View this email in your browser ([link removed])


** 13 December 2023
------------------------------------------------------------


** UK
------------------------------------------------------------


** Risk of dying from cancer in England varies hugely between regions, say scientists (#1)
------------------------------------------------------------


** Blog: How to move towards a preventive state: which political party will grasp the four big opportunities? (#2)
------------------------------------------------------------


** Disposable vapes can be recharged hundreds of times, study finds (#3)
------------------------------------------------------------


** UK
------------------------------------------------------------


** Risk of dying from cancer in England varies hugely between regions, say scientists

The risk of dying from cancer in England “varies massively” depending on where a person lives, according to a study that experts say exposes “astounding” health inequalities.

Researchers who analysed data spanning two decades found staggering geographical differences. In the poorest areas, the risk of dying from cancer was more than 70% higher than the wealthiest areas. The findings were published in the Lancet Oncology.

Overall, the likelihood of dying from cancer has fallen significantly over the last 20 years thanks to greater awareness of signs and symptoms, and better access to treatment and care. The proportion dying from cancer before the age of 80 between 2002 and 2019 fell from one in six women to one in eight, and from one in five men to one in six.

However, some regions enjoyed a much larger decline in risk than others, and the new analysis has revealed that alarming gaps in outcomes remain.

“Although our study brings the good news that the overall risk of dying from cancer has decreased across all English districts in the last 20 years, it also highlights the astounding inequality in cancer deaths in different districts around England,” said Prof Majid Ezzati, from Imperial College London, who is a senior author of the study.

Researchers suggested that poverty and cuts to public health services, such as smoking cessation support, probably contributed to the acute differences in cancer death risk.

The widest inequalities were for cancers where a person’s risk can be reduced with lifestyle changes – such as losing weight or stopping smoking – and for cancers where screening is available to help cut the odds of dying from the disease.

Theo Rashid, the first author of the study, who is a PhD student at Imperial, said: “The greatest inequality across districts was for the risk of dying from cancers where factors such as smoking, alcohol and obesity have a large influence on the risk of getting cancer.

“Due to funding cuts, many local authorities have reduced their budgets for smoking cessation since 2010. Our data shows we cannot afford to lose these public health programmes and are in urgent need of the reintroduction and strengthening of national and local policies which combat smoking and alcohol.”

Source: The Guardian, 11 December 2023

See also: The Lancet Oncology - Mortality from leading cancers in districts of England from 2002 to 2019: a population-based, spatiotemporal study ([link removed](23)00530-2/fulltext)
------------------------------------------------------------
Read Here ([link removed])


** Blog: How to move towards a preventive state: which political party will grasp the four big opportunities?

Writing for the King’s Fund, David Buck, senior fellow in the King’s Fund policy team and Dr Emily Reed, Public Health Registrar with Action on Smoking and Health, outline the four areas of opportunity for preventative health policy.

First is the need for a cross-government approach that is not solely owned by the Department of Health and Social Care. The public’s health is driven by so much more than health and care services and is impacted by the actions of many government departments, so the approach to improving public health must also take this approach.

Second, success requires close attention to the mechanisms required to cement health as a real priority across government departments. Specific ideas range from a minister in cabinet, such as the Covenant for Health’s Chief Secretary for Population Health, to wider cross-government groups or committees, such as a cabinet committee (Tony Blair Institute) or a body modelled on the Climate Change Committee (IPPR). A strategy that does not include serious goal setting, monitoring and accountability, though, is destined to fail.

Third is adequate funding. For this we need to know how much is actually being spent, and reform funding and payment mechanisms. Demos has called for a new category of public spending for prevention to be reported by the Treasury, arguing that this would create greater accountability and prevent funding constantly being raided, or at least making that visible if it happens. On mechanisms there are a range of ideas, such as ‘polluter pays’ harms levies (as proposed in the Khan review of tobacco), but all agree sustainable funding streams for prevention are needed.

Fourth are connected themes around localism, devolution and an increasing role for, and recognition of the role of, communities. Thise is also consistent and aligned with much recent thinking and ‘doing’ in the local government and NHS worlds, including New Local’s work on community power, and related ideas of what increasing the power of communities means in practice in relation to health and care services.

Political will is required to start the shifts needed, and politicians can and should be bold – the public is far more on side than is commonly portrayed. This is the final critical piece of the jigsaw. The public actually gets the need for change, is supportive of it, and is far more interventionist than many politicians think.

Source: The King’s Fund, 12 December 2023
------------------------------------------------------------
Read Here ([link removed])


** Disposable vapes can be recharged hundreds of times, study finds

E-cigarette batteries that are being thrown away after a single use can be recharged hundreds of times, research has shown.

Vapes have grown in popularity in recent years, especially among younger people, and many lithium-ion batteries are not designed to be recharged.

About 1.3 million devices are thrown away in the UK every week, with 10,000 kilograms of lithium winding its way into landfill.

Aside from the waste of potential charges, the batteries also contain nickel, cobalt and organic solvents that are toxic to the environment.

Researchers from UCL and the University of Oxford said “as a bare minimum” the public needs to be more aware of how to dispose of batteries properly.

Professor Paul Shearing, senior author of the paper, said: “The surprise for us were the results that pointed toward just how long these batteries could potentially cycle.

“If you use a low charge and discharge rate, you can see that for over 700 cycles you still have more than 90% capacity retention.

“That’s a pretty good battery, actually. And these are just being discarded. They’re being chucked on the side of the road.

“As a bare minimum, the public needs to be aware of the types of batteries going into these devices and the need to properly dispose of them.

“Manufacturers should provide the ecosystem for reuse and recycling of e-cigarette batteries, and also should be moving towards rechargeable devices as the default.”

Source: The Standard, 12 December 2023

See also: Joule - Up in smoke: Considerations for lithium-ion batteries in disposable e-cigarettes ([link removed](23)00482-8)
------------------------------------------------------------
Read Here ([link removed])
Have you been forwarded this email? Subscribe to ASH Daily News here. ([link removed])

For more information email [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]) or visit www.ash.org.uk
@ASHorguk ([link removed])

ASH Daily News is a digest of published news on smoking-related topics. ASH is not responsible for the content of external websites. ASH does not necessarily endorse the material contained in this bulletin.

============================================================
Our mailing address is:
Action on Smoking and Health
Unit 2.9, The Foundry
17 Oval Way
London
SE11 5RR

Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can ** update your preferences ([link removed])
or ** unsubscribe from this list ([link removed])