Bad press or genuine worry?

Didihno

A new study in Japan:
http://news.yahoo.com/e-cigarettes-10-times-carcinogens-japan-researchers-081638013.html

Is it yet more horsesh1t or is it a genuine study?

Dr Farsalinos published a retort:
http://www.ecigarette-research.com/web/index.php/2013-04-07-09-50-07/2014/188-frm-jp

How on earth do we 'filter' the agenda based 'reports' from the genuine information in todays world? Its truly a minefield of misinformation and downright lies.

JH_raheny

horsesh1t I say

jonski

Lazy press

moonboy52

My cousin sent me that Daily mail link today with her title Real smokes FTW.

She rightly wound me up

The folks on Reddit say that the study was conducted with a cig-a-like.

It is headlines like that, that stick in peoples heads.

J Mysterio

Ha, that pic is class (saved).

54kroc

Much as I love a vape I think we're getting closer to a point where they will be regulated.
I certainly wouldn't be calling Dr Kunugitas research horse sh*t, I'd like to more work by people like him.

moonboy52

I would be of the opinion that any science is good science as long it is peer reviewed. The question has to be asked though if this scientist is in the pocket of big tobacco or not.

To state that vaping in general is 100% safe is just wrong. Of course if you make your own juice and build your own coils then it diminishes any potential risks greatly.

For me it is all about harm reduction over analogues. Vaping when you know your sources and one is educated is probably 90% - 95% "safer" than smoking. Pulling that number out of my ass

The cig-a-like manufacturer / cowboy in question needs to be called out and named and shamed.

J Mysterio

Pretty much spot on (although the term 'analogues' does make me squirm a little).

Didihno

J Mysterio wrote: »

Ha, that pic is class (saved).

Seconded.

On the study I immediately dismiss anything that will not reveal what was tested and what gave bad results. It smacks of bullsh1t to me.

To draw a parallel, imagine a world where someone tested only a 1980's Lada car, found it to be a pile of crap and then declared all cars to be unsafe piles of crap.

tommy2bad

Jeeze lads (and lassies) did any of ye read the links? The Japan one is not just horsesh1t, it's downright lieing. Read what the scientist himself said when asked about it. "This is an unpublished result, a single extreme case out of the many products he tested, and we do not know what went wrong in that case". It was not included in the published report. So how did it get to the press? Well the fact that Prof. Kunugita works for tobacco control with the WHO gives us a clue as to the source of this press release.

54kroc;
Much as I love a vape I think we're getting closer to a point where they will be regulated.
I certainly wouldn't be calling Dr Kunugitas research horse sh*t, I'd like to more work by people like him.

We are past the point of regulation, that happened during the TPD. We are now in the phase of smear campaign which is why press releases like this need to be called out for the horsh1t they are. The actual research done by Prof. Kunugita showed on average, the levels of formaldehyde in e-cigarettes are up to 50 times lower compared to tobacco cigarette smoke. And that the single carcinogenic found at high levels. This is not even counting the 10's of carcinogenics found in cigarette smoke, which are not present in ecig vapor.
This 'report' isn't just horsh1t, it's deliberate falsehood designed to damage ecigs.

54kroc

tommy2bad wrote: »

Jeeze lads (and lassies) did any of ye read the links? The Japan one is not just horsesh1t, it's downright lieing. Read what the scientist himself said when asked about it. "This is an unpublished result, a single extreme case out of the many products he tested, and we do not know what went wrong in that case". It was not included in the published report. So how did it get to the press? Well the fact that Prof. Kunugita works for tobacco control with the WHO gives us a clue as to the source of this press release.


We are past the point of regulation, that happened during the TPD. We are now in the phase of smear campaign which is why press releases like this need to be called out for the horsh1t they are. The actual research done by Prof. Kunugita showed on average, the levels of formaldehyde in e-cigarettes are up to 50 times lower compared to tobacco cigarette smoke. And that the single carcinogenic found at high levels. This is not even counting the 10's of carcinogenics found in cigarette smoke, which are not present in ecig vapor.
This 'report' isn't just horsh1t, it's deliberate falsehood designed to damage ecigs.

Were very far off been regulated at the moment.
I remember asking on here a while back if anyone had knew of people who had taken up vaping who didn't previously smoke, since then I've come across a couple more, between this and spotting kids vaping spells only bad news for us.
As moonboy52 said above I'd like to see more peer reviewed work on vaping.

tommy2bad

54kroc wrote: »

Were very far off been regulated at the moment.
I remember asking on here a while back if anyone had knew of people who had taken up vaping who didn't previously smoke, since then I've come across a couple more, between this and spotting kids vaping spells only bad news for us.
As moonboy52 said above I'd like to see more peer reviewed work on vaping.

The TPD comes into force in 2016, it's already being written into Dutch law. I duno how you measure time but that's up against it to me.
The Office of National Statistics in the UK puts never smokers who take up vaping at 1.4%. That pretty much dismisses the 'appeals to new users' theory and lets not even discuss the hypothetical gateway to smoking nonsense. As so far not one case ever of someone starting with ecigs them moving to lit tobacco has been reported let alone recorded.
The problem is not the lack of peer reviewed research, it's the cherry picking of the reviews. The release of press releases like this without anything other than a promised study to back them up. And don't put so much faith in peer review anyway, it's been captured and misused so much it's becoming a joke at this stage. Yes it's all we have but the politics involved in the peer review process is appalling. The whole thing needs restructuring from the bottom up. When the reviewers are the same people who worked on the study or closely tied to them there is a problem. Tobacco control studies are a circle jerk of reviewers reviewing each others papers.
The fact is we know ecigs work in the real world, they seem to be waiting until they work in theory, as the old economics joke goes.