# Acute vapor exposure has limited impact on gene expression in human lung cells



## Alex (19/4/17)

Public Release: 18-Apr-2017
* Acute exposure to Vype vapor has limited impact on gene expression in human lung cells *
R&D at British American Tobacco

New research shows that at equivalent or higher doses of nicotine, acute exposure to e-cigarette vapour has very limited impact on gene expression compared to cigarette smoke.

The human genome has tens of thousands of genes, and the profile of genes that are switched on and off can be used to understand whether exposure to an aerosol has had a toxic effect

Scientists at British American Tobacco used nicotine as a reference point and exposed MucilAir™, a realistic in vitro 3D model of a human airway, to e-cigarette vapour and cigarette smoke to assess their comparative effect on gene expression.

The MucilAir™ human respiratory tissue was exposed to smoke from a reference cigarette (3R4F) or vapour from an e-cigarette (Vype ePen) continuously for an hour. Two doses of vapour were tested, matching or doubling the amount of nicotine reaching the cells compared to smoke. Then, to measure the cell response, the scientists mapped the genes that were switched on and off at 24 hours and 48 hours after the one-hour exposure.

In the tissue exposed to smoke, the scientists found 873 and 205 genes were affected after 24 and 48 hours of recovery, respectively. However, significantly fewer genes--only 3 and 1, respectively--were affected after exposure to e-cigarette vapour

Further analysis revealed that the exposure to cigarette smoke had caused changes in the expression of genes involved in the development of lung cancer, inflammation and fibrosis, while the test e-cigarette vapour only caused minor changes in genes known to be involved in cell metabolism and oxidative stress mechanisms.

'Our results clearly show that cigarette smoke has an adverse effect on cells, triggering a robust gene expression response,' says Dr James Murphy, Head of Reduced Risk Substantiation at British American Tobacco. 'However,' he said, 'even at equivalent or higher dose of nicotine, acute exposure to the test e-cigarette vapour has very limited impact on gene expression compared to cigarette smoke exposure--it's a striking difference.'

These results, which are published in Scientific Reports (DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-00852-y) add to an increasing weight of evidence that e-cigarette vapour causes less damage to cells compared to cigarette smoke.

Previous research conducted by British American Tobacco has shown that Vype ePen vapour contains around 95% less toxicants (_Chem. Res. Toxicol_, DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00188) compared to cigarette smoke from a reference cigarette (in terms of the priority list of nine toxicants which the World Health Organisation recommends to reduce)

Many in the public health community believe e-cigarettes offer great potential for reducing the projected public health impact of smoking. Public Health England, an executive body of the UK Department of Health, published a report saying that the current expert estimate is that using e-cigarettes is around 95% safer than smoking cigarettes. The Royal College of Physicians have said that the public can be reassured that e-cigarettes are much safer than smoking and that they should be widely promoted as an alternative to cigarettes.

###
source: https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2017-04/raba-aet041117.php

Reactions: Like 1 | Winner 8 | Informative 7


----------



## Silver (19/4/17)

Thanks for aharing this @Alex 
Great article and a win for vaping!

Reactions: Thanks 1


----------



## RichJB (19/4/17)

This is fantastic news. Part of the problem I have with existing testing is that it compares smoking and vaping via levels of toxicants _found in cigarette smoke_. That is well and good but what if there are toxicants in vapour which aren't found in cigarette smoke? To draw an analogy, it's like testing someone's blood for arsenic and cyanide. You test someone who's just been bitten by a mamba but, because mamba venom doesn't contain arsenic or cyanide, the tests are negative. That doesn't mean that the test subject doesn't have poison in their system, only that the poison doesn't show up in the test because the test is not designed to identify it.

This test goes much deeper and tests vapour at a cellular response level. So if there is _anything_ in the vapour that triggers a cellular response, it should show up. That it's had such a minor effect is great news, and the most convincing piece of research to date imo.

Reactions: Like 5


----------



## Warlock (19/4/17)

Thanks @Alex Nice find

Reactions: Thanks 1


----------



## Waine (19/4/17)

Thanks for this. Most encouraging. Some more info to tell my best friend who constantly nags me about how harmful vaping is. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Reactions: Thanks 1


----------



## Mender31 (19/4/17)

RichJB said:


> This is fantastic news. Part of the problem I have with existing testing is that it compares smoking and vaping via levels of toxicants _found in cigarette smoke_. That is well and good but what if there are toxicants in vapour which aren't found in cigarette smoke? To draw an analogy, it's like testing someone's blood for arsenic and cyanide. You test someone who's just been bitten by a mamba but, because mamba venom doesn't contain arsenic or cyanide, the tests are negative. That doesn't mean that the test subject doesn't have poison in their system, only that the poison doesn't show up in the test because the test is not designed to identify it.
> 
> This test goes much deeper and tests vapour at a cellular response level. So if there is _anything_ in the vapour that triggers a cellular response, it should show up. That it's had such a minor effect is great news, and the most convincing piece of research to date imo.


I wholeheartedly agree. The testing should be done further to first test the possible toxic substances that ecigarettes might produce. Also, and this is only my opinion as I believe a lot of people wouldn't like this to happen or maybe it already does, but eliquids should also be tested before production. I know that some chemicals are no longer being used such as diacetyl which causes popcorn lung, but I believe that not everyone might adhere to those rules. Just my opinion, not to be taken seriously. Just want to be safe. 

Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk

Reactions: Like 1


----------

