Cited by 66Smoking Behavior and CessationGlobal Public Health Policies and EpidemiologyPublic Health Policies and Education

Lessons from the public health responses to the US outbreak of vaping‐related lung injury

Hall, Wayne, Gartner, Coral, Bonevski, Billie·2021·Addiction

Abstract

Aim: To describe an outbreak of lung injuries in 2019 among people who vaped in the United States (type of injuries, people afflicted, substances vaped and cause of the injuries) and to analyse critically the regulatory responses of public health authorities and the media reporting of the outbreak. Methods: Case studies of the reporting of the e‐cigarette or vaping product use associated lung injury (EVALI) outbreak. We examined data on the number of cases of lung injury provided by the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC), public advice on the causes of the outbreak provided by the CDC and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), major media reports of the outbreak and proposed regulatory responses by governments in the United States, Australia and the United Kingdom. Results: The CDC initially suggested that the cause of the outbreak was nicotine vaping because the outbreak followed a large increase in nicotine vaping among US adolescents. Case–control studies revealed that the majority of cases had vaped illicit cannabis oils that were contaminated by vitamin E acetate. The CDC's public advice and the media were slow to report the evidence on the role of cannabis vaping. Popular government regulatory proposals—bans on sales of nicotine flavours and vaporizers—were based on the assumption that nicotine vaping was the cause of the outbreak. Conclusions: Media reporting in the United States, Australia and the United Kingdom of the US Centers for Disease Control's analysis of the causes of the e‐cigarette or vaping product use associated lung injury outbreak contributed to regulatory over‐reactions to nicotine vaping by the public health community.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/add.15108

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hall, W., Gartner, C., & Bonevski, B.
Affiliations
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
  • University of Newcastle Australia (AU)
Corresponding author
Hall, Wayne
Venue
Addiction
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-05-30
Volume
116
Issue
5
Pages
985-993
ISSN
  • 0965-2140 (ISSN-L)
  • 1360-0443
OpenAlex
W3023257713
Cited by
66
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 11 · 2012: 1
FWCI
7.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Addiction (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion)
  • NOVA (University of Newcastle Australia) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Public Health Policies and Education
Keywords
EVALI, cannabis vaping, alpha-tocopherol acetate, nicotine vaping, public health regulation, media coverage, CDC, FDA, youth vaping
MeSH terms
Vaping, Adolescent, Disease Outbreaks, Humans, Public Health, United States, Lung Injury, Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review