“Study finds e-cigarettes affect airways, and quickly”

[markfm]

Another, different, article from late last year: Effect of an Electronic Nicotine Delivery device (e-Cigarette) on Smoking Reduction and Cessation Medscape: Medscape Access

"...Combined sustained 50% reduction and smoking abstinence was shown in 22/40 (55%) participants, with an overall 88% fall in cigs/day. Mouth (20.6%) and throat (32.4%) irritation, and dry cough (32.4%) were common, but diminished substantially by week-24. Overall, 2 to 3 cartridges/day were used throughout the study. Participants' perception and acceptance of the product was good."

Note the next to the last sentence, referencing the fairly typical early vaper issues, diminshing a great deal over time.

From the full report: "These events were most commonly reported at the beginning of the study and appeared to wane spontaneously by study visit 5....side effects commonly recorded during smoking cessation trials with drugs for nicotine dependence were absent (i.e. depression, anxiety, insomnia, irritability, hunger, constipation were not reported)."

 

[Nicko]

It's sad that we will all throw out or discount any study that looks negative on ecig use. I've had several smokers try my e-cig and immediatly put it down and start coughing insanely.. Usually they smoke it like a cigarette (direct lung inhale).. That would probably be the reason...

We NEED to know if these are safe.. I think we all had issues in the beginning. And yes, perhaps our bodies have adapted (just like they did to cigarettes), that doesn't mean they are safe..

Direct lung inhale must be something Americans do. I've never done it, and I've never met a smoker who does it. I thought most smokers first inhaled into their mouth and then took it all down. Two seperate actions.

Why do you NEED to know that vaping is safe? What exactly is safe? It doesn't exist. How can anything at all be safe in the absolute sense of the word? Is water safe? I heard people have drowned in that stuff. The studies that exist show vaping to be vastly safer than smoking.

 

[Pav]

I'm not sure how this can be taken seriously when this kind of error exists.

First the goal is stated.

BACKGROUND:

Debate exists as to the scientific evidence for their claims that e-cigarettes have no health related ramifications. Our aim was to assess whether using an e-cigarette for five minutes has an impact on pulmonary function tests and exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) among healthy adult smokers.

Ok. So they want to see the effects on smokers (who are somehow healthy).

But then (as pointed out previously in this thread)

METHODS:
30 healthy non smokers (ages 19-56, 14 male) participated in this laboratory based experimental vs. control group study. Ab lib use of an e-cigarette for 5 minutes with the cartridge included (experimental group n=30) or removed from the device (control group n=10) was assessed.

They use non-smokers in the test. I can't find anywhere in the article that states smokers were tested. Either this is a really bad typo or a very poorly run test.

 

[Uncle Willie]

It's sad that we will all throw out or discount any study that looks negative on ecig use. I've had several smokers try my e-cig and immediatly put it down and start coughing insanely.. Usually they smoke it like a cigarette (direct lung inhale).. That would probably be the reason...

We NEED to know if these are safe.. I think we all had issues in the beginning. And yes, perhaps our bodies have adapted (just like they did to cigarettes), that doesn't mean they are safe..

It's always nice to see a voice of reason .. I never understood why the minute a negative study comes out, members jump on it immediately and try to discredit it .. should we not welcome any and all info .. ?? Is the PV for everyone .. ?? Do the experiences of many that tout the "I feel better" scenario mean studies are not needed .. ??

Let's never forget that analogs were once considered harmless ..

 

[Spazmelda]

I haven't heard back from the author yet regarding whether smokers or non smokers were tested.

 

[Spazmelda]

I can actually believe that vaping might cause some lung and airway issues. I have asthma that gets worked up with certain flavors*. So, while I'm not discrediting the study I do want to know whether they tested smokers or non smokers and I'd like to know more about how they tested, what PV they used, how the study was set up, etc...

I also think that temporary effects from beginning vaping (or use by naive users) might not tell us much about experienced users and long term lung function. I'd want to see way more than one measurement used (not sure, since I don't have the whole paper to read, but it looks like they only measured one or a few things?).

*I should also add that there are many perfumes and other fragrances that exacerbate any asthma symptoms I have. Febreeze, in particular, seems to make my airways close up.

 

[Uncle Willie]

as well, nicotine is a constrictor

 

[frosting]

I agree with most here, anything new someone inhales is going to appear to have adverse effects. A study about lung constriction would be much more worthwhile on those who have been vaping longer, at least a year. All I know is I feel so much better it has to be better than cigarettes at least!

 

[stretchpants]

Hahaaha Healthy Smoker. Haahahaa

 

[EmmaJo]

I don't really give a .... what these quacks come up with. 9 months ago I couldn't free dive deeper than 10'. Riding my bike for 5 miles was a problem. Walk up stairs and I was out of breath. 9 months of no analogs and I can free dive to 30' and stay long enough to shoot a fish. Yesterday I went for a 26 mile ride. I can run up stairs. I know it is good for me!!!!

Have to agree even though I don't dive or ride my bike5 miles. I just know that before October 14, 2011 I could not take a deep breath that I could feel to the very bottom of my lungs but I can now. I did not wake up in the mornings before October 14 without hacking on and off for the first 30 minutes to an hour of the first part of my day. Before October 14, I could not raise my voice when needed to my teenage daughter without coughing, but now I can as my voice seems much stronger! lol

It would be nice to think that these "researchers" would at least read some of the ECF posts, but I doubt that will ever happen. I guess they would doubt each and every one of us.

 

[DC2]

Reading GN Connolly among the authors (and remembering his polemic TPSAC presentation), there is not much doubt about the authors’ spin.

Exactly.

For anybody that doesn't know who this jerk is, he is one of the gang that wants to take your e-cig away.
The fact that he is involved in this explains exactly what the motivation for this study was.

Regardless, I agree with everyone else in that OF COURSE they are going to find irritation and inflamation in non-smokers.
And they probably didn't even advise them to drink lots of water either.

I don't really give a .... what these quacks come up with. 9 months ago I couldn't free dive deeper than 10'. Riding my bike for 5 miles was a problem. Walk up stairs and I was out of breath. 9 months of no analogs and I can free dive to 30' and stay long enough to shoot a fish. Yesterday I went for a 26 mile ride. I can run up stairs. I know it is good for me!!!!

When I first started vaping some 30 months ago I could barely hold my breath for 30 seconds.
Last time I tried about 16 months ago I could hold my breath for over 90 seconds without too much trouble.

After vaping for 17 months I went in for a test of my lung function.
My readings were generally around 103% of standard for an adult male of my size, weight, and age.

 

[Detroit]

i dont know all the fact about e-liquid never clamed to but one thing i know for sure is i work in a foundry (about 100-120 degrees on a everyday basis) i was having issues passing out,falling down ect.. do to not being able to breath. ive been off analogs a lil over a month now and i can run circles around my co-works and have ZERO breathing issues and i just all around feel better. so i dont care what they say i got proof it works and im the proof lol

 

[Beans]

You know I have had chronic bronchitis for at least 20 years. I could never do ANY exercising or hiking because the constant burning in my airways and lungs. Last night I walked 5 miles up hill both ways in an hour and my lungs never complained once......Riddle me this......Why can I breath so much better vaping than I could smoking? Oh and I haven't had bronchitis ONCE in just over 12 months Yep e cigs are dangerous!!!!!! Better send me your PV's

 

[telsie]

It's sad that we will all throw out or discount any study that looks negative on ecig use. I've had several smokers try my e-cig and immediatly put it down and start coughing insanely.. Usually they smoke it like a cigarette (direct lung inhale).. That would probably be the reason...

We NEED to know if these are safe.. I think we all had issues in the beginning. And yes, perhaps our bodies have adapted (just like they did to cigarettes), that doesn't mean they are safe..

It's always nice to see a voice of reason .. I never understood why the minute a negative study comes out, members jump on it immediately and try to discredit it .. should we not welcome any and all info .. ?? Is the PV for everyone .. ?? Do the experiences of many that tout the "I feel better" scenario mean studies are not needed .. ??

Let's never forget that analogs were once considered harmless ..

Negative ecig studies have a habit of being really flimsy — poor methodology, vague results, and yet they spread like wildfire across the internet. It's incredibly frustrating to those of us that know we're healthier since switching from smoking tobacco cigarettes to vaping electronic cigarettes. That doesn't mean we're all turning a blind eye to possible long term health effects (of course we want to know!), but for once, could there please be a study that has some real meaning?

Was this study done on smokers or non-smokers? How dramatic was the airway inflammation compared to, say, smelling a flower or some perfume? How long did the inflammation last after ceasing to puff on the electronic cigarette? What was the ingredient list of the liquid in the ecig used? How does the level of inflammation compare to what happens to a smoker's airway while inhaling smoke? How deeply was the vapor inhaled? Does someone who is accustomed to vapor experience airway inflammation? So many questions that seem very important for quantifying results.

 

[Vocalek]

My comment:

This study provides no useful information because the control group consisted of smokers inhaling plain air through an e-cigarette. In the real world, if smokers had a cigarette in their hand, they would be inhaling smoke. This study does not answer the question of whether lung function gets worse, stays the same, or improves for smokers who switch to e-cigarettes.

 

[markfm]

To me, the good test would involve checking while still smoking, then follow up at say 5 days, 30 days, 6 months, 1 year. Testing a totally new person by giving them an ecigarette will likely, as others noted, find irritation, as even those of us who smoked right until we switched over to vaping took time to get the hang of it.

The other study that I posted (by Riccardo Polosa; Pasquale Caponnetto; Jaymin B Morjaria; Davide Campagna; Cristina Russo) on the last page noted how subjects had a fair number of cases of irritation/coughing at the start, but how those conditions spontanously either cleared or significantly reduced by the fifth visit.

 

[KeysBum]

Exactly.

For anybody that doesn't know who this jerk is, he is one of the gang that wants to take your e-cig away.
The fact that he is involved in this explains exactly what the motivation for this study was.

Regardless, I agree with everyone else in that OF COURSE they are going to find irritation and inflamation in non-smokers.
And they probably didn't even advise them to drink lots of water either.



When I first started vaping some 30 months ago I could barely hold my breath for 30 seconds.
Last time I tried about 16 months ago I could hold my breath for over 90 seconds without too much trouble.

After vaping for 17 months I went in for a test of my lung function.
My readings were generally around 103% of standard for an adult male of my size, weight, and age.

Right on!!

 

[wfx]

It's always nice to see a voice of reason .. I never understood why the minute a negative study comes out, members jump on it immediately and try to discredit it .. should we not welcome any and all info .. ?? Is the PV for everyone .. ?? Do the experiences of many that tout the "I feel better" scenario mean studies are not needed .. ??

Let's never forget that analogs were once considered harmless ..

completely agree. maybe we are vaping the 'light/low tar cigarettes' of our generation.

but i'm very glad folks jump on these stories. it gets the studies out there for inspection and forces a multi level analysis. some of these studies are goal oriented or the methods are shoddy, but you can read past that to see if they expose a potential issue.

an immediate denial response and then dialog is a good thing. analysis is something the majority of members here do very well. i'd be really curious to know the median age of ecf members. 'burnt cartos' is the best example i can think of. just remember the 'mob' wins only by strength of numbers.

 

[Vocalek]

It's always nice to see a voice of reason .. I never understood why the minute a negative study comes out, members jump on it immediately and try to discredit it .. should we not welcome any and all info .. ?? Is the PV for everyone .. ?? Do the experiences of many that tout the "I feel better" scenario mean studies are not needed .. ??

Let's never forget that analogs were once considered harmless ..

As someone else already pointed out, it's difficult to not question a study that flies in the face of our own personal experience. If you look at the population surveys, you see that somewhere in the neighborhood of 90% of regular users are reporting that their lung function has improved. We see stories every day of folks who have COPD getting much better exam results when they go back to their lung specialists after switching.

So that leads us to the suspicion that the study may be been set up either by mistake, or on purpose, in such a way that skewed their results. What factors did the researchers not consider in their study design? Does the control group concept make sense? Theoretically, the control group should represent the real-world opposite of the study group.

In the real world, people don't choose between inhaling vapor or inhaling air. They choose between inhaling vapor or inhaling smoke.

So they found that inhaling vapor does constrict airways. That isn't necessarily a negative thing. You need to know what it means. How much does vapor constrict the airways? Does it do so to dangerous levels? The study didn't provide that information, so it failed to tell us whether there is a serious health risk for non-smokers to take up use of an e-cigarette.

And what if by switching to vapor, a smoker actually REDUCES the amount of temporary airway constriction? Or what if it INCREASES the amount of airway constriction when compared with smoking? So the study also failed to tell us whether it is harmful or beneficial to switch from smoking to e-cigarettes.

Pardon us for being paranoid, but we have just seen too many studies that seem to have been scientifically designed to give the antis something to scream bloody murder about.

As an example, I give you the studies showing that nicotine causes high blood pressure. Sounds awful, until you find out that nicotine doesn't cause chronic high blood pressure (aka hypertension, which requires treatment). When you find out that the high blood pressure increase only lasts about 20 minutes, and that other things (such as healthy exercise) also raises blood pressure for 20 minutes (a condition that does not require medical treatment), then the fact that nicotine causes high blood pressure isn't clinically relevant.

 

[Tom09]

nicotine is a constrictor

... and this property could be the starting point to explore and hopefully understand the actual findings of the recent study.

According to the abstact, primary outcome is that using an e-cigarette “was found to lead to an immediate decrease in exhaled FeNO [exhaled nitric oxide fraction]”, which is “similar to some of the effects seen with tobacco smoking”. The exhaled nitric oxide is a biomarker that is well known to be found decreased in the air exhaled by cigarette smokers (e.g. here and here).
In the human body, nitric oxide is produced with the help of nitric oxide synthase (NOS) enzymes. An important biological function of nitric oxide is that of a vasodilator. Nicotine, now, is acting against the widening of blood vessels by inhibiting the NOS enzymes, decreasing the endogenic nitric oxide level, and thus causing constriction (e.g. here).

Appers to me as if the result of Connolly group’s study could simply read: e-cigs work - as they deliver nicotine (inducing constriction and decreasing the FeNO marker). And nicotine delivery is certainly something desired by most of e-cig users. IMO, the ANTZ exploit is that the authors did not set their findings in relation to nicotine-free e-cigarettes and/or the nicotine inhaler, since nicotine consumption does decrease the FeNO marker.

That’s a scetch of my present way of thinking, further input highly appreciated.