Delayed study confirms low-risk claims

[salemgold]

Vapers probably won’t be surprised that positive findings have been played down. What does raise eyebrows is that this research was carried out in early 2011 – but has only been released now. Such strong findings by respected US institutions could have had a major influence on lawmakers in the United States, potentially stemming the flood of draconian anti-vaping legislation.

Delayed study confirms low-risk claims, while resistance from vapers gains strength

 

[zoiDman]

From the link that VictorC posted today in this thread ...

Study: Smokers Who Switch to E-Cigarettes Exposed to Same Levels of Nicotine, Lower Carcinogen Level



Study: Smokers Who Switch to E-Cigarettes Exposed to Same Levels of Nicotine, Lower Carcinogen Levels

 

[salemgold]

Bernie Sanders Just Blocked Obama’s Nominee to Head FDA over Ties to Big Pharma -

 

[salemgold]

The Latest In The Never-Ending Assaults On Our Freedoms. One Of These Is Lethal

 

[Kent C]

The Latest In The Never-Ending Assaults On Our Freedoms. One Of These Is Lethal

The Latest In The Never-Ending Assaults On Our Freedoms. One Of These Is Lethal

 

[Racehorse]

Vapers probably won’t be surprised that positive findings have been played down. What does raise eyebrows is that this research was carried out in early 2011 – but has only been released now. Such strong findings by respected US institutions could have had a major influence on lawmakers in the United States, potentially stemming the flood of draconian anti-vaping legislation.

Delayed study confirms low-risk claims, while resistance from vapers gains strength

This is the same researcher who warned about benzaldehyde in 75% of the e-liquids they analyzed. It appears that there may be added concern for "cherry flavoring" as opposed to others. I think the flavoring thing is going to be well studied soon, sort of along the lines Dr. Farsalinos was on when he was talking about some of the chemicals in the flavorings being "inhalation risks."

Benzaldehyde: Another molecule in the flavors war?

I would trust this guy though, he doesn't seem to have an agenda either way. Some things he finds are good and others not so good..........he did another one funded by NIH that found Chantix to be better than buproprion and patch, but buproprion and patch better than nothing at all........

 

[Racehorse]

Study: Smokers Who Switch to E-Cigarettes Exposed to Same Levels of Nicotine, Lower Carcinogen Level



Study: Smokers Who Switch to E-Cigarettes Exposed to Same Levels of Nicotine, Lower Carcinogen Levels

Interestingly enough, this study was partially funded by U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH).

I thought they were portrayed as 'the bad guys' due to some of the other studies they have funded about ecigs?

 

[Racehorse]

delete and repost below

 

[Racehorse]

this research was carried out in early 2011
Delayed study confirms low-risk claims, while resistance from vapers gains strength

Since the vaping site doesn't link to the actual study itself, but does say "A Vaping Post reporter has emailed Prof Goniewicz to ask why this potentially life-saving research was kept quiet for so long...."

I would also like to follow up on the reason, but since no link is given to the actual study, it is hard to pinpoint and know who to follow up with.

Can anyone find the study itself? (this is what drives me nutz about vaping sites, as opposed to the actual pubmed or scientific sites.........the lack of links to the study, and then conjeccture about why it wasn't released really isnt' acceptable to me unless I know why......because it is just one of those paranoia things that I can't validate....)

There are many reasons, as you know, for studies not to be published. Most of the time it's not because of conspiracy theories. not saying that is what did or didn't happen here, but I really like good information, not conjecture.

 

[Racehorse]

"Such strong findings by respected US institutions could have had a major influence on lawmakers in the United States

I believe the vaping magazine/site that said this may not be aware that this study may have been done when the researcher was working at Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland.

Again, as someone who seeks truth, not just propaganda (even if the propaganda is pro-vaping, it is still not correct or complete information sometimes) I like to know exactly how and where studies are done, by whom and where they can be found before I claim that finding were done by US institutions when maybe they weren't?

The venue itself may be why it wasn't published in the US? Who knows.

Some journalists tend to embellish. Or perhaps the journalist saw the actual study, but if so should have LINKED TO IT.


Of note this same researcher is pro-regulation:
http://www.pubfacts.com/detail/2629...dren-and-young-people-the-need-for-regulation

and also that ecigs a possible 3rd hand exposure to nicotine:
http://www.pubfacts.com/detail/2517...re-a-source-of-thirdhand-exposure-to-nicotine


(why don't the vape sites practice due dilligence......one day this researcher is a HERO.........a week from now, because of some other study he does/did, he will be an ENEMY.)
Sorry guys, but this stuff drives me nuts. REally.

Every time somebody posts a study, or an article from some vaping site, I perform surgery on it........I look up everything about the researchers that I can.....

I wouldn't publish something just because I read it and it "seemed" favorable to vaping...., because to leave out all the other work the SAME TEAMS did that was NOT favorable to vaping seems somewhat intellectually dishonest, or, at the very least....intellectually lazy .

So, that said, I have just as many questions for the journalist of that article as I do for the researcher.

 

[Rossum]

This is the same researcher who warned about benzaldehyde in 75% of the e-liquids they analyzed. It appears that there may be added concern for "cherry flavoring" as opposed to others. I think the flavoring thing is going to be well studied soon, sort of along the lines Dr. Farsalinos was on when he was talking about some of the chemicals in the flavorings being "inhalation risks."

Benzaldehyde: Another molecule in the flavors war?

Color me confused here. The article doesn't even allude to any kind of health risk associated with this molecule, particularly not at the levels detected, which were 3 orders of magnitude less than another, occupational exposure study? OK, vaping cherry flavors gives you greater exposure to benzaldehyde than smoking does. So what?

 

[Kent C]

Color me confused here. The article doesn't even allude to any kind of health risk associated with this molecule, particularly not at the levels detected, which were 3 orders of magnitude less than another, occupational exposure study? OK, vaping cherry flavors gives you greater exposure to benzaldehyde than smoking does. So what?

Just another 'doubt raising' item, like diacetyl that will likely be used for more regulation.

Wiki:
Benzaldehyde - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Benzaldehyde has been classified as a hazardous substance by the United States Environmental Protection Agency. [another 'no threshold' ruse no doubt]

Benzaldehyde is used as a flavoring and fragrance in food, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, and soap and is "generally regarded as safe" (GRAS) by the US FDA. This status was reaffirmed after a review in 2005. It is accepted in the European Union as a flavoring agent. Toxicology studies indicate that it is safe and non-carcinogenic in the concentrations used for foods and cosmetics. It may have carcinostatic (anti-cancer) properties.

Benzaldehyde does not accumulate in any specific tissues. It is metabolized and then excreted in urine.

Like nicotine, it may be beneficial...

 

[Rossum]

Just another 'doubt raising' item, like diacetyl that will likely be used for more regulation.

Wiki:
Benzaldehyde - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Benzaldehyde has been classified as a hazardous substance by the United States Environmental Protection Agency. [another 'no threshold' ruse no doubt]

Benzaldehyde is used as a flavoring and fragrance in food, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, and soap and is "generally regarded as safe" (GRAS) by the US FDA. This status was reaffirmed after a review in 2005. It is accepted in the European Union as a flavoring agent. Toxicology studies indicate that it is safe and non-carcinogenic in the concentrations used for foods and cosmetics. It may have carcinostatic (anti-cancer) properties.

Benzaldehyde does not accumulate in any specific tissues. It is metabolized and then excreted in urine.

Like nicotine, it may be beneficial...

Right. In railroad tanker-car quantities, it's probably correctly classified as hazardous.

 

[Racehorse]

okay, you guys are okay with vaping sites and mags not including actual studies and journalists just drawing their own conclusions.

As for flavorings that may pose inhalation risks, there are a LOT of vapers who are interested in reducing their harm vaping for same reasons they switched from smoking to vaping ----- just because it's not an issue for you doesn't mean anything.

And like I said, one day a group of researchers will be diefied because they say something good and then the next study they don't and they are crucified, because nobody is even matching up the names with the studies. And despite that NIH also funds studies that are complimentary to vaping, (as I showed) we won't bring that up too often either.

Yes, it's easier to just take everything, including "tossed off remarks by vaping journalists" you read and just use it if it supports our bias.

The journalist suggested some kind of conspiracy theory and also said that studies by major US insititutions need to be brought to light, despite the probability that the study was conducted in poland, etc..........but let's just go with that because the journalist didn't perform due dilligence before he wrote all that.......and didn't even link to the study itself!


(BTW, I have no idea why you (Kent) are quoting wikipedia (which is a general definition of Benzaldehyde and mostly with regard to use in food and cosmetics) instead of the actual study done by the researcher who was studying Benzaldehyde with DIRECT regard to it's use in eliquid...effects of inhalation, not application or injestion as with cosmetics/food.)

 

[Racehorse]

Like nicotine, it may be beneficial...

When INHALED?

Show me the work on that.

 

[squee]

Is this what they're referencing? Levels of selected carcinogens and toxicants in vapour from electronic cigarettes -- Goniewicz et al. -- Tobacco Control

 

[Kent C]

When INHALED?

Show me the work on that.

The EPA doesn't have any studies (from the wiki link) on inhalation. I was commenting on Rossum's comment:
"The article doesn't even allude to any kind of health risk associated with this molecule..."

All it says is that there was X% higher with this flavor than others and that it was 1000 times less than occupational exposure study that only rated the 'exposure' not anything to do with toxicity. Like Rossum said: so what?!

One could say that an all VG eliquid had 75% more VG than other eliquids and that the exposure via inhalation is 1000 times less than the inhalation exposure of DOW chemical workers. Uh... Ok... and that the DOW studies on inhalation have shown no harmful effects (which is true for both VG and PG).

IOW, nothing was stated other than the amounts for this chemical. But all the 'mays' and 'coulds' used, it is a propaganda piece, insinuating harm where none was shown.

 

[Kent C]

Don't know if Goniewicz is attempting to make a move toward THR but his past studies have been more toward the TC faction. A search for him on Siegel's site shows what I mean:

The Rest of the Story: Tobacco News Analysis and Commentary: Search results for Goniewicz

Phillips' site:
Smoking trends don’t show whether ecigs are “working”. Ever. So quit it!

Goniewicz | Search Results | Anti-THR Lies and related topics

Likely more of the same from Godshall, Rodu, Dick P's sites

Tobacco Truth: Search results for Goniewicz

https://vapers.org.uk/?s=Goniewicz&submit=Go

 

[Racehorse]

Is this what they're referencing? Levels of selected carcinogens and toxicants in vapour from electronic cigarettes -- Goniewicz et al. -- Tobacco Control

Squee I don't KNOW what study the authors of the original article mentioned by the OP are referring to.

THAT was my problem with their commentary in the first place.

I don't just take people's words for things, i.e. the study was delayed due to some kind of conspiracy theory......unless I can see the study, and trace why, but the author didn't link to in the vaping article he wrote.

See, I'm fair minded. We rip studies apart if we don't like them, but seems many aren't willing to do the same thing with studies that are complimentary to us.

To me, that is just something I don't engage in.

'nough said. Won't be hashing out my standards again, as I feel I've made them clear.

 

[Racehorse]

Don't know if Goniewicz is attempting to make a move toward THR but his past studies have been more toward the TC faction. A search for him on Siegel's site shows what I mean

Yeah, I think I already said as much, he seems to have studies to support both sides.

Maybe he just goes wherever the grant $$ can be found.