E-cigarettes make quitting smoking HARDER, study claims

[Matheist]

Online Daily Fail up to it's scaremongery again:

E-cigarettes make quitting smoking HARDER, study claims | Daily Mail Online

Professor Peter Hajek: "Smokers who found e-cigarettes effective and stopped smoking were excluded and only smokers who did not find e-cigarettes helpful were followed-up."

wtf sort of study is this? So what they found was that smokers who didn't find vaping effective were less likely to reduce their cigarette consumption - What a shocker that is!

 

[sponge]

Fucking planks.

 

[oldhippydude]

QM professor calls for rethink on e-cigarette regulation
This man seems suportive of vaping.
No idea what the mail is on about I refuse to take their click bate but will be interested in the study.
I bet they are taking some part of a paper out of context.

 

[scrumpox]

Hold up ... for once I'm happy with that Fail article ... the research "study" was completely debunked by Bauld and Hajek. Would've been better if the headline was "University of California produces yet another shit survey" ...

 

[gregorycartoon]

Again with the Mail Online! It's all bollocks, every single 'fact' or statement they make is pure drivel.

 

[MrDJ]

total crap but sadly the planks out there read it and think it must be true.

all i know is for 35 years i was a smoker. started off on capstan full strength and then jps and bennys for the rest of it and 7 weeks ago today i got a blu pro kit with e liquid and havnt touched a stinkie since.
ive still go 80 laying around the house and no interest in going back on them.

the press dont give a toss what they write about as long as they sell papers.

 

[seanvapes]

what a load of bollocks.

 

[orcad-ian]

Hold up ... for once I'm happy with that Fail article ... the research "study" was completely debunked by Bauld and Hajek. Would've been better if the headline was "University of California produces yet another shit survey" ...

And therein lies the problem. The Fail can claim that the article showed balance by quoting the debunking by proper scientists, but that information was right at the bottom and couched in terms that, because they require careful reading, won't make it past the information filters fitted to Mail readers' brains. The main body of the text, and of course the headline, will convince many that the "researchers" have proved their case.

Given that these "researchers" are attached to a proper university, and (one would hope) know how statistical analysis of studies works, you can't help but wonder whether they were determined to find against vaping before they started...

 

[knome]

Well, I've read the article and I don't understand 59% of it 49% of the time. It's gobbledegook - or shite.

 

[cheersm8]

I love Facts!
For example - After 1 year, 19.5% of those surveyed, that used a combination of NRT patches and NRT inhalers (nicorettes) had quit and that only 14% of those that used an NRT inhaler had quit. You could, of course, use those same percentages to make them sound even more scare mongery (which, of course, you have to if you work for the Daily Mail ) and say that they had an 80.5% and an 86% failure rate.
I should be used to it by now but it still never ceases to amaze me that people genuinely get paid to write things like "study finds 100% of dead people never visit the dentist"

What gets me the most though, is that vaping has never been promoted as a form of NRT to help folks quit smoking, it's only ever been promoted as a (possibly?) safer alternative to smoking tobacco, (which, of course, is the tobacco industries biggest gripe with vaping, they don't mind if you quit smoking, but they damned well are not going to stand for you finding an alternative to the cigarettes!) so, if vaping fails as a form of nrt, so what? These researchers might just as well do surveys to find out how successful tap water is as a method of NRT.