Anyone seen this one yet ? More anti stuff.

[vaporsizer]

E-Cigarettes Expose People to More than

I havn't read it all yet, tired head after work & i'll look later.

 

[Chegs]

Saw the picture of Stan ton Glantz and read no further as he is a grade one dickhead with about as much knowledge of vaping as my fecking dog

Sent from my SM-T210 using Planet of the Vapes mobile app

 

[cheersm8]

I'll only start paying attention to information like this, from both anti vaping and pro vaping perspectives, when the words 'lower' and 'higher' are replaced with factual statistics in the form of numerals.

Less ambiguity and more substantiation is required, across the board. After all, wtf is lower,higher and some?
C'mon boffins! FFS give us mere mortals some credit. We are all perfectly capable of understanding what X amount per measured volume means.

 

[anthonyb]

I'm sure this relates to this hog wash
The Rest of the Story: Tobacco News Analysis and Commentary: Glantz Review Article is Little More than an Unscientific Hatchet Job on E-Cigarettes

Posted up by Clive Bates on twitter yesterday. (That's the first time I saw it.)

Note how Glantz uses differing time scales to make the piece sound plausible.

In one indication of the swiftness by which the devices have been embraced, in the U.S. youth “ever use” of the devices rose from 3.3 percent in 2011 to 6.8 percent the following year in Korea, youth “ever use” of e-cigarettes rose from .5 percent in 2008 to 9.4 percent in 2011. “Ever use” means whether one has smoked the product even just once.

 

[Diche]

If you read the journal article on which the report is based there are a lot more definitive details. The sections dealing with dual fuelling and how the potential benefits are balanced against the potential negatives is particularly interesting. In essence they are saying that although dual fuelling produces a far lower risk than conventional cigarette use alone this benefit is out weighed by the consideration that without the use of e-cigarettes the user might have quit smoking altogether.

The journal article also highlights issues with quality control of the products, something which I have observed is of passionate interest to most of the users of this forum. We all want high quality well produced product made with reliable ingredients. Some of the trials which the article used were using products that were none of these things. The article therefore recommends regulation to ensure quality, where as I think market forces will have the same effect over time without the cost burden that regulation would introduce.

With regards to the quantified levels of chemicals in e-cigarette vapour vs cigarette smoke this table might be of interest

E-Cigarettes

 

[anthonyb]

With regards to the quantified levels of chemicals in e-cigarette vapour vs cigarette smoke this table might be of interest

Dr. Farsalinos (a proper e-cig expert) Formaldehyde release in ecigarette vapor The New York Times story explained in detail

 

[Diche]

Dr. Farsalinos (a proper e-cig expert) Formaldehyde release in ecigarette vapor The New York Times story explained in detail

Thank you, that was helpful. It was interesting to see that the two studies broadly agreed on the difference between the levels of formaldehyde in the vapour as opposed to cigarette smoke, and also the complete absence of some other toxic chemicals. Obviously the two reports came to radically different conclusions based on the same data, and your report was clearly written by an author with a more detailed understanding of e-cig use, particularly the use of refillable bottom coil atomisers.

Obviously you can use statistics to manipulate data to back any point of view. However it is nice to see that the data is broadly consistent regardless of the bias of the author. I always like to see the raw data so that I can come to my own informed conclusions rather than be swayed by bias and hype.

This forum has been extremely helpful in this regard, and my conclusion (based on the reports I have read here both positive and negative and the research I have done elsewhere) is that vaping is hugely safer than smoking cigarettes. Dual fuelling is also safer but should ideally be regarded as a stepping stone to a tobacco free existence rather than a permanent state of being. Being a non-smoker and non-vaper is the safest route of all (but we all already knew that).

That said I am off to continue my research into some really tasty fruit based juices that will help me complete the switch to vaping and make my current pouch of baccy my last

 

[Greasemonkey]

The test on formaldehyde at different voltages reads like testing for standardisation.