French professor Bertrand Dautzenberg has published a book titled “Arrêtons de fumer” (Let’s Stop Smoking) on modern approaches to smoking cessation. The pulmonologist emphasizes the complete replacement of combustible cigarettes and the harm reduction role of vaping.
Professor Bertrand Dautzenberg, former department head at the Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital in Paris, released his new volume, “Arrêtons de fumer,” on October 15. Drawing on decades of clinical experience and consultations with smokers, the pulmonologist criticizes rigid, guilt-based traditional cessation methods, advocating instead for empathy and positive reinforcement.
The expert considers smoke-free nicotine intake, particularly the e-cigarette, to be one of the most effective tools for replacing smoking. He highlights that vaping provides an effective alternative while maintaining familiar rituals. Dautzenberg also points out that about ten percent of smokers remain permanently nicotine-dependent due to genetic factors, making the long-term use of significantly lower-risk products essential for them.
While acknowledging the work of specialized vape shops, the author also raises the possibility of pharmacy-distributed alternatives. In his view, this would allow for the targeted use of products with nicotine concentrations higher than the 20 mg/ml limit currently in effect in the European Union, assisting those hard-to-quit adults for whom the currently available concentration is insufficient.
In Brief
- Pulmonologist Professor Bertrand Dautzenberg’s book “Arrêtons de fumer” has been published.
- Instead of inducing guilt, the author places the emphasis on empathy and smoke-free nicotine replacement.
- He considers the e-cigarette an exceptionally effective harm reduction tool for eliminating smoking.
- He suggests exploring pharmacy distribution, which would allow for supplying those who require nicotine levels higher than 20 mg/ml.
Source: VapingPost FR (fr.vapingpost.com)
This summary was created by artificial intelligence based on the original article.
and well, it is easily attackable, no matter how right it is. The book’s truly positive critics could be other health-related supporters.