ERS Position Paper on Heated Tobacco Products

ERS Position Paper on Heated Tobacco Products - article image

A statement prepared by the ERS Tobacco Control Committee and approved by the ERS Advocacy Council, Science Council and Executive Committee

Author: Prof. Charlotta Pisinger on behalf of the ERS Tobacco Control Committee

What are heated tobacco products?

Heated tobacco is a new nicotine delivery system that is commonly referred to as “Heat-not-Burn” by the tobacco industry. Heated tobacco products consist of a small tobacco stick that is heated electronically, rather than burned. The tobacco industry is actively pursuing the market with sales on the rise of products such as ‘iQOS’ and ‘glo’.

Tobacco industry research claims a 90-95% reduction in harm

According to a press release by the tobacco industry the main ingredient in their heated tobacco products is water, whereas the main ingredient in conventional cigarettes is tar. The tobacco industry claims that there is a 90-95% reduction in harmful and potentially harmful substances and toxicity 1.

Not the full picture: digging deeper into tobacco industry research

Tobacco companies have not informed the public that their studies on emissions from heated tobacco found high concentrations of e.g. particulate matter, tar, acetaldehyde (a carcinogen), acrylamide (a potential carcinogen), an acrolein metabolite (toxic and irritant) 2-6 and formaldehyde (a potential carcinogen) 7, 8. Independent researchers have investigated tobacco industry data and point out that heated tobacco products emit significantly higher levels of several substances that are not recognised as harmful or potentially harmful by the Food and Drug Administration compared with combustible cigarette smoke. Twenty two harmful or potentially harmful substances were >200% higher and seven were >1000% higher than in reference cigarette smoke 9. Further, human studies show that there is no statistically detectable difference between users of heated tobacco and conventional cigarette for 23 of the 24 biomarkers of potential harm 10. Both animal and human studies performed by the tobacco industry also show there is no evidence of improvement in pulmonary function or inflammation in smokers who switched to heated tobacco 11 and there is possible hepatotoxicity of heated tobacco 12.

Independent research: a substantially higher risk than claimed by the tobacco industry

Historically, there is strong evidence that studies performed by the tobacco industry or by researchers funded by the tobacco industry cannot be trusted 13-17. Former employees and contractors have detailed irregularities in the clinical experiments on heated tobacco products performed by the industry 18. Independent research shows that heated tobacco products emit substantial levels of carcinogenic tobacco specific nitrosamines 19 20 as well as toxic and irritant substances and potential carcinogens 21. Nicotine and tar levels have been found to be almost identical to a conventional cigarette 22, the potentially carcinogenic substance acenaphthene is found to be almost 3 times higher than in conventional cigarettes 21, and release of formaldehyde cyanohydrin takes place, which is of great concern as it is highly toxic at very low concentrations 23. In-vitro studies found that emissions for heated tobacco cause damage to human bronchial epithelial cells 24, have the potential to increase oxidative stress and inflammation, infections and airway remodeling and initiate epithelial mesenchymal transition-related changes in the airways 25. Experimental animal studies found that exposure to heated tobacco led to decreased blood vessel function comparable to that induced by cigarette smoke 26 and impaired arterial flow-mediated dilation, a measure of vascular endothelial function in a manner very similar to tobacco smoke 27. In addition, a study found that users of heated tobacco may be forced to smoke at a rapid pace which could lead to an increase in intake of carbonyls (potentially carcinogenic) and nicotine, inducing a high level of nicotine dependence 23.

What does ERS recommend?

Even though heated tobacco products may perhaps be less harmful for smokers they nevertheless remain both harmful and highly addictive, and there may be a risk that smokers will switch to heated tobacco products instead of quitting. ERS cannot recommend any product damaging the lungs and human health.

Why does ERS make this recommendation?

It is tempting to recommend to smokers to switch to heated tobacco products without considering all the consequences. Experiences with filter cigarettes and light cigarettes have shown that ‘safer products’ undermine smokers’ wish to quit, and they have not improved smokers’ health 28. Quoting the tobacco industry on ‘safer products’: “Quitters may be discouraged from quitting, or at least kept in the market longer …” 29. We must remember that two to three out of four smokers want to quit 30 and almost all smokers regret that they started to smoke 31 32. Also, many smokers want to quit because they want to regain control of their life 33 34, and get cured of their nicotine dependency – this will not happen if they switch to heated tobacco products. A majority of smokers want to quit, and there is not a ‘hardening’ of smokers 35 – on contrary there are fewer hard core smokers 36 and they report being less dependent 37 . We have no evidence that heated tobacco products are efficient as smoking cessation aid. Dual use is very frequent for other harm reduction products as e-cigarettes (approx. 70-80%) 38 39 and snuff/snus (>40%) 40, and dual use of heated tobacco cigarettes combined with conventional cigarettes cannot be ruled out. Finally, ex-smokers and never-smokers might be tempted to start using this ‘harmless’ product and a renormalisation of smoking in the public might occur 41. Four studies show that heated tobacco is used by non-smokers in up to 45% of cases 42.

The European Commission underlines that “with regard to the sale, presentation and manufacturing of these products within the European Union, the relevant provisions of the Tobacco Products Directive apply and should be enforced. This includes the ban on misleading elements foreseen by Article 13 and notably any suggestions that a particular tobacco product is less harmful than others 43. Member states are currently assessing the toxicity of these products. For example, there is concern in the UK” over the potential for non-smokers including children and young people, who would not otherwise start to smoke cigarettes, to take up using these products as they are not without risk. There was also concern over whether use of these products would lead people to take up smoking cigarettes” 44.
An expert scientific panel has advised the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to vote against the tobacco industry’s claim that heated tobacco products cut the risk of tobacco-related diseases and that a heated tobacco product is less risky than continuing to smoke cigarettes 45 .


Heated tobacco products, regular tobacco smoking and smokeless tobacco for oral or nasal use are all addictive and carcinogenic to humans 46 47. We should not allow debate around the new tobacco products to distract us from the main job at hand – promoting regulatory measures that we know are effective at reducing smoking and continue to support those who wish to quit smoking.


  1. Gilcrist M. Heat-not-burn products. Scientific Assessment of Risk Reduction. In: International PM, ed. Global Tobacco and Nicotine Forum 2015 Annual Meeting Sept 17, 2015
  2. Szostak J, Boue S, Talikka M, et al. Aerosol from Tobacco Heating System 2.2 has reduced impact on mouse heart gene expression compared with cigarette smoke. Food and chemical toxicology : an international journal published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association 2017;101:157-67. doi: 10.1016/j.fct.2017.01.013 [published Online First: 2017/01/24]
  3. Tricker AR, Stewart AJ, Leroy CM, et al. Reduced exposure evaluation of an Electrically Heated Cigarette Smoking System. Part 3: Eight-day randomized clinical trial in the UK. RegulToxicolPharmacol 2012;64(2 Suppl):S35-S44.
  4. Tricker AR, Jang IJ, Martin LC, et al. Reduced exposure evaluation of an Electrically Heated Cigarette Smoking System. Part 4: Eight-day randomized clinical trial in Korea. RegulToxicolPharmacol 2012;64(2 Suppl):S45-S53.
  5. Tricker AR, Kanada S, Takada K, et al. Reduced exposure evaluation of an Electrically Heated Cigarette Smoking System. Part 5: 8-Day randomized clinical trial in Japan. RegulToxicolPharmacol 2012;64(2 Suppl):S54-S63.
  6. Tricker AR, Kanada S, Takada K, et al. Reduced exposure evaluation of an Electrically Heated Cigarette Smoking System. Part 6: 6-Day randomized clinical trial of a menthol cigarette in Japan. RegulToxicolPharmacol 2012;64(2 Suppl):S64-S73.
  7. Urban HJ, Tricker AR, Leyden DE, et al. Reduced exposure evaluation of an Electrically Heated Cigarette Smoking System. Part 8: Nicotine bridging–estimating smoke constituent exposure by their relationships to both nicotine levels in mainstream cigarette smoke and in smokers. RegulToxicolPharmacol 2012;64(2 Suppl):S85-S97.
  8. Stabbert R, Voncken P, Rustemeier K, et al. Toxicological evaluation of an electrically heated cigarette. Part 2: Chemical composition of mainstream smoke. JApplToxicol 2003;23(5):329-39.
  9. St Helen G, Jacob Iii P, Nardone N, et al. IQOS: examination of Philip Morris International’s claim of reduced exposure. Tob Control 2018;27(Suppl 1):s30-s36. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2018-054321 [published Online First: 2018/08/31]
  10. Glantz SA. PMI’s own in vivo clinical data on biomarkers of potential harm in Americans show that IQOS is not detectably different from conventional cigarettes. Tob Control 2018 doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2018-054413 [published Online First: 2018/08/23]
  11. Moazed F, Chun L, Matthay MA, et al. Assessment of industry data on pulmonary and immunosuppressive effects of IQOS. Tob Control 2018;27(Suppl 1):s20-s25. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2018-054296 [published Online First: 2018/08/31]
  12. Chun L, Moazed F, Matthay M, et al. Possible hepatotoxicity of IQOS. Tob Control 2018;27(Suppl 1):s39-s40. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2018-054320 [published Online First: 2018/08/23]
  13. Proctor RN. Golden Holocaust. Origins of the Cigarette Catastrophe and the Case for Abolition. Berkeley and Los Angeles, California: University of California Press 2011.
  14. Barnes DE, Hanauer P, Slade J, et al. Environmental tobacco smoke. The Brown and Williamson documents. JAMA 1995;274(3):248-53.
  15. Hong MK, Bero LA. How the tobacco industry responded to an influential study of the health effects of secondhand smoke. BMJ 2002;325(7377):1413-16.
  16. Barnes DE, Bero LA. Industry-funded research and conflict of interest: an analysis of research sponsored by the tobacco industry through the Center for Indoor Air Research. JHealth PolitPolicy Law 1996;21(3):515-42.
  17. Barnes DE, Bero LA. Why review articles on the health effects of passive smoking reach different conclusions. JAMA 1998;279(19):1566-70.
  18. Reuters Investigates. The Philip Morris files. 2017 [
  19. Leigh NJ, Palumbo MN, Marino AM, et al. Tobacco-specific nitrosamines (TSNA) in heated tobacco product IQOS. Tob Control 2018;27(Suppl 1):s37-s38. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2018-054318 [published Online First: 2018/09/23]
  20. Bekki K, Inaba Y, Uchiyama S, et al. Comparison of Chemicals in Mainstream Smoke in Heat-not-burn Tobacco and Combustion Cigarettes. Journal of UOEH 2017;39(3):201-07. doi: 10.7888/juoeh.39.201 [published Online First: 2017/09/15]
  21. Auer R, Concha-Lozano N, Jacot-Sadowski I, et al. Heat-Not-Burn Tobacco Cigarettes: Smoke by Any Other Name. JAMA internal medicine 2017;177(7):1050-52. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.1419 [published Online First: 2017/05/23]
  22. Li X, Luo Y, Jiang X, et al. Chemical Analysis and Simulated Pyrolysis of Tobacco Heating System 2.2 Compared to Conventional Cigarettes. Nicotine Tob Res 2018 doi: 10.1093/ntr/nty005 [published Online First: 2018/01/11]
  23. Davis B, Williams M, Talbot P. iQOS: evidence of pyrolysis and release of a toxicant from plastic. Tob Control 2018 doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2017-054104 [published Online First: 2018/03/15]
  24. Leigh NJ, Tran PL, O’Connor RJ, et al. Cytotoxic effects of heated tobacco products (HTP) on human bronchial epithelial cells. Tob Control 2018;27(Suppl 1):s26-s29. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2018-054317 [published Online First: 2018/09/07]
  25. Sohal S, Eapen M, Naidu V, et al. IQOS exposure impairs human airway cell homeostasis: direct comparison with traditional cigarette and e-cigarette. ERJ Open Res 2019; 5(00159-2018)
  26. Nabavizadeh P, Liu J, Ibrahim S, et al. Poster presentation: Inhalation of Heat-Not-Burn Tobacco Aerosol Impairs Vascular Endothelial Function: Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, 2017.
  27. Nabavizadeh P, Liu J, Havel CM, et al. Vascular endothelial function is impaired by aerosol from a single IQOS HeatStick to the same extent as by cigarette smoke. Tob Control 2018 doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2018-054325 [published Online First: 2018/09/13]
  28. Harris JE, Thun MJ, Mondul AM, et al. Cigarette tar yields in relation to mortality from lung cancer in the cancer prevention study II prospective cohort, 1982-8. Bmj 2004;328(7431):72. doi: 10.1136/bmj.37936.585382.44 [published Online First: 2004/01/13]
  29. Cunningham R. Smoke and mirrors : the Canadian tobacco war. Note on: Creative Research group, Project Viking, Volume 11: An Attitudinal Model of Smoking, 1986, February- March, prepared for Imperial Tobacco Limited (Canada). International Development Reasearch Center1996.
  30. Rosendahl Jensen H, Davidsen M, Ekholm M, et al. Danskernes Sundhed – Den Nationale Sundhedsprofil 2017. (National Health Survey 2017). Sundhedsstyrelsen, Islands Brygge 67, 2300 København S: Danish National Board of Health, 2018.
  31. Sansone N, Fong GT, Lee WB, et al. Comparing the Experience of Regret and Its Predictors Among Smokers in Four Asian Countries: Findings From the ITC Surveys in Thailand, South Korea, Malaysia, and China. NicotineTobRes 2013;15(10):1663-72.
  32. Fong GT, Hammond D, Laux FL, et al. The near-universal experience of regret among smokers in four countries: findings from the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Survey. NicotineTobRes 2004;6 Suppl 3:S341-S51.
  33. McCaul KD, Hockemeyer JR, Johnson RJ, et al. Motivation to quit using cigarettes: a review. Addict Behav 2006;31(1):42-56. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2005.04.004 [published Online First: 2005/05/27]
  34. Ahluwalia JS, McNagny SE, Clark WS. Smoking cessation among inner-city African Americans using the nicotine transdermal patch [see comments]. J GenIntern Med 1998;13(1):1-8.
  35. Edwards R, Tu D, Newcombe R, et al. Achieving the tobacco endgame: evidence on the hardening hypothesis from repeated cross-sectional studies in New Zealand 2008-2014. Tob Control 2017;26(4):399-405. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2015-052860 [published Online First: 2016/07/07]
  36. Eriksen M, Mackay J, Ross H. The Tobacco Atlas: American Cancer Society. 250 Williams Street. Atlanta, Georgia, 30303 USA 2012.
  37. Bommel‚ J, Nagelhout GE, Kleinjan M, et al. Prevalence of hardcore smoking in the Netherlands between 2001 and 2012: a test of the hardening hypothesis. BMCPublic Health 2016;16
  38. Reid JL, Rynard VL, Czoli CD, et al. Who is using e-cigarettes in Canada? Nationally representative data on the prevalence of e-cigarette use among Canadians. PrevMed 2015;81:180-83.
  39. Christensen T, Welsh E, Faseru B. Profile of e-cigarette use and its relationship with cigarette quit attempts and abstinence in Kansas adults. Prev Med 2014;69:90-4. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2014.09.005 [published Online First: 2014/09/18]
  40. Lund I, Scheffels J. Adolescent tobacco use practices and user profiles in a mature Swedish moist snuff (snus) market: Results from a school-based cross-sectional study. Scand J Public Health 2016 doi: 10.1177/1403494816656093 [published Online First: 2016/06/25]
  41. Wells Fargo: Probability Of PM/MO Combo Now Higher – iQOS Remains A Key Catalyst & Is Driving Transformative Growth. Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, 18. 12. 2016.
  42. Dautzenberg B, Dautzenberg MD. [Systematic analysis of the scientific literature on heated tobacco]. Revue des maladies respiratoires 2019;36(1):82-103. doi: 10.1016/j.rmr.2018.10.010 [published Online First: 2018/11/16]
  43. Answer given by Mr Andriukaitis on behalf of the Commission, Parliamentary questions, available at: 9 January 2017
  44. Statement on the toxicological evaluation of novel heatnot-burn tobacco products, Committees On Toxicity, Carcinogenicity and Mutagenicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment (COT, COC and COM), available at:, 11 December 2017.
  45. LaVito A. In high-stakes votes, FDA advisors say evidence doesn’t back Philip Morris’ claims. CNBC Health Care 25.01.2018.
  46. WHO. International Agency for Research on Cancer. IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. 2014 [
  47. IARC. IARC strenghthens its findings on several carcinogenic personal habits and household exposure, World Health Organisation, International Agency for Research on Cancer, available at 02 November 2009
EU Affairs