Category Archives: data

The health impact of e-cigarettes they don’t want you to know

health

Health is important. The impact of proper information for smokers making choices about their health is more important. The health impacts e-cigarettes make on less smoking are beyond the wildest dreams of those genuinely interested in less smoking.

A more common objective is biased information permeating public opinion through the media – who always seem happy to oblige. Unethical hypocrites censor valuable information for fear of their own fiscal health. It isn’t what they tell you behind a shroud of important titles, it’s what they decide to tell you. Is there an underlying method to their approach?


When someone reaches a point in their lives where they choose to stop smoking,  manipulation and lies are not needed. Offering false promises and *unicornian hopes of approved methods to stop smoking, smokers only become disappointed in themselves. The bullying words “smoking is evil” is manufactured propaganda. If less harm is truly the goal, speak often and loudly. If the strategy of convincing the public only of dangers sounds like a tragedy, it certainly is.

What are the health impacts of e-cigarettes? The “health impacts” of e-cigarettes are covered more than a few times in this blog. From “anecdotal” evidence in my and other surveys – right down to a science on the left colum in the links provided.

There are health impacts a smoker may be concerned about before using e-cigarettes, but public health “experts” pick and choose what the public is told. They won’t tell you what they don’t want you to know. The moralistic approach needs to stop.


Ethical Standards

First, ethical standards are not something these holier than thou idiots adhere to. The impact health officials parade around are about morality. Morals are standards set by those who want their standards met by others. If your revenue depends directly on the sales of what you’re fighting against by design, there is a conflict of interest. Period. Misrepresentation, fraud and criminal activity comes to mind.

Next, if you believe the goal of “less smoking” is the final goal, why are “experts” still babbling about anything aside from science. Hypothetical opinions and deceptive rants portrayed as “expertise” are deterring people from doing what the intended purpose supposedly is… that’s counterproductive. This isn’t about health. The desire to instill control over smokers outweighs the alleged “desired” end result. They don’t want you to know.

Third, what incentive is there for government to fail? What impact is there to deny information to the public? What is the return on investment on an estimated $20 million FDA initiative of tax dollars to determine people can keep smoking tobacco?

Thanks, in part, to Matt Myers of Tobacco-Free Kids, the cost of lying to adults is now in the BILLIONS.

The CDC fails to recognize the harm reduction benefits of smokeless tobacco, instead telling curious smokers looking for accurate information that there is simply not enough research to confirm that these products carry far less health risks than cigarettes.

Deception’ Over The Risks Of Smoking Alternatives Violates ‘Public Health Ethics


What are the health implications?

The idea of e-cigarettes took most of these experts by surprise, beyond comprehension. There’s obvious health advantages, yet the  impact of e-cigarettes are disrupting all aspects of “anti” and tobacco control so much they claim it is “partially understood”. They can’t completely comprehend “less smoking”.

Practical Implications for Continuing Education

  • The use of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) has become very popular in the United States, including among youth.
  • The health impacts of ENDS are only partly understood, but the preponderance of research suggests that using current-generation ENDS is significantly less harmful than using combustible tobacco products.

Key issues surrounding the health impacts of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) and other sources of nicotine


Harm Minimization

Although this chart below doesn’t show approved medications, this is progress. Harm

 



Potential deaths averted

The health impact is less smoking.

However, evidence is mounting that e-cigarettes deliver only a small percentage of the toxicants delivered by cigarettes. (26–32) In addition, newer e-cigarettes models have been shown to more efficiently deliver nicotine (29 30 33) than older models and provide sensorimotor experiences and ‘throat-hit’ similar to smoking, (34) thus increasing their potential to serve as effective substitutes for cigarettes.

Potential deaths averted in USA by replacing cigarettes with e-cigarettes


This isn’t about health

If this were about health there’d be a much different tone from those “in charge”.  If those in charge were truly trying to “help” people stop smoking, they would gladly taking on the challenge to make e-cigs better, and put themselves out of business. There is a monumental difference in smoking and using an e-cigarette. There is NO tobacco, no combustion. That, on its own, should be more than enough to spark interest in anyone “fighting” smoking, but it isn’t, and no mainstreamorganization” cares.

E-cigarette emissions span most of this range with the preponderance of products having potencies<1% of tobacco smoke and falling within two orders of magnitude of a medicinal nicotine inhaler

Comparing the cancer potencies of emissions from vapourised nicotine products including e-cigarettes with those of tobacco smoke


What is appropriate for “public health”?

Really? At this point, those who pretend they know what they’re talking about need to shut up. Those who know better need to stand up. Those who are deceiving the public need to be put in their place now, not later.

Distorting research makes academic opinions sound scary and is supported by mainstream media more than the truth can ever be. Calling nicotine “tobacco” is a license to print money.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is regulating nicotine as tobacco.

Let me rephrase that.

The FDA is regulating both nicotine in e-cigarettes and devices as tobacco.

The act mandates that FDA’s action not be “arbitrary or capricious,” and that actions be “appropriate for the protection of the public health,” the primary phrase of focus for this project.

Ethically Interpreting Eight Words in the Tobacco Control Act to Help FDA and the Courts


Controlling health challenges ahead

The plot thickens… not only do “experts” want more smoking (predicted here), they have invested now over 100 MILLION dollars to keep tobacco burning. Not only do they want more smoking, nobody cares. In fact, they want to use cigarettes to prescribe smoking.

The impact of less smoking is less revenue.

Below, bold and red are my emphasis disbelief.

The FDA together with other agencies of the U.S. government have invested over $100 million in several independent medical studies which have shown the health benefits of the company’s proprietary tobacco cigarettes.

Dr. Dorothy Hatsukami a principal investigator in the trial has publicly indicated that an immediate reduction in consumption of nicotine is “most likely to lead to less harm.

You can read that again, but I’m here to help.

Dr. Hatsukami thinks smoking cigarettes is “most likely to lead to less harm“. Are you stupid?

Oh look, more cigarettes…

22nd Century Group Inc (NYSEAMERICAN:XXII) Ships 2.4 Million SPECTRUM® Cigarettes for the National Institute on Drug Abuse


Philip Morris wants to quit smoking

Much to their surprise and humor, tobacco control is now watching tobacco giant Philip Morris take the battle on themselves to fight – themselves.

Where it makes no sense, tobacco control and anti-tobacco are now fighting against a “smoke-free world“.

If it looks like a duck and lies like a duck, it must be a pigeon.

Dick explains: Tobacco Control Pigeons, Meet Philip Morris’s Cat


Like most things, distractions and propaganda designed to look like truthful information, aren’t.

I’m more concerned about the things experts are concerned with when they withhold the information they don’t want you to know.


*Unicornian:


Have you met my OUR friends at vapers.org.uk? 

vapersukgraphic.JPG


You can find me here trying to be cordial on Facebook

You can find me here being a bit more evil on Twitter

You can also find me on LinkedIn


Tobacco Harm Reduction For Life

GONZO GIVES




Medical, Research, Science Professionals:

Research:


Politics:

E-Cigarette Politics 

A Billion Lives

A Billion Lives


think

Your comments are NEVER filtered, always encouraged and welcome on this blog. There is definitely more to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin

What We Know About E-Cigarettes: Data and Science Is Available

Are E-cigarettes Harmful

What We Know About E-Cigarettes

What We Know About E-cigarettes is clear. Data is easily found. Science is piling up. The Food and Drug Administration released their “Every Try Counts” campaign. I looked for the e-cigarette section on the link provided ~ because I’m a curious soul, and found the section “What We Know About E-Cigarettes”.

I’ve completed my meta-analysis and the data shows here that “Every Try Counts” only eludes to every try counting. The propaganda found on the website does not support e-cigarettes as a “try”. In fact, It looks like I may have found the “what we know about e-cigarettes” master draft journalists are using as a coloring contest fill in the blank exercise. By adding sentences, sprinkled opinions, various lies and fodder between the text and adding an ever catchy title with scary words for a click-bait title , ~voila~ they have a full article of “we just don’t know” here.


What should you know about e-cigarettes

If you are are a journalist. If you are a professional. If you are in any capacity in the medical field, feel free to reference my sentiments on the challenges of e-cigarettes public health experts face daily, here.
If you are a person with a prestigious title similar to “politician, front group liason, expert, media contact”, etc.) and have an uncontrollable urge to look stupid, please, consider not doing that.
Science and data show e-cigs are a safer option and cessation rates are high according to available government research.

Below are my edits in bold, italics, etc, and with links below each paragraph to data and science.


Paragraph one:

E-cigarettes are officially known as electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS). They are more commonly called e-cigarettes, e-cigs, e-hookah, or vapes. You may have seen ads or stories on the internet that say e-cigarettes are a safe safER choice to help smokers quit choose to switch from smoking. There isn’t enough is plenty of scientific evidence to say if this is true or not. Opinion alert: Here’s what doctors and researchers do know right now.


What we know about e-cigarette research

Research: Here, here and here. Oh, here, here, here and here. That should get you started.

Paragraph two:

We already know this: E-cigs work by heating a liquid that may or may not has have nicotine and other chemicals in it. Heating the liquid turns it into a vapor. That’s what the user inhales and exhales. Some research shows that this vapor includes chemicals that are known to be less harmful. Scientists are studying the health effects of using e-cigarettes. New information is coming in, but they don’t have the answers yet. but is being all but ignored.


What we know about withholding information:

There’s Withholding differential risk information. Information is available here, and “Lower Carcinogen Levels” here, scary science here, and “Harm reduction in COPD smokers who switch” here.

Paragraph three:
Although FDA is working to regulateregulating e-cigarettes to restrict, tax and ban these devices,no more innovation can be achieved,currently they are not regulated. That means the makers of e-cigs don’t have to say what is in them. There are ways to know is no way to know exactly what chemicals are in e-cigarettes, it’s called science or how much are in these products.

What we know about regulations

National Tobacco Day is covered here.


Paragraph four:

We do know that some, not all e-cigs contain nicotine. Nicotine is by proof of assertion, what you believe is addictive what makes tobacco addictive. Nicotine can (may, could, might) also affect how the brain develops. Because childhood and teen years are times of important brain development, the nicotine in tobacco and e-cigs is believed to be especially bad for children and teens.


What we know about nicotine

Nicotine is covered here, and here with “approved” methods, proof by assertion (the addiction to saying it is addictive) is covered here, and more nicotine is here, nicotine propaganda is covered in-depth here, and by me here.

Think of the children™ is covered in-depth, where there is no such thing as a gateway here, 10 years of smoking rates are plummeting for children here, described as weak here and covered here, and very interesting points of restrictions here… my fingers are tired, but I’ll press on because it’s important.

I’ve covered gateways and nicotine addiction, here.


Paragraph five:

It’s also not very clear if e-cigs do help people quit smoking or or if  and the government, public health, tobacco control experts purposely get in the way of people quitting. Researchers are working hard to find the answers to these important questions. For now, we do not know if using e-cigs is a safER and helpful way to quit smoking, so using e-cigs is not recommended. There are other proven, safe, and effective methods for quitting smoking.

Explore the options to find a quit method that’s right for you.

What we know about helpful

There’s that pesky National Institutes of Health (NIH) and National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) showing 79% success rate here.

Clarity on research misconduct happens to be here.

I can show you 7,238 answers to helpful here.

Science and data show e-cigs are a safer option and cessation rates are high according to available government research.




I typed slow, but you can bookmark this page and refer to it anytime, share it with your professional friends, and while you’re here, may I suggest if you’re writing an article or op-ed on e-cigarettes, try harder for information. Look to the left and right of this blog.

Repeat after me:

Science and data show e-cigs are a safer option and cessation rates are high according to available government research.


Advertise with YOUR text link or banner!




Have you met my OUR friends at vapers.org.uk? 

vapersukgraphic.JPG


You can find me here trying to be cordial on Facebook

You can find me here being a bit more evil on Twitter

You can also find me on LinkedIn


Tobacco Harm Reduction For Life

GONZO GIVES




Medical, Research, Science Professionals:

Research:


Politics:

E-Cigarette Politics 

A Billion Lives

A Billion Lives


There is definitely more to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin

Senator Todd Kaminsky claims: “Vaping nearly doubled”.

propaganda.jpg


Senator Todd Kaminsky, (D) NY Senate District 9 has concluded a “discussion” last night, proudly and ambiguously stating he

“… held an expert panel to discuss the dangers of this newfound trend” claiming “Vaping has nearly doubled since 2014“.

“DANGER IN DISGUISE” is on the banner in front of the “expert” panel.

With obvious facts in hand, there wouldn’t be presumptuous assertions or a need to corrupt the crowd (of eager parents) with preconceived or contrived notions from an expert panel.


If it has “doubled”, good. Less smoking among teens, what’s the problem?

If it has, please, show your work to the class, Senator.


I’ll assume since Senator Kaminsky is “a leader on ethics reform & corruption” (referred to here), there would be no need for me to assume there could be broad manipulation or ommission of facts in this discussion.

No, I assume credibility & fact-checking was of the highest priority before the discussion began.



Now, different than the normal rhetoric, he didn’t say it doubled with the normally ever-present words like “youth”, “children” or “kids” in his post(s), instead, for the sake of my own sanity, “Think of the children™”, I’ll describe it as implied.



Assumptions

My assumption is he and the expert panel “are” referring to “children”… if anyone has video or a transcript to the “discussion” or data used, please comment below.


For those that care, keep up and are watching:

What I still can find is still the latest from the National Institute on Drug Abuse” via the “Monitoring the Future (MTF) survey” from 2016 found here:

For a second year in a row, the MTF survey asked high school students about their use of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes).

Significant decreases in use from last year were reported by:

8th (6.2 vs. 9.5 percent)

10th (10.3 vs. 14.0 percent)

12th graders (12.4 vs. 16.2 percent).







I can only assume this will lead to another attempt to promote what is “Tobacco 21” or youth smoking covered here and here and here and here.

What I cannot find is “vaping nearly doubled”. If anyone has it, please link it in the comments below so I can publicly

  • Apologize publicly and directly to Senator Kaminsky
  • Correct the numbers so I can pretend I’m an expert!

I’ve said this before.

I’ll repeat it: “If “children” are *already smoking, they’re *smokers regardless of age. Think of the children™.”

I predict, as others have, rates among “kids” will go up in the next few years. I’m not against that.

“When tobacco use decreases, less smoking occurs.”

What I do know is “nicotine” is now wrongly classified as “tobacco”.

What I also know, Senator, is New York has top billing with the long-standing Master Settlement Agreement Ponzi scheme.


Ask the expert!

I encourage you to voice your questions or concerns on these matters on his public Twitter and Facebook accounts.


“T21 has potential to increase use rates through psychological reactance, and out of protest once the targeted demographic realizes their right to choose has been removed.”

“They” want tobacco to be restricted to adults, they want to restrict adults from tobacco, and e-cigarettes.

Could Tobacco 21 increase smoking rates?




Keller and Heckman is pleased to announce its 2nd annual E-Vapor and Tobacco Law Symposium. If you’re interested in attending, please click on the graphic below!

Symposium.JPG

2018 E-Vapor and Tobacco Law Symposium




Have you met my OUR friends at vapers.org.uk? 

vapersukgraphic.JPG


You can find me here trying to be cordial on Facebook

You can find me here being a bit more evil on Twitter

You can also find me on LinkedIn


Tobacco Harm Reduction For Life

GONZO GIVES




Medical, Research, Science Professionals:

Research:


Politics:

E-Cigarette Politics 

A Billion Lives

A Billion Lives



think

Your comments are NEVER filtered, always encouraged and welcome on this blog.



There is definitely more to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin


Of interest:




“I am a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for (me) to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.”

 

 

 

 

Vaping In The News – November 18th, 2017

a

 


Sarah Jakes, Ecig Summit Keynote speech ~ Public Health’s Useful Idiot ~ Health impact of E-cigarettes ~ This is Why Tobacco Control Should not be Trusted ~ MN Groups Abuse Government Process In Attempt To Raise Vaping And Smoking Age ~ Quit Methods ~ Content analysis of homeless smokers’ perspectives on established and alternative smoking interventions. ~ California Smokers’ Helpline


This is Vaping In The News for the week ending November 18th, 2017


 

This tweet, and the link to Sarah’s Keynote speech will speak for itself.

Keynote speech:

Sarah Jakes keynote speech at the E-Cig Summit 2017


Public Health’s Useful Idiot.

Paul can be, well… a loveable guy. He’s kind enough to point out the usefulness in idiots!

Public Health’s Useful Idiot


This is Why Tobacco Control Should not be Trusted

Kevin Price & David Goerlitz explain in terms even a tobacco control expert could understand.

This is Why Tobacco Control Should not be Trusted


MN Groups Abuse Government Process In Attempt To Raise Vaping And Smoking Age

Carl V. Phillips. ‘Nuff said.

MN Groups Abuse Government Process In Attempt To Raise Vaping And Smoking Age


Quit Methods Used By American Smokers, 2013-2014

No matter how they slice the patches and gums…

Quit Methods Used by American Smokers, 2013–2014


Health Impact

Denial in any form is denial.

This. DON’T Miss THIS.

Health impact of E-cigarettes: a prospective 3.5-year study of regular daily users who have never smoked


Content analysis.

Content analysis of homeless smokers’ perspectives on established and alternative smoking interventions.


California Smokers’ Helpline Marks 25th Anniversary

I tweeted the account that was bragging, asking a direct question.

Nothing to see, move along.

California Smokers’ Helpline Marks 25th Anniversary


Have you met my OUR friends at vapers.org.uk? 

vapersukgraphic.JPG


You can find me here trying to be cordial on Facebook

You can find me here being a bit more evil on Twitter

You can also find me on LinkedIn


 

Tobacco Harm Reduction For Life

GONZO GIVES

 




Medical, Research, Science Professionals:

Research:


Politics:

E-Cigarette Politics 

A Billion Lives

A Billion Lives


There is definitely more to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin

Vaping In The News – September 9th, 2017

eye

The New England Journal of Medicine: Wrong

Surgeon General report: Wrong

Lowering nicotine in cigarettes: Looks like prescribing smoking “could” be coming…

Toxicity of the main electronic cigarette components, propylene glycol, glycerin, and nicotine from Science Direct…

Canada needs a petition signed.


Vaping In The News September 9th, 2017


New Research Puts the Final Nail in the Coffin of the NEJM Formaldehyde Study ~ Surgeon General ~ The War on Nicotine begins ~ Prescribing Smoking ~ Nicotine – The Zombie Antidote ~ Big Tobacco Goes Soft ~ Science & Data ~ E-cigarettes and youth smoking: be alert but not alarmed




New Research Puts the Final Nail in the Coffin of the NEJM Formaldehyde Study

It seems in my estimate, 99.994% of what is passed of as “research” is done improperly because they don’t talk to vapers directly, or interperet data incorrectly by choice.

With all the wannabe scientists and researchers searching for fame and funding, there has to be one constant goal to the consumer.

The truth, good or bad.

Science Direct:

E-cigarettes emit very high formaldehyde levels only in conditions that are aversive to users

New Research Puts the Final Nail in the Coffin of the NEJM Formaldehyde Study


Surgeon General

When the last Surgeon General released his report the governmental “Think Of The Children™” propaganda agenda last year, it was very obvious he and his fiction writers were creating an illusion. We all knew that, but damage control may be futile.

Covered by Clive Bates here, now Riccardo Polosa,Christopher RussellJoel Nitzkin and Konstantinos E. Farsalinos have collaborated below.

 

“The next US Surgeon General should consider the possibility that future generations of young Americans will be less likely to start smoking tobacco because of, not in spite of, the availability of e-cigarettes.”

👇
A critique of the US Surgeon General’s conclusions regarding e-cigarette use among youth and young adults in the United States of America

Related, Cannot Be Ignored:

James Dunworth of the Ashtray Blog interviews Professor Polosa on why they (thankfully) decided to release the above critique.

Scientists Criticise US Surgeon General`s Attitude Towards E-Cigarettes

Another perspective from Steve Birr over at the Daily Vaper:

‘Misleading’ Surgeon General Report On Vaping Battered As ‘Fiction’


The War on Nicotine begins

Carl V. Phillips takes a shot at the war on nicotine, tobacco, the FDA and… well….

The War on Nicotine begins


Century 21

I can’t make this up. With the FDA’s announcement to reduce nicotine in cigarettes…and the support from organized crime got me to thinking.

They’ve been wrong about all the other cessation methods, why not.

Carl got me thinking — as he usually does. One search turns into another and although I didn’t find what I was looking for, I found what I’d predicted here

 

In print:

 

X-22 is the first and only smoking cessation product in the form of a combustible cigarette.

X-22 is a six-week prescription treatment which utilizes Very Low Nicotine (VLN) cigarettes (95% less nicotine than conventional cigarettes) to satisfy a smoker’s craving for cigarettes while separating the act of smoking from the rapid delivery of nicotine.

X-22 Smoking Cessation Aid In Development

But… wait… there’s more to this company, they also have “high nicotine” cigarettes. Imagine that.

 

Red Sun

This is its American brand sold in more than 600 stores. It is a high nicotine cigarette. It might seem counterintuitive, especially given the health benefits claimed by its very low nicotine cigarettes, but high nicotine cigarettes could have significant health benefits as well.

X-22 has certain advantages:

“It’s a cigarette, people seem to prefer that”

“It has no side effects, apart from the harmful effects of cigarette smoke”

“It has been proved effective in six clinical trials”

22nd Century’s Unique Cigarettes Create Growth Opportunities


Do you know about THR4LIFE?

bod1


Dick Puddlecoat

If you’re not new here, Dick needs no introduction, but I like doing it anyway.

Spot The Difference



Are you familiar with INNCO?


Nicotine – The Zombie Antidote

Saw this in a Facebook group I belong to  – from 2012. Nice perspective.

 

“My aim here is to defend the rights of people who choose to smoke. It may surprise you to know that, while the percentage of the population that smokes has declined in recent years (due to government propaganda), the incidence of heart disease has not declined. The reason, shock! horror! is that smoking is not the real problem to begin with!”

Nicotine – The Zombie Antidote


Big Tobacco Goes Soft

It seems Philip Morris is ahead of the curve of researchers, experts and distinguished nimwits in the tobacco control and anti-tobacco control “field”… again.

Gregory Conley submitted this in support.

‘Experts’ will continue to refrain from seeing less harm as the goal with the heat -not- burn product from Philip Morris.

Big Tobacco Goes Soft

 


CANADA:

Canadians only, Get this petition to your friends, neighbors, weird cousins….

Speaking of weird cousins…

Dimitris is willing to allow Phil Busardo to shave his chest if it hits 10k…

*Canadians* only should sign this petition. Here’s the link:

Vapers have a voice! Bill S-5 and petition E-1237


Do you know about NNA?

nna.JPG



Science And Data:

The truth, good or bad. Again.

Toxicity of the main electronic cigarette components, propylene glycol, glycerin, and nicotine…….

  • Ninety-day rat inhalation study to assess toxicity of e-cigarette liquid components.
  • Aerosolized mixtures of propylene glycol and glycerin with and without nicotine.
  • Aerosol mixtures showed only limited biological effects with no toxicity.
  • Adding nicotine to the aerosol mixtures resulted in effects previously reported

Toxicity of the main electronic cigarette components, propylene glycol, glycerin, and nicotine, in Sprague-Dawley rats in a 90-day OECD inhalation study complemented by molecular endpoints


E-cigarettes and youth smoking: be alert but not alarmed

MY position on “kids” vaping is clear.

If “children” are already smoking, they’re smokers regardless of age.

That personal position will not change.

Coral Gartner has taken the “Think Of The Children™” to task in her paper.

Coral Gartner, who I follow on Twitter, and she, of all I follow, has briefly messaged back and forth with links for me, and has engaged reasonably….

has a piece in the Tobacco Control Journal.

“Several things should be considered in the interpretation of these studies”



You can find me here trying to be cordial on Facebook

You can find me here being a bit more evil on Twitter

You can also find me on LinkedIn




Have you met my OUR friends at vapers.org.uk? 

vapersukgraphic.JPG


Medical, Research, Science Professionals:

M.O.V.E.

Research:

Ecigarette Research

Dr. Konstantinos E Farsalinos (Research)

E-Research Foundation


Politics:

E-Cigarette Politics 

A Billion Lives

A Billion Lives


think

Your comments are NEVER filtered, always encouraged and welcome on this blog.


There is definitely more to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin


Save

Save

Save

Vaping In The News: September 2, 2017


news1

Vaping In The News – August 27th – September 2nd, 2017

What Trump’s FDA director gets wrong ~ First Clinical Evidence of Unharmed Myocardial Function in Vapers ~ Data-Driven Meta-Analysis E-cigs cause less smoking ~ BrandFire ~ New York City ~ Tobacco 21 ~ Youth ~ Seattle Smokers ~ Ruth Malone ~ Puff-N-Stuff – Nicotine ~ American Vaping Association




 What Trump’s FDA director gets wrong

“The FDA’s failure, to date, to acknowledge that e-cigarettes not only are safer than combustible cigarettes, but that they are much safer, results in confusion among would be consumers.”

What Trump’s FDA director gets wrong

First Clinical Evidence of Unharmed Myocardial Function in Vapers

Dear Professor Glantz,

Before you sharpen your pencil:

First Clinical Evidence of Unharmed Myocardial Function in Vapers

 


Data Driven Meta-Analysis

The wild, wild west of data driven meta-analysis just isn’t full enough yet – of meta-analysis about e-cigarette use. I’ve decided to go west.

Because data. Yep. I thought it was way overdue. Because data.

My Data Driven Meta-Analysis: E-cigarettes cause less smoking.

Via Michael Siegel:

Center for Tobacco Products is Lying to the Public About Youth Tobacco Use


 BrandFire

Adam Padilla of “BrandFire” where the claim on their “about us” page brags of their approach as “creative and “It has the power to disrupt your competition”.

Mr. Padilla put out, on social media sites, a box showing a baby with “my first vape” on it.

It of course, spread around Facebook with ease – and on Twitter….

It turns out my new friend Adam at BrandFire has Pfizer (owned by Johnson & Johnson) listed as a client on their “client” page, but doesn’t show any dazzling “work” for Pfizer on “our work” page.

I looked.

How interesting. This must have been it.

Thierry Bonnevap tweeted this.

Choose the Auto-Translate at the top of the blog link By below to read more:
Who is behind the new false viral vapor ads for children?

Jim McDonald also had his say on Vaping360:

Is Pfizer behind the My First Vape meme?




a


Do you know about THR4LIFE?

bod1


New York City

With the Bloomberg regime off in the distance, the next generation of nannies want to pretend to lower smoking rates in New York City, or profit from those who keep smoking, regardless of the price.

Because of the failure of Bill de Blasio’s city to be fiscally responsible by budgeting what they have,  he’s decided, and includes e-cigarettes… that less people smoking… paying more for public housing… for not smoking… is the plan.

Oh, except New Yorkers being smarter than he is, and of course the black market that doesn’t exist.

Firmly stating “We are sending a loud and clear message that we will not let their greed kill any more New Yorkers without a fight”.

Greed can be misconstrued by “imposing a new 10 percent local tax on tobacco products other than cigarettes” and raising the cost of cigarettes from $10.50 to $13.00 could never be classified as “greed”.

Win/win.

It’s Official: A Pack Of Cigarettes Now Costs $13 In NYC

 


Tobacco 21

Here’s how their game plan “works” in writing.

Raising The Age Of Purchase For Tobacco Products: Lessons Learned from Tobacco21

Seems the plan isn’t working for compliance, or is it?

In my (highly acclaimed by me) opinion, as the age of purchase was 18, they are having a difficult time keeping their percentage at acceptable levels, and now want to raise it to 21 to recreate the problem.

If they raise the minimum to 21, they create a whole new class and “infringement rate” – and in the process, create more funding to do what “they’ve” already allegedly done.

Job security.

The plan is working to keep “control” relevant as I’ve predicted here and here.

Suddenly, in California, bad laws create bad people and relevance for tobacco control. Now they will “need” more funding to fight “it”.

The rates of “underage sales” failed 50%. They quietly (not to me) created more “problems”…

This is exactly what they planned. More “self-created” problems, more job security to “fight” it.

More proof that “laws” don’t stop “children” (redefined as 18-20 year olds as well) from tobacco use.

August 28, 2017: Tobacco Retailer Compliance Operations Cases

Sheriff’s report of the same:

Tobacco Retailer Compliance Operations

If there were only more 18-20 year olds like this:

Letter: Tobacco 21 will actually create more young smokers in Detroit Lakes


 Youth

“most e-cigarette experimentation does not turn into regular use, and levels of regular use in young people who have never smoked remain very low.”

Young People’s Use of E-Cigarettes across the United Kingdom: Findings from Five Surveys 2015–2017

Lies:

FDA Lies About Vaping While the CDC Inches Toward the Truth


 


 Seattle Smokers

Aside from taking exception to “Thus, the statement that e-cigarettes are addictive is true”, I actually was pretty impressed with this article from Alex Berezow and the American Council on Science and Health.

If Seattle Smokers Follow King County’s Health Advice, They Will Die


Ruth Malone

Last week, Christopher Snowden had a few words to say another idiotic statement from Stuff-N-Puff Glantz and “big tobacco”:

“This is the David and Goliath delusion on crystal meth. “

That shady link between Big Tobacco and nicotine gum

This week, Ruth Malone has more to contribute. SURPRISE!

“It doesn’t seem to make sense for a company that sells cigarettes to help smokers stop using them”: A case study of Philip Morris’s involvement in smoking cessation

Then, with his knife resharpened, Christopher Snowden took another stab by appropriately lunging at Ruth:

Get your story straight

I fixed the final thoughts for her.

ruth malone drivel.jpg


Poor Stan

I’m torn between considering Stan a punching bag or a punchline.

Time to make the donuts.

Teen Smoking Unconnected to Cinematic Smoking


Do you know about NNA?

nna.JPG


Nicotine

My favorite subject.

Smokers’ understandings of addiction to nicotine and tobacco: A systematic review and interpretive synthesis of quantitative and qualitative research



Are you familiar with INNCO?


American Vaping Association

Via Gregory Conley:

Today, AVA submitted our comment on PMI’s modified risk tobacco product application for iQOS and its associated HeatSticks.

greg.JPG

Outstanding. THIS is louder.

American Vaping Association Submission (PDF)




You can find me here trying to be cordial on Facebook

You can find me here being a bit more evil on Twitter

You can also find me on LinkedIn




Have you met my OUR friends at vapers.org.uk?

 

vapersukgraphic.JPG


Medical, Research, Science Professionals:

Research:


Politics:

E-Cigarette Politics 

A Billion Lives

A Billion Lives


think

Your comments are NEVER filtered, always encouraged and welcome on this blog.


 

There is definitely more to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

My Data Driven Meta-Analysis: E-cigarettes cause less smoking.

kid smoking



Data Driven Meta-Analysis: E-cigarettes cause less smoking. Imagine you’re a tobacco control “expert”, a professor, in fact. There is notoriety, fame even. You’re not a scientist, but while bumbling through your meta-analysis, you elude to being one for decades. Ahhh the life.

While walking upright, there’s a noticeable amount of doughnut powder in your beard (to show your expertise) in almost any sterile artificial setting — where everyone will nod their heads in agreement…

glantz tweet


Since I have the formalities out of the way, I will meta-analyse the chart below for before Professor Puff-N-Stuff gets his grubby paws on it.

I’ll submit my findings for all you math / data / science /statistitians for peer review below!

Aren’t you excited?


Submitted by Kevin Crowley, AKA @VapingIT, SPE, EEI.

(You have to have the fancy-shmancy initials!)

Title

(or whatever they put at the top of important studies)

E-cigarettes cause less smoking.

“Important stuff”:

E-cigarette use was tracked by the FDA & CDC – from 2011 – 2016.

It went up, peaked in 2015 and went back down.


 

Purpose:

I suppose I should explain myself like they all do, but I won’t, I’ll do it my way.

To have determination a deliberate (Thanks Fig!) and honest assessment of whether e-cigarettes cause more smoking (or not) in youth without using words like “may, might, could” or any phrases like “more studies will be needed to determine” (with or without nicotine).

This could be difficult, and I’m not an “expert” so I certainly hope you’re rooting for me.


Data: More Stuff

Cigarette use in the same time frame – went down. (Check my math, this is important).

kids youth gateway

Findings:

Most children around adults not smoking has caused the children to not smoke. The adults choosing to use (e-cigarettes) vaping equipment instead of purchasing cigarettes, so the children can’t steal cigarettes from parents who are not smoking.

E-cigarettes cause less smoking in children, and adults.

(Being informative is exhausting!)

Result:

Since 2011, adults smoked less, making cigarettes less available to kids. 8% of children will still try cigarettes.

Links:

Chart above is here.

Study below the chart is here.

You can purchase my metanalysis for a billion dollars once I put it behind a paywall.


Conflicts Of Interest:

Like this matters, but I’ll play along. None, consumer.


Opinion

Big Ole’ long sentence assesment warning!

It is in my opinion that around 8 percent of the children in the United States are the core group of rebels who, despite any half-hearted efforts by tobacco control organizations or esteemed professors like Puff-N-Stuff, will try smoking, skip school and daredevil and adventure off into other activities deemed dangerous or delinquent-like.

Less than that will continue try cigars, hookah, pipes and smokeless tobacco.

It happens. That will give more time for experts (uninterested in blaming themselves or rebellion) to have something to do, like blame Hollywood for the remaining 8%.

I want to beat Professor Glantz to the metanalysis submission frenzy:

How’d I do?

Peer review my findings! Someone check my math!


Related:

“most e-cigarette experimentation does not turn into regular use, and levels of regular use in young people who have never smoked remain very low.”

Cumulatively these surveys collected data from over 60,000 young people.

Young People’s Use of E-Cigarettes across the United Kingdom: Findings from Five Surveys 2015–2017

“Nicotine dependence is not a significant mechanism for e-cigarettes’ purported effect on heavier future conventional smoking among young adults.”

Evaluating the Mutual Pathways among Electronic Cigarette Use, Conventional Smoking, and Nicotine Dependence.


Related:

Via Michael Siegel:

Center for Tobacco Products is Lying to the Public About Youth Tobacco Use

Mine:
Smoking and E-cig use among teens is down, again – (Don’t tell Stan)

Added 9/6/17

I must have done well:
  • Riccardo Polosa
  • Christopher Russell,
  • Joel Nitzkin and
  • Konstantinos E. Farsalinos

A critique of the US Surgeon General’s conclusions regarding e-cigarette use among youth and young adults in the United States of America


Advertise with YOUR text link or banner!


Do you know about THR4LIFE?

bod1



You can find me here trying to be cordial on Facebook

You can find me here being a bit more evil on Twitter

You can also find me on LinkedIn


Have you met our friends at vapers.org.uk?

vapersukgraphic.JPG


Medical, Research, Science Professionals:

Research:


Politics:

E-Cigarette Politics 

A Billion Lives

A Billion Lives


think

Your comments are NEVER filtered, always encouraged and welcome on this blog.


 

There is definitely more to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin

 

 

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Nicotine Addiction: An Open 30-Day Public Health Challenge

nicotine

Foreword:

For decades, Public Health, Tobacco Control, and Government experts have agreed in unison, that nicotine is the addictive chemical in cigarettes with comparisons and statements that nicotine is as or more addictive than heroin.

This “Public Health Challenge” is to show scientific proof that the assertions of addiction are true.


I have decided to put (our) money where your assertions are by taking you, the health, tobacco control, science and research communities, to literal task on nicotine addiction.

This is a 30-day challenge for anyone in public health to show nicotine addiction in humans, without MAOI’S, ammonia, or any other non-nicotine additive or any form of tobacco, without question.

You don’t need to prove me wrong, you need to prove yourselves right.

That’s it.


Nicotine Addiction

An Open 30-Day Public Health Challenge:

Addiction to a habit-forming substance is defined by Merriam-Webster:

Medical Definition of addiction

  1. :  compulsive physiological need for and use of a habit-forming substance (as heroin, nicotine, or alcohol) characterized by tolerance and by well-defined physiological symptoms upon withdrawal; broadly: persistent compulsive use of a substance known by the user to be physically, psychologically, or socially harmful [emphasis added.]


Criteria:

To show proof of nicotine addiction with existing clinical trials, case studies, data, and scientific documentation of addiction to nicotine alone, without any form of tobacco or Monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOI’S), ammonia, or any other non-nicotine additive, in humans.

Documentation submitted (either as a text file or in the form of a web link) must be accessible and not be behind a “paywall”.


Documentation:

Unacceptable documentation:

  • Animal studies (rats, mice, monkeys, etc.) are not acceptable.
  • Submissions not published in professional or scientific journals or government websites are not acceptable.
  • Anything inaccessible by the public, including “paywalls” via the internet, are not acceptable.
  • Oral presentations, press releases are not acceptable.
  • Existing clinical trials, case studies, data, in vitro studies, self-reported surveys and scientific documentation in humans that claim probabilities or hypothetical possibilities as they do not show nicotine “is” addictive and are not acceptable.
  • Existing clinical trials, case studies, data, in vitro studies, self-reported surveys, and scientific documentation cannot include words and phrases like “hand to mouth, dependent, habitual, ritualistic” or words like “can, conceivably, could, likely, may, might, perhaps, possible, possibly, possibility, probably, probability” and cannot include tobacco or MAOI’s, ammonia, or any other non-nicotine additive for this challenge.

Acceptable Documentation:

  • Documentation must be accessible to the public.
  • Documentation must show the acceptable definition of addiction in existing clinical trials, case studies, data, or science and include characteristics of addiction such as increased tolerance, and withdrawal symptoms of nicotine alone, in humans, without any form of tobacco or MAOI’s, ammonia, or any other non-nicotine additive.
  • Documentation showing addiction in clinical trials or case studies with 3% or 2 subjects, whichever is greater.
  • Documentation must include a clear description of methodologies and results.
  • Peer-reviewed submissions must include names and affiliations of reviewers.

Documentation submitted (either as a text file or in the form of a web link) must be accessible and not be behind a “paywall”.

Documentation submitted must also include proof of existence with at least three of the following compulsive use or behaviors identified and defined, such as:

  • Physical addiction
  • Loss of job
  • Erratic or deviant behavior
  • Decreased social activities
  • Increased tolerance of nicotine and use over time
  • Harm to the patient or others around them
  • Withdrawal symptoms, phases

Submission:

Documentation must be submitted to this blog publicly and directly in the comment section below.


Reward:

money6

If addiction to nicotine is proven according to the criteria above, 5% of the funds donated during this 30-day challenge (minus processing fees) will be donated to The Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids.

The remaining 95% (if proven) will be donated as follows:

In the absence of or lack of documentation submitted per the criteria stated above, or if this Public Health Challenge is deemed uncontested, any and all funds donated during this 30-day challenge (minus processing fees) will go to ecigarette-research.org for further research by Dr. Farsalinos and his colleagues.


To *donate any amount, please go here to the GoFundMe page:

Nicotine Addiction: An Open 30-Day Public Health Challenge


*If you cannot donate with GoFundMe (due to bank fees, country of origin or other reasons), please message me. I can accept your donation of any amount securely via PayPal here and I will then transfer it with your name or initials  (please specify) so there is a receipt for both of us.


Save

Save

Save

Save

Professionals Just “Don’t Know Enough” About E-cigarettes

You’ve entered the “I’m tired of your bullshit” zone.

doctors4

The word “Bullshit” is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy… that’s found here.

Sound familiar?

To be clear:


Are you an expert?

expert.JPG

The degree you’ve worked so hard to attain needs to be used properly, not at your discretion. I know you are proud of your accomplishments and contributions to society for your vast knowledge.

I know you are the “go to” person in your prestigious department or institution of higher learning. I know you know everything and have an “I love me” wall to prove it.

I have been known to pass out extra points if your degree(s) hang higher on the wall than photos of your family. I offer a double bonus if the only photo(s) in your office are of you.

You’ve entered the “I’m tired of your bullshit” zone.


Breathe snowflake, breathe.

gif-stunned

I know many of you are truth-a-phobic. Let’s be honest, you’re not used to your integrity being questioned or spoken to in this manner.  I want to earn your respect.

If you recognize yourself in the above description and want to skip the formalities, I’ve covered the true experts here:

Is Public Health challenged about ecigs?


Still with me?

welcome.JPG

I’ll presume for time and space that you already know what combustible tobacco “is”. I’ll also presume you “know” what e-cigarettes ~are~.

Let’s move on.

Use that brain for something other than a hat rack. I know, you think nicotine is addictive. That, my dear expert is called “Proof by assertion“.

You can’t fathom some uneducated consumer can out-research you?

Think again.

The link (PDF) below covers all the important stuff you don’t know and more.

Nicotine. Children. Chemicals. Battery Safety. Research. Resources. Less harm.

Go ahead, click it:

When tobacco use decreases, less smoking occurs.

You know you want to. I’ll wait.


Let’s Talk About You

eyes

Pride and social status does impede one’s sense of intelligence. One of the hardest things to do is ask for help. Another is for one to admit they are wrong.

E-cigarettes. Think less harm. No combustion. Not smoking.

The pretentious attitude concerns me from those who’s job it is to know better. I know you know better. You know you know better.  The amateurish display of stupidity about e-cigarettes shall now come to a close.

If you don’t know enough, why are you babbling? I know, you’re a snowflake and feel too important to be chastised for your own stupidity.

For you who are professionals, this is a need to know basis. I’m trying to help.

Claiming expert status without being an expert makes you an idiot. Study all you can about that tweet or article you’re destined to write. Stop depending on your daily dose of information from your peers or media.

Pro-Tip: Stop surfing the internet in a drunken stupor to “find” information about e-cigarettes. When you google, the top five results are not always the correct results.

The words “we need more studies”, and we “don’t know enough” are unacceptable.

Become an expert, have some nerve, stick with that choice. People will continue to smoke based upon your opinion, make it count. Prepare for your big interview.

Millions of people have switched from smoking to e-cigarettes. Millions more are afraid to try, and instead rely on information from “reputable” sources.


Swallow your pride or display it proudly

pride.JPG

Please, put your big researcher panties on.

I’m trying to keep you from looking like an imbecile. (They do exist.) Don’t say you “don’t know enough” any longer.

I know you like data, so for reference, here are two examples of high profile tobacco control imbeciles here and here. (References for tobacco control and public health are available upon request).


Wibble Words & Phrases

If you insist on continuing your train wreck down the track, please  -use phrases like:

“I’m too lazy to do research”

“I’m afraid of what my peers will say if I speak out”

“But the CDC, FDA (or pick a lying organization) say”

Or, as seen below, wibble words will also suffice.


You are a professional, act like one.

research4

SEEK knowledge. Talk with other professionals.

Engage with consumers. LINKS are all over this blog.

Stop saying you “don’t know enough”.  Here’s a quick expert exercise:

Say “I don’t know enough” out loud to yourself.

Are you trying to impress or coerce. (That isn’t a question).

Think about how uneducated you sound.

Above all, stop trying to bullshit people.

Withholding differential risk information on legal consumer nicotine/tobacco products: The public health ethics of health information quarantines


Instead of trying to prove people wrong, try proving yourselves right.

Via Clive Bates:

Memo to public health grandees: vaping, vapers and you

 

If you still insist on having an agenda to keep people smoking, by all means –  continue to lie to yourselves and bullshit the public to your hearts content.


Medical, Research, Science Professionals:

Research:

Consumers Groups:


NEWS from my friends across the pond: Vapers.org.uk.

You can find me here trying to be cordial on Facebook

You can find me here being a bit more evil on Twitter

You can also find me on LinkedIn

You can follow me on this blog!


Your “Rapid Response” is NEVER filtered and are always encouraged and welcome on this blog.

More to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin

Save