What I think is that this begins or continues a misinformation campaign by someone in Thailand's government who doesn't want the competition of e-cigarettes, probably for tax reasons.
didnt originally think of this. it is a possibility.
I do think the last sentence in the report is odd and led me to big pharm theory:
It is better to just stop smoking or do not smoke an electronic cigarette if you are using nicotine gum. They will not help much. Instead it will cause lung, liver and mouth cancers," she said.
a couple of sentences up the gum is also given preference.
She said nicotine released by the electronic cigarette is absorbed into blood vessels faster than regular cigarettes and will stay in the body longer than nicotine chewing gum
The thai government actively seeks to curb smoking by also enforcing various anti-smoking laws as
this article reports.
and listen to this....
As early as 2004, concerned at the amount of monks smoking, their packs also started to contain an edict admonishing the public not to give Buddhist monks a smoke.
The new label, proposed by the head of Thailand's National Buddhism Office, read: "Donating cigarettes to monks is a sin.
it is clear that thailand hates tobacco products, but why is a
dentist faculty castigating the use of e-cigarettes, a practical and pleasing means to quit the weed while also praising the virtues of gum? well researching this issue, i stumbled apon this qoute from an
article relating to the use of gum in asia.
Another beneficiary of the deal was pharmaceutical giant Pfizer, which makes Nicorette, a nicotine gum meant to help smokers kick the habit. Both gums can only be sold by a dentist or a pharmacist
the article refers to practice in singapore, but from a quick search, im fairly certain it is also the case in thailand...so could the hokey study be simply the case of the dental assoc not wanting to loose revenue? and was their "conclusion" supported by the gum manacturers?
this colombo is still emming and ahhhing.