13 Dec 13: (utter filth) DailyMail Online: E-cigarette smokers (sic!) inhale...

[Anjaffm]

If you wish to know what utter filth is published in the EU (the UK, to be exact) by the tabloid Daily Mail, then take a deep breath and check this out:

This is the kind of lies, fabrications and utter filth that we are dealing with. On the eve of the final meeting of the oh-so-secret "trilogue" in which the EU Commission and the EU Council are attempting to override the vote of the EU Parliament (the elected representatives of the people) who voted to keep e-cigarettes legal in the EU.

So now we have a tabloid spreading some manure, so that the seeds of greed will grow better.

- put is together in your browser please - I will not give them more clicks

http://www.dailymail.co.uk
/health/article-2523175/E-cigarette-smokers-inhale-MORE-nicotine-toxins-regular-smokers-Study-finds-users-unknowingly-inhaling-host-dangerous-chemicals.html

The headline is BS already.

The only thing interesting about that filth are the comments. The readers are having none of that crap

And the information that this oh-so-great "study" (which is never cited) has probably not even been done yet.
It may be this one. Which has not yet been done.. duh...
Dental researchers examine hidden health impact of electronic cigarettes

By the way, .... Puddlecote will write something about it on the weekend. Can't wait to see him tear it apart
so: watch this space .... Puddlecote

 

[havanowoncheese]

I feel like I went for a ride in the washer on the spin cycle lol. Glad to see people are not wasting time in commenting on that article.

 

[AgentAnia]

I had only seen the headline about that "dental researchers" study, and was rather encouraged that finally the dental profession would do some research and weigh in on how vaping improves dental health. However, from Anja's link to the study press release (it's nothing more than that):

Deepak Saxena, associate professor of basic science and craniofacial biology, and Xin Li, assistant professor of basic science and craniofacial biology, both at the College of Dentistry, are working to close the gap between marketing and science by using oral cavity and various systems biology approaches to reveal the health impact of e-cigs....

....Since the initial interaction of nicotine from e-cigs with the human body occurs first in the oral cavity, Saxena and Li will collect saliva and oral mucosa from College of Dentistry patients who are e-cig users to determine the relative abundance of oral bacteria and changes in dna in these patients in order to compare them with the effects found among conventional cigarette smokers.

I don't see "teeth" mentioned anywhere, or "gums" either. Or anything craniofacially related. Oral bacteria? Okay. But dna changes? Huh?

As for the Daily Fail, I expect nothing better from them...

 

[rothenbj]

This is an interesting interview, The Leonard Lopate Show: Understanding E-Cigarettes - WNYC. Dr Hurt is fairly well informed, but Dr. Deepak Saxena is a total idiot.

That being said, Dr Hurt is certainly beholden to the Pharma industry.

 

[DC2]

We are clearly facing an all-out frontal assault across the globe.
And we are fighting powers far beyond our means.

But we have something they might not have expected...
A passion for never giving up and never giving in.

I hope this fight for our lives is what will eventually expose the corruption that has flourished for far too long now.
I really, really hope so.

 

[Spazmelda]

This article is beyond words. I did some searching and could not find any such study. The authors in question have only one paper listed on pubmed that shows them as coauthors, Comparison of oral microbiota in tumor - PubMed Mobile

From their work, it doesn't even seem likely that they would be studying amounts of toxins inhaled, they will be studying microorganism populations in the mouths of people who smoke versus people who vape (I certainly hope they do a non-smoker group as well). It's kind of an interesting question, but I don't think it's going to be much use in determining risks of vaping. If I were to predict the outcome of their study, I'd guess that they will find that the microbial profile of a vaper's mouth will be similar to that of a non-smoker. If its not though, what does that mean? I'm sure they will come up with something, LOL.

 

[ElectronicHookah]

"The readers are having none of that crap "
That's what I've been noticing too. I saw a couple US articles where the comments were unanimous in their support for vaping.
We do need to continue looking into conclusive studies proving the general safety of vaping in order to be well prepared to refute any of nonsense.

 

[ElectronicHookah]

"And we are fighting powers far beyond our means."
Maybe but you have the facts and even the general public on your side believe it or not.

 

[AgentAnia]

This article is beyond words. I did some searching and could not find any such study. The authors in question have only one paper listed on pubmed that shows them as coauthors, Comparison of oral microbiota in tumor - PubMed Mobile

From their work, it doesn't even seem likely that they would be studying amounts of toxins inhaled, they will be studying microorganism populations in the mouths of people who smoke versus people who vape (I certainly hope they do a non-smoker group as well). It's kind of an interesting question, but I don't think it's going to be much use in determining risks of vaping. If I were to predict the outcome of their study, I'd guess that they will find that the microbial profile of a vaper's mouth will be similar to that of a non-smoker. If its not though, what does that mean? I'm sure they will come up with something, LOL.

Since PG has antibacterial properties, I would think researchers would see a decrease in vapers' oral microbe levels as compared to smokers (and possibly even to non-smoker-non-vapers). At any rate, that's what got me excited about the "dental researchers" doing a study. Well.... If they actually do do a study, as opposed to issuing press releases and giving interviews, I'll be interested to see their results.

 

[Anjaffm]

Update:

Please launch a complaint to the PCC (Press Complaints Commission) about this article.

Here is how
(step by step)

http://mattgluggles.blogspot.co.uk/2013/12/complain-to-pcc-about-daily-mail.html

ending:

IF YOU THINK THAT THE ARTICLE WAS INACCURATE OR MISLEADING, THEN YOU CAN MAKE A COMPLAINT TO THE PCC.

Do it. Takes 5 mins. The more the better, and ask that the Mail publish a full retraction of this article.

This dangerous, innacurate and misleading article could be quoted for years to come, if a retraction is not published.

... rats.. I forgot to ask for the retraction... Please take care of this point as well.

 

[Spazmelda]

Here's another article on the same subject. It's just as bad. Twists the recent study in Nicotine and Tobacco Research.

http://www.universityherald
.com/articles/6213/20131214/ecigs-conventional-cigarettes-smokers-nicotine-toxins-new-york-university.htm

I left a few comments on this one as well as the daily mail one. Oh, funny, daily mail wouldn't let me use spazmelda as my name. Said it contained an offensive word. I signed up as Snarls on there.

 

[Vocalek]

Left this comment on the radio interview:

Mr. Lopate: If you really want to help your audience understand e-cigarettes, then stop inviting guests who don't know what they are talking about. Dr. Saxena believes that the terms light, mild, and bold indicate how many puffs you can get from a cartridge. Actually, those designations refer to the nicotine concentration in the liquid. This varies from one company to another, and could be as low as 0.3% nicotine. Most pre-filled cartridge don't contain more than 1.8% nicotine (18 mg/ml)and eCigs are also available in 0% nicotine.

How many puffs are produced from a cartridge depends on two things: The volume of liquid in the cartridge, and the proportion of propylene glycol (PG) to vegetable glycerin (VG). VG produces more vapor. A typical 0.5 ml cartridge only replaces about half a pack of smokes in terms of nicotine, but might produce 150 to 200 puffs.

Dr. Hurt talked about the study that was published in the Lancet, and left out the fact that there was a third arm of the study that used the nicotine patch. The actual quit rates were 7.3% for eCigs with nicotine, 5.8% for the patch, and 4.1% for eCigs without nicotine (placebo). So the study showed that when you use eCigs like an NRT, they are at least as effective as the patch. The differences among the 3 arms were not statistically significant.

Neither doctor showed any understanding of the purpose of flavors. Switching to a non-tobacco flavor helps to extinguish all appreciation for the taste of smoke. Most former smokers who switched to eCigs now find that real cigarettes taste nasty. Think about it. This phenomenon might reduce the relapse rates among switchers.

And we can't say that flavors attract kids, because no survey to date has asked kids what flavor they use. If they are getting their eCigarettes where real cigarettes are sold, the odds are that their flavor is either "menthol" or "tobacco".

By the way, the past participle of the verb "to vape" does not rhyme with "rapping." It is pronounced "vaping" with the same Long-a sound as in the root word "vape."

 

[Julie W]

Now I know why I stopped reading newspapers, what total & utter rubbish.
Methinks they are getting pretty desperate,& in the absence of any legitamate studies they will just make them up.

As has already been said what can you expect from the Daily Mail,it's a national joke!

The Daily Mail Song - YouTube

 

[AgentAnia]

I started a thread on another of these articles, asking for comments. None so far, so if you see it here, please add your comment! This is my hometown news doing this, and I'm furious.

http://www.wptv. com
/dpp/news/health/e-cigarettes-take-another-hit-poison-control-centers-see-spike-in-e-cig-calls

TIA for your support.

 

[Orb Skewer]

Now I know why I stopped reading newspapers, what total & utter rubbish.
Methinks they are getting pretty desperate,& in the absence of any legitamate studies they will just make them up.

As has already been said what can you expect from the Daily Mail,it's a national joke!

The 'Daily Fail' is a national joke-and it draws them attention-which is what modern 'journalism' lends itself to-sadly.


Here is their 'science editor' Dr Dimwit

 

[Julie W]

Sorry Agent Ania I tried, but no way!it requested I sign in with my 'Facebook Account' & it wanted this :

ScrippsEcho will receive the following info: your public profile, friend list, email address, relationships, birthday, hometown, religious and political views and likes.

talk about big brother!

 

[Anjaffm]

Well lookee there!
That filthy rag must have published that same kind of filth before - and had to publish a retraction

A lady who has complained before has just sent me this retraction to a former filthy-lies article:
http://i.imgur.com/IZJR2AI.jpg

 

[Spazmelda]

Well lookee there!
That filthy rag must have published that same kind of filth before - and had to publish a retraction

A lady who has complained before has just sent me this retraction to a former filthy-lies article:
http://i.imgur.com/IZJR2AI.jpg

Unfortunately by the time they publish a tiny retraction, the damage is done. Because of the number and incredulous tone of the comments, I'm hopeful that most people saw through the giant lie that this article was.

 

[Orb Skewer]

Put a link to ECF on it, or the Drexel study, or anything 'pro vaping'-use 'their space' for maximum conversion. Readers clicking links will divert them from the (insert very bad word here) thats in these articles.

 

[Uma]

I agree with Orb, blast out the study reports loud & clear. It let's the author know we know, the editor, and most of all the "audience". The smokers need to know there are safer alternatives, no matter what.

I agree with Anja too, make them retract!!