by four LEDs; on the back you’ll find two brass contacts, the device name and serial number.

It turns out the only control is under the rubber top cap, which also serves as a mouthpiece; to turn it on you just press down on the centre of the cap until the Pax logo lights up. Holding the button for two seconds opens the temperature select mode. There are four temperature options; press the button to cycle through them, and the petals on the logo light up one by one to show how hot it will get.

The plastic bottom cap covers the heating chamber; just press one side of it and it pops out. The chamber itself looks slightly smaller than the Vapour 2 Pro’s, and there’s a replaceable metal screen at the bottom to keep tobacco out of the device’s innards.

The PAX 3 is beautifully made; there’s no other words for it. The finish is perfect (although a bit of a fingerprint magnet) and everything fits together immaculately. It’s also very light – lighter than the Vapour 2 Pro or any e-cig I own – but feels strong and solid. A definite ten out of ten for workmanship.

Anyway, as I took the vaporiser out, I noticed that the card around it was loose. Removing that, I found it concealed two more items – the charger and USB cable. The charger is a simple cradle that you lay the device on, and magnets will line the contacts up correctly. It’s very simple to use, and should also be well sealed and robust.

The other side of the box has lots of stuff in it, and some of it’s not too obvious at first. There’s a card on top, giving instructions on how to register the device and download the Pax app (do both). Then, underneath, is an assortment of bits and pieces. A white pad conceals the tiny instruction manual, which you should definitely read. There’s a key ring, which turns out to be a simple multitool; its rubber body is for tamping leaves into the heating chamber, and the inlaid metal strip with the Pax logo is a cleaning tool. A box marked “Maintenance kit” holds some pipe cleaners and a brush.

Next, there’s another mouthpiece and two bases. The standard mouthpiece is flat, with a slot at one side for the vapour. The spare one is raised, if you prefer that shape. There’s also a base with an inner chamber for wax concentrates, which we won’t bother with, and a second dry herb one with an insert to let you half-fill the chamber. That might be important for certain herbs, but it isn’t with tobacco – the chamber isn’t huge. So we won’t bother with that one either. Finally, you get three spare screens for the heating chamber and an extra O-ring for the concentrate chamber.

The next step was to charge the battery, which was easy and only took a couple of hours. The charger really is easy to use, and the Pax logo shows how the battery’s doing. The four “petals” of the logo will pulse white and progressively light up as the charge rises, and glow solidly when it hits 100%.

So, back to how it works. As you might have guessed, the heating chamber and mouthpiece are at opposite ends on the PAX 3. To load the chamber you remove the bottom cap, load your tobacco and put the cap back on. A narrow tube runs through the body and opens into a small chamber just under the mouthpiece. This arrangement lets the vapour cool down before you inhale it; apparently this helps when you’re vaping herbs, but I’m not sure it’s so necessary with tobacco.

Right, on to the test! I loaded the chamber with tobacco from a fresh pouch, taking care not to pack it too tightly, then activated the PAX 3. This is easy; just press the button – don’t hold; just press. Instantly the LEDs in the logo flash white, then turn purple – when they’re purple that means the PAX is heating up. And it heats up fast. Even with the temperature set to maximum the logo turned from purple to green in less than 25 seconds, and that was it ready to go. All that was left was to start vaping it.

This is where things get a bit mixed. Here’s the good news: With the temperature set at maximum, the vapour from the PAX 3 is the best I’ve found from any Heat not Burn device so far. There’s plenty of it and the taste is great. After one puff I was extremely impressed. After the second I was pretty much ecstatic. Then it started to go downhill.

The third puff gave almost no vapour at all, and the next couple were the same. There was still a faint taste, but it wasn’t very satisfying. At this point I put the device down and let it sit for a moment to build up vapour, then tried again. By doing that I got a couple more reasonable puffs out of it, but then it dried up for good.

Unlike the Vapour 2 Pro the PAX 3 doesn’t automatically cut off after a set time; you have to switch it off using the button (it will turn off if it’s left untouched for three minutes). So I turned it off, let it cool down, emptied the chamber (the cleaning tool works very well) and had a poke at the tobacco. It was bone dry, so my guess is that it stopped producing vapour because there was nothing left to evaporate.

What I think is happening is that the PAX 3 is a victim of its own success. The design of the heating chamber is obviously great. It’s very efficient, probably because of its shape – it’s quite long and narrow, so the contents heat up very quickly and evenly. That means the first couple of puffs are great. The problem is, the first couple of puffs basically contain all the moisture in the tobacco. I also tried it on a lower temperature setting, but this radically dropped the quality of the first puffs and didn’t really extend the session by much; you might get five puffs instead of two, but they were nowhere near as good.

If you’re trying to replicate the experience of smoking this is a bit of a drawback. You can expect to get about ten good puffs from a cigarette, but you’re going to have to reload the PAX 3 four or five times to match that.

Conclusion

From everything I’ve heard about the PAX 3, it’s unrivalled as a device for vaping substances of a more herbal nature – but, for tobacco, it doesn’t have the same edge. It’s a beautifully made device with good battery life (it packs in 3,500mAh, compared to the PAX 2’s 3,000mAh), and it’s simple to use, but if you’re mainly interested in tobacco I don’t think it’s the best option. If you really want a loose-leaf tobacco vaporiser the Vapour 2 is at least as good and a lot cheaper; if convenience and performance are what matters most, go for an iQOS.

Video Review

 

Posted on

Will heat not Burn make Britain smoke free?

Smoke Free

Ever since the first Heat not Burn devices appeared, they’ve been controversial. Most of that controversy has come from politicians and the public health industry, who seem to have hated the technology right from the beginning. If you’re a vaper their complaints will be pretty familiar; HnB users haven’t really quit, they’re still addicted to nicotine, it’s just a different kind of cigarette, it’s all a Big Tobacco plot to get children hooked… you know the sort of thing. It’s all hyped up, it’s all alarmist – and it’s all untrue.

What is true? It’s true that Heat not Burn has the potential to make smoking go away. Public health say they want this to happen, but over the past few years they’ve been very hostile to any new alternatives to smoking. The cynical might think they’re more worried about protecting their jobs than helping smokers find safer alternatives.

This might explain why all the targets set by the traditional anti-smoking lobby are slightly unambitious. Currently the British government’s tobacco control plan – largely written by taxpayer-funded activists like ASH – aims to create a “smoke free generation” by reducing the smoking rate to 5% (it’s currently around 16%). Obviously a 5% smoking rate isn’t “smoke free” in any way that resembles reality, because 5% of the UK population is actually quite a lot of people, but that’s their target. According to the trend in smoking rates over the last few years, that target should be achieved around 2040.

Now that figure is being challenged from an unexpected source. A couple of weeks ago Philip Morris released a report produced for them by Frontier Economics, an analysis consultant. Frontier have looked at the data on smoking rates in the UK, examined the current trends and what’s driving them, and come to an interesting conclusion.

The government might think that they can achieve their 5% target by 2040, but Frontier and PMI are saying that, in fact, they could get there much sooner – by 2029, just twelve years from now. It might seem surprising to hear a tobacco company advocating a faster decline in smoking, but in fact PMI have been saying this for a while now. When I visited their research centre at the Cube back in April they were very open about the fact that they plan to move away from cigarettes as fast as possible, and that the future is in alternative products.

What about vaping?

The problem is that, right now, the most common alternative product in the UK is e-cigarettes – and it looks like they might be running out of steam. The number of vapers in Britain is still rising, and an ever-increasing percentage of them have switched away from cigarettes completely (just under half of UK vapers also smoke, down from 70% two years ago), but growth is slowing down. In 2014, 800,000 British smokers started vaping, but it’s likely that by the end of 2017 the year’s total will be just 100,000. The most likely reason for this fall is that smokers have been scared off by false claims about health risks.

Now PMI say that it’s possible to reach the “Smokefree” target eleven years early – but only if the number of smokers switching to safer alternatives starts to accelerate again, back to where it was in 2014. The question is, what alternative should they switch to?

E-cigarettes are still a popular option – according to Public Health England they’re now the UK’s top choice among smokers who want to quit. It’s possible that, if people like ASH stop talking nonsense about them, the number of smokers switching to them every year could rise again. On the other hand, it’s also possible they could be overtaken by Heat not Burn. In fact I think that’s very likely.

When it comes to quitting smoking, e-cigs have been a game changer. The number of smokers in Britain is falling faster than it ever has before, even though fewer people are buying nicotine gum or using NHS quit services. They’re not ideal for everyone, though. Some smokers find them too complicated; others just want something that tastes like their favourite cigarette.

Is Heat not Burn the future?

I think a lot of smokers who aren’t interested in e-cigs are going to be very interested in HnB, for a couple of reasons. Firstly, a device like iQOS isn’t as simple as a cigarette – what is? – but it’s a lot less complicated than a high-end e-cig. Secondly, HnB can recreate the taste of cigarette smoke almost perfectly and that’s important to a lot of people. Many vapers love the array of new flavours they can use, but there are also plenty smokers who just want something that tastes like the smoke they’re used to. E-cigs are never going to recreate that flavour – they just don’t work that way – but PMI have spent a lot of money making sure iQOS tastes as much like a Marlboro as possible, and it’s paid off.

If you want to see how well it’s paid off, just look at Japan. iQOS launched there three years ago, and as of last month it’s taken 13.3% of the country’s nicotine market. It’s already broken even, paying for the enormous cost of developing it, and it isn’t even on sale in most countries yet. E-cigs have been growing fast, but not that fast.

It doesn’t stop with iQOS, either. As well as its direct competitors, like Glo and the new Lil from KT&G, there are more products due on the market soon. A couple of paragraphs back I asked what’s as simple as a cigarette. Well, PMI’s next product is. Using the same concept as RJ Reynold’s Revo, but apparently working much better, these are exactly as easy to use a cigarette. Just take it out the pack, light the end – which contains a charcoal heating pellet – then, when you’re finished it, stub it out in an ashtray. If it works as well as PMI are hoping, this could be even bigger than iQOS.

There’s a lot going on in the world of HnB right now, with new products appearing and existing ones being rolled out into new markets. There’s also a lot of opposition from the usual suspects in tobacco control, and that has the potential to put smokers off trying HnB for themselves. If we’re lucky, however, smoking could more or less disappear from the UK before 2030, and it won’t be plain packs or nagging health campaigns that do it; it will be e-cigs and heated tobacco products.

Posted on

More Heat not Burn science – Glo has been tested!

Back in April we looked at the latest research on the safety of iQOS compared to traditional cigarettes, and it looked very encouraging for heat not burn devices. Studies carried out for PMI by independent labs found that the vapour from an iQOS had much lower levels of toxic chemicals than cigarette smoke – in most cases, 90% or 95% lower. That’s impressive, especially considering that the tests looked at a much larger range of chemicals than any research done by public health groups.

The down side to this research was that it only looked at iQOS. Yes, that particular product is much safer than smoking, but does it apply to HnB in general? Realistically it’s going to be a while before we know that for sure, but this week some more results were released, this time by British American Tobacco. We recently did the first full UK review of BAT’s new Glo, their entry in the HnB market; now there’s some science to go with our impressions of this device.

Real science?

Although research done by the tobacco industry in the past has had a bad reputation, things have moved on a long way since the 1960s. Companies like BAT know that anything they publish is going to be scrutinised in minute detail by activist scientists looking for the slightest hint of foul play, so they don’t take any chances. These days they’re scrupulous about following good research procedures and releasing details of their methods, so the research can be studied and replicated. How well are they doing at that? Well, all the criticism of PMI’s research on iQOS has been about where the money comes from; nobody has said a word against the science. That probably tells us all we need to know.

BAT seem to have been just as careful with their own research, which makes the results worth looking at. For a start, they didn’t just bodge up some shonky equipment, like one university did recently when they used syringes to collect vapour from e-cigs. Instead, they studied how people actually use Glo then programmed a robot smoking device to replicate that. Then they tested Glo, collecting the vapour for comparison with a range of other products.

In total seven products were tested:

  • Glo
  • Three conventional cigarettes, including the standard 3R4F reference cigarette used in most smoking research.
  • “Another THP (tobacco-heating product)”, almost certainly an iQOS.
  • “A hybrid product”, BAT’s iFuse
  • An e-cigarette.

This is a good selection of products, covering all the main categories on the market right now. BAT also tested for a wide range of chemicals. They used the Health Canada testing method to collect vapour, because it’s one of the most thorough methods in use, combined with their own list of chemicals. The FDA test for 28 different toxins in cigarette smoke; the International Agency for Research on Cancer only measure fifteen. BAT’s list has 44 substances in it – not quite as extensive as the 58 that PMI look for, but still much more impressive than what most health researchers are doing.

Checking the chemistry

What’s really impressive is the results of all this testing. Unsurprisingly, most of the vapour from Glo consisted of water vapour and glycerine, which is added to increase the vapour output. That’s interesting, because when we looked at the innards of a NeoStik the tobacco in it looked much less processed than the contents of a Heet. Obviously, even though what the Glo is heating looks like normal cigarette tobacco, BAT have added a considerable amount of glycerine to it somehow. That doesn’t cause any worries, though; glycerine is perfectly safe to inhale.

The nicotine content of the vapour was about 62% of that found in cigarette smoke. This makes sense; using the Glo, it felt similar to a light cigarette, while the 3R4F cigarette is a full-strength blend. In any case, this sort of nicotine dose is close enough to a cigarette that it’s an effective replacement.

Moving on to the less welcome substances, the tests showed sharp reductions in all of them. The lowest reductions were for mercury, at 57.1%, followed by ammonia at 64.3%. Neither of these chemicals are at high enough levels in cigarette smoke to be much of a worry anyway, but any reduction is welcome. For the other 41 chemicals tested, 39 had a reduction of at least 80% and 36 saw levels reduced by 90% or more. Almost half had at least a 99% reduction. The total reduction in toxins was around 90%.

Does this mean it’s safe?

It’s worth pointing out that a 90% reduction in toxins is impressive, but it doesn’t tell the whole story. For example, the single most harmful chemical in cigarette smoke is carbon monoxide, and smoke contains a lot of it. The level in Glo vapour was 98.6% lower. Benzene is another major problem for smokers; Glo reduces the leve by 99.3%. Hydrogen cyanide – 98.8% lower. What this means is that while switching from cigarettes to Glo cuts total toxins by 90%, it almost certainly cuts the health risk by a lot more.

More good news from the study is that iQOS and the e-cigarette gave roughly similar results to Glo (although many of the toxins aren’t found in e-cig vapour at all).

Between this new research and what PMI have already released about iQOS, it seems obvious that HnB is much safer than smoking, and probably about the same as vaping an e-cigarette. A reduction in risk of at least 95% seems likely to be about right. Does this mean that switching to Glo cuts your risk of premature death by 95%? No – it almost certainly cuts it by a lot more than that. Jumping from a ground-floor window is about 95% less risky than jumping from a fourth-floor one, but the risk that’s left doesn’t mean your chance of dying drops from 50% to “only” 2.5%. It means that, if you’re really unlucky, you might twist your ankle.

If you need a final vote of confidence in BAT’s new research it’s just been published in a peer-reviewed medical journal, Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology. Peer review means a panel of experts have examined and decided that the experiments were good science and the data has been properly interpreted. Of course some extremists will refuse to accept it simply because it was funded by BAT, but open-minded people like our readers can find it here.

 

Posted on

Heat not Burn UK exclusive – BAT Glo review

bat glo review

If there’s a bad thing about heat not burn it’s that the latest products aren’t widely available yet. That’s slowly changing as they roll out across new markets, but when we reviewed iQOS last summer it was only on sale in a handful of countries – and the UK wasn’t one of them. Obviously we were very excited about doing one of the first UK reviews of a product that’s turned out to be a real game changer.

Well, now we’ve done it again. British American Tobacco’s new Glo is only available in Japan and South Korea right now, but Heat Not Burn UK have managed to get our hands on one and, as promised, it’s now been through a full review.

You might remember that we did a preliminary review of the Glo a while ago. That was interesting, but it did have some limits. The main ones were that it was a borrowed device, there weren’t many sticks with it, and the person who actually had it was at the other end of a Skype conversation and half way down a bottle of wine. It did give an idea of what Glo was like, but couldn’t match up to actually having one right here to play with and use regularly for a couple of days.

Anyway, on to the review:

Hands-on at last!

Unlike the last time we reviewed a Glo, this one came with the full retail packaging. The lid of the sturdy box comes off to reveal the Glo itself in a plastic tray; lift the tray out and you’ll find another one holding a USB cable, cleaning brush and warranty card.

Glo, unpacked.

Glo looks and feels very different from the iQOS. Instead of a slim tube about the size of a medium cigar, it’s more similar to a single-18650 box mod. In fact, although I haven’t taken it to bits, I suspect that’s what powers it. The wider edge of its nicely round aluminium body is exactly the right size to hold an 18650.

The device feels well-made and solid, without being too heavy – it’s noticeably lighter than a slightly smaller box mod. The end caps are grey plastic, with a glossy finish on the top one. The top cap also has a cover that slides open to reveal the NeoStik holder. On the bottom there’s a micro-USB charging port and a small plastic flap with a ring of tiny holes in the middle. Closed, this allows enough airflow for the device to work; slide it towards its hinge and let it go, and it springs open to allow access for the cleaning brush.

The bottom cover opens for cleaning.

Apart from that there isn’t a lot to see. Everything is operated by a single metal button on the front of the device, set in an LED-illuminated ring. Well, I say “everything” but there isn’t really much to control except for turning it on.

To use the Glo, all you have to do is slide the top cover back and insert a NeoStik into the hole. Push it down until there’s only about an inch sticking out the top – it sometimes seems to stick a bit near the bottom, but you won’t break it. Then all you have to do is press the button and wait.

Glo seems to heat up slightly faster than iQOS – probably because it only goes to 240°C, instead of 350°C – and you can easily tell when it’s ready. Firstly, the LED ring around the button progressively lights up; when it’s fully illuminated you’re ready to go. Just in case you get distracted the device will vibrate and buzz when it’s at running temperature. Then all you have to do is start puffing.

When the device thinks the stick is done it will vibrate again and turn itself off; just pull out the stick, dispose of it and close the top cover. If you use it the way you’d smoke it runs for long enough to take ten or a dozen puffs – just like a cigarette. The question is, does it deliver the same experience?

Using the Glo

My Glo came with two packs of NeoStiks, one each in Menthol and Bright Tobacco flavour, both carrying the Kent brand. I played with the device for a few days, vaping a menthol stick every couple of hours as a change from my e-cigs – my plan was to keep the regular tobacco sticks for a full-day trial, as I was never a menthol smoker. I also cut one of them up for the last article.

I have to say, though, the menthol sticks were pretty good. The taste and sensation they delivered were exactly like a Consulate or Marlboro menthol, so these sticks are a definite win. If you smoke menthols right now, I think you’re going to like the Glo.

Ready to go!

Anyway, last Friday morning I made sure the Glo was fully charged, put all my e-cigs away in a cupboard for the day, and broke out the bright tobacco sticks. I loaded one into the device, hit the button and waited for it to heat up. Then I vaped it.

Well, it was pretty good. It wasn’t like the high-tar cigarettes I used to like, but if you smoke Marlboro Gold it’s very close to that experience. There’s no shortage of nicotine hit, and the vapour replicates the taste of cigarette smoke very well.

One stick isn’t much of a test though; what I wanted to know was, could I use the Glo all day? Would it be satisfying enough to keep a smoker off the cigarettes? So, after my first stick, there were nineteen more to go. And I got through them all.

It worked, too. At no point did I feel that the sticks weren’t satisfying enough, and I usually sub-ohm 24mg e-liquid. I found myself reaching for the pack of sticks about every 40 minutes through the day. Using it was easy, too, and I didn’t find the short wait for it to heat up all that annoying. Once a stick is finished you can just drop it in the bin – there’s no need for ashtrays, and you won’t get flakes of ash all over the place either.

One thing I did notice was that there’s a distinct tobacco smell. By the end of the day my office smelled as if someone had smoked a couple of cigarettes in it. That was completely gone by next morning, though, with no stale aroma hanging around. Would it become more persistent if you used Glo every day? I don’t know the answer to that one.

Compared to iQOS the Glo isn’t quite as satisfying, probably because of its lower running temperature. To compensate, it’s a lot easier to use because you don’t need to worry about battery life so much.

When we first discussed the Glo, one interesting point was the claimed battery capacity. iQOS needs to be recharged frequently; the larger Glo packs in a lot more power storage, and BAT said a single charge would be enough to vape more than 30 NeoStiks. I admit to being sceptical about this, but it’s true.

After vaping a full pack of twenty sticks, the power indicator – that LED ring around the button again – showed the battery still had half its charge left. That’s pretty impressive, and means a single charge should keep a Glo in action all day.

Our verdict

Does Glo deliver exactly the same experience as smoking? Not quite – but it’s very close. If e-cigarettes don’t quite do it for you this gadget will definitely be worth a try when it starts appearing in your market.