A retrospective study on the health effects of vaping

[Dr. Robert Cranfield]

if you are the co owner of "smoke and mirrors" I applaud you in holding DIY classes- I wish some of the vape shops here in NS would do likewise

I'm not here to market my store. Please let's leave it at face value what I'm bringing to this forum.

 

[Dr. Robert Cranfield]

I read the study but am unable to comment a pop up said thread could not be found.

What happened? Was the article not there?

 

[Caro123]

What happened? Was the article not there?

I found the article but when I went to respond to it I was unable to and got a pop up saying " thread could not be found" I have no idea why this was so and I am not a person who has ever been on any other forum so do not know how they work exactly.

 

[Racehorse]

I love scrutiny............<snip> I'm not a research scientist, just a humble urgent care physician with 35 years in practice

Thank you for answering. I see where you are coming from better now.

It certainly helps when doctors are behind vaping. All mine are, but I hear a lot of stories on here where people feel they have to lie to their doctors. That's unfortunate, isn't it.

My experience w/most doctors is that there isn't much they haven't seen or heard after 30+ years in practice....in other words, it is hard to shock them

I view all my doctors as "partners" in my quest for good health. So I tell them everything so they can help me better.

I guess if I had one who was closed minded, they wouldn't be my partner in the first place. I've only had 3 of those in 50 years though, so I generally have a very good opinion of doctors.

Good luck w/your work on this. Can any of the people here be in the survey?

 

[Racehorse]

What happened? Was the article not there?

I was able to get to your study via the 2nd post in this topic. Opens up as a PDF just fine.

I think once you had 5 posts in, Classwife went ahead and combined the topics and your study attachment got posted in post #2 in this topic.

 

[Dr. Robert Cranfield]

I found the article but when I went to respond to it I was unable to and got a pop up saying " thread could not be found" I have no idea why this was so and I am not a person who has ever been on any other forum so do not know how they work exactly.

Gotcha. Sounds like the article doesn't link back here. As long as here links to the article I'm OK.

 

[Dr. Robert Cranfield]

Thank you for answering. I see where you are coming from better now.

It certainly helps when doctors are behind vaping. All mine are, but I hear a lot of stories on here where people feel they have to lie to their doctors. That's unfortunate, isn't it.

My experience w/most doctors is that there isn't much they haven't seen or heard after 30+ years in practice....in other words, it is hard to shock them

I view all my doctors as "partners" in my quest for good health. So I tell them everything so they can help me better.

I guess if I had one who was closed minded, they wouldn't be my partner in the first place. I've only had 3 of those in 50 years though, so I generally have a very good opinion of doctors.

Good luck w/your work on this. Can any of the people here be in the survey?

Of course you can. I'm sure, based on some of the other posts here, you can find a link to the survey. The more I get the less critical people can be. If you can't find it, let me know. I'll let you know where to find it.
And yes, your care should be a partnership.
I have had my patients tell them that vaping causes pneumonia (2 cases in 15 years of lipid pneumonia) and that it's more toxic than cigarettes (thank you NEJM). So misinformation is out there. We are also missing a huge opportunity to help many minorities who are missing this advancement. See my paper regarding minority distribution of vapers. Less than 10 percent are not Caucasian.

 

[Pinot]

I love what you are doing. And I mean this to be helpful. I used to write client satisfaction survey reports for a living.

Depending on where you see your survey results ending up long term, can I make a few suggestions?

I would love an abstract, citations in your introduction and conclusion (with a list of references) and I think you may want to put a bit more thought into describing the survey tool itself. Personally I think it would read better if you present the results for each survey item for the total respondents first and then break it down into your subgroups (vaping less than 3 years and vaping more than 3 years). Also when comparing your subgroups it would make for a better comparison if you converted the numbers into percentages and displayed them on the same graph.

I hope you find this feedback useful, it was not ment to be critical.

 

[Caro123]

I put out an electronic survey within various vaping social media web sites. I'm still fine tuning the results. But I have enough information to begin sharing. The research to date has focused too much on potential hazardsd of vaping and not at all on what has happened to people who have already been vaping for years. So I set about trying to collect information on people who have used e-cigs for long periods. So, the questions are, if e-cigs really do put out toxins, do they have any adverse health effects, if so, what are they. You can do a prospective study to look a how health changes starting from a given point in time going forward. But you can also collect similar information looking into the past. Here is a link to the results of my survey. I had about 500 patticipate in the survey, including about 120 who had used vapor products for 3 or more years. I think the results are fascinating.

Dr. Robert Cranfield, MD

I am wondering about the gender factor in your study. Much of the Vaping info and perhaps until recently (at least here in Nova Scotia ) been internet based. I could be wrong but I wonder if Internet use is higher in males than females ? Curious finding.

 

[torzonborz]

Dear Dr. Robert Cranfield please read and - if you agree with the M.O.V.E - add your support. Home « Medical Organizations supporting Vaping and Electronic cigarettes

 

[Dr. Robert Cranfield]

I love what you are doing. And I mean this to be helpful. I used to write client satisfaction survey reports for a living.

Depending on where you see your survey results ending up long term, can I make a few suggestions?

I would love an abstract, citations in your introduction and conclusion (with a list of references) and I think you may want to put a bit more thought into describing the survey tool itself. Personally I think it would read better if you present the results for each survey item for the total respondents first and then break it down into your subgroups (vaping less than 3 years and vaping more than 3 years). Also when comparing your subgroups it would make for a better comparison if you converted the numbers into percentages and displayed them on the same graph.

I hope you find this feedback useful, it was not ment to be critical.

Thank you. Those suggestions are part of my plan to finish this.

 

[Dr. Robert Cranfield]

I am wondering about the gender factor in your study. Much of the Vaping info and perhaps until recently (at least here in Nova Scotia ) been internet based. I could be wrong but I wonder if Internet use is higher in males than females ? Curious finding.

I think the gender distribution is probably accurate. More men smoke so it makes sense that more men would vape. I might have skewed the results more by doing an online survey. If it turns our that men use social media more than women, it would put that statistic more towards men.

 

[retired1]

I don't have privileges to post in the medical professionals private forum.

Open a ticket using the Contact Us link at the bottom of each page. The request will be assigned to the Forum Manager and you'll be contacted for verification.

 

[Caro123]

Dr Cranfield what surprised you the most? it is my understanding that Dr F started out a skeptic was this also true of you?

 

[Dr. Robert Cranfield]

Open a ticket using the Contact Us link at the bottom of each page. The request will be assigned to the Forum Manager and you'll be contacted for verification.

Done. Thx

 

[Dr. Robert Cranfield]

Dr Cranfield what surprised you the most? it is my understanding that Dr F started out a skeptic was this also true of you?

A good scientist starts out with questions and an open mind, not a skeptic. As a physician we hear strange home remedies all the time. It's pretty easy to conclude that many are ineffective and don't need to be studied. For example, putting a slab of bacon on a boil, or soaking a cut in kerosene. But with Vaping, the process makes sense from a physiological standpoint. The issues really are separating the effects of nicotine alone from the traditional method of delivery in burning tobacco, studying the effects of Vaping on the human body (in situ and in vivo), and climbing the psychological hurdle that creates the association of any method of nicotine delivery with tobacco.
I was completely ignorant about Vaping until about 2 1/2 years ago. As a professional, you hope to read and learn throughout your career. But the reality is that your time is severely limited by your practice. So we typically get little time to review literature. When we do, it's often just superficial review, not in depth. If you just review Vaping literature superficially, you will see the shock headlines. I guess the thing that has surprised me the most is the deep division between factions. When you hold extreme views it's very difficult, if not impossible, to moderate those views. That seems to be where we are now. It's a three faction battle between harm reducers, non-renormalizers, and big tobacco. I'm actually very surprised that big pharmaceutical companies haven't inserted themselves into the battle.

 

[Jode]

I won't post just to increase my post count. Elsewhere it is called spamming. Rules are rules, gentlemen. 5 posts will get here quickly.
I am not a smoker, not a vaper. I was introduced to vaping by a friend who had used it to quit smoking. She had gotten her 30 year old son to quit smoking simpy be telling him he couldn't smoke in the house, but he could vape. He was adamant that he was not going to quit smoking. He would just vape inside and smoke everywherre else. He ended up quitting cigarettes within a month, not intending to quit. My son was a closet smoker, but discovered e-cigs on his own and quit. I had a 70 year old neighbor, smoking since age 10. He was able to quit (cigalikes believe it or not). Another friend, my now significant other, was also a closet smoker when we met. Needless to say she is now vaping. So I started doing research. There is a lot of controversy about the health benefits, but no one that I have seen ever actually took the time to ask folks about how their health had changed when they started vaping. So, I did. The changes are incredible. We can talk about theoretical dangers based on what is in them, or how they seem to affect cells, or individual organs, or genetic markers that might make a difference, but the proof is in what happens to the person, not in theory, but in practice. My study has about 500 respondents and is growing. Currently there are over 120 people who have been using e-cigs for 3 years or more. It is clear that not only do they feel better, but there are far fewer measurable adverse health events when you stop combustible tobacco products. Measured, documented and now reported. I now am co-owner of a vape store. As with others who have started this business, I am concerned about getting people to a clearly safer and measureably healther option.

Robert Cranfield, MD

Welcome to ECF. Thanks for joining us, doing this important study, and for supporting vapers in general. I love your story and look forward to hearing more from you.

 

[Caro123]

A good scientist starts out with questions and an open mind, not a skeptic. As a physician we hear strange home remedies all the time. It's pretty easy to conclude that many are ineffective and don't need to be studied. For example, putting a slab of bacon on a boil, or soaking a cut in kerosene. But with Vaping, the process makes sense from a physiological standpoint. The issues really are separating the effects of nicotine alone from the traditional method of delivery in burning tobacco, studying the effects of Vaping on the human body (in situ and in vivo), and climbing the psychological hurdle that creates the association of any method of nicotine delivery with tobacco.
I was completely ignorant about Vaping until about 2 1/2 years ago. As a professional, you hope to read and learn throughout your career. But the reality is that your time is severely limited by your practice. So we typically get little time to review literature. When we do, it's often just superficial review, not in depth. If you just review Vaping literature superficially, you will see the shock headlines. I guess the thing that has surprised me the most is the deep division between factions. When you hold extreme views it's very difficult, if not impossible, to moderate those views. That seems to be where we are now. It's a three faction battle between harm reducers, non-renormalizers, and big tobacco. I'm actually very surprised that big pharmaceutical companies haven't inserted themselves into the battle.

Interesting thank you. I come to the table with 33 years of nursing in various area and positions and a long history of being a smoker. I also have an interest in journalism and writing (almost chose journalism over nursing ) and a long history of battling tobacco control - not the dire potential effects of tobacco etc but the drastic effects of tobacco control on populations and very specifically on my patients.
The harm of the war on tobacco IMO has created much trauma even more than smoking. I could list off numerous issues etc I am not convinced big pharma is not involved, they do have money for and against research etc and methods to lobby the hard working professional. I also cannot discount the vast taxation dollars and the pharma goodies given out ad nauseum to addiction centres.

I have hope for Vaping, and I can guarantee you if Vaping has the potential to assist this hard working old nurse to even bother to switch then it certainly has potential for less crusty smokers There is no way in Gods green earth anyone would have ever thought I would quit. I was not an apologetic or shamed tobacco user and truly didn't give it much thought except for a few years in the early seventies when my kids were little.

 

[Steamix]

... I'm actually very surprised that big pharmaceutical companies haven't inserted themselves into the battle...

Oh, they have, they're just waging it in their own way, at least in Europe they do.

EU passed the TPD (Tobacco Products Directive) and it needs to be adopted into national legislation by 2016. Tobacco took a drubbing - as usual. E-cigarettes were incorporated too. And a LOT of these fairly restrictive regs were hammered out in backrooms. Before that, pharma lobbyied hard to have them declared as pharmaceutical products. Tobacco of course had their shots at it too. The result is a patchwork quilt of rules from almost no rules to a total ban:


Electronic Cigarettes - Global Legal Status

Don't know how current the site is , but it does give you an idea

And a pharma player known for manufacturing nic patches and nic chewing gum launched a nicotine spray - similar to asthma inhaler spray - with a lot of advertising. Online, print media, prime time TV.
And is using argumets like nicotine not being carcinogenic, not staining teeth yellow etc. etc. Am I missing something here ? So theirs ''good'' nicotine. Our ''bad'' nicotine.
Glad nobody told the nicotine yet it's supposed to have an attitude...

So I guess they're feeling the pinch in their wallet

 

[Dr. Robert Cranfield]

Oh, they have, they're just waging it in their own way, at least in Europe they do.

EU passed the TPD (Tobacco Products Directive) and it needs to be adopted into national legislation by 2016. Tobacco took a drubbing - as usual. E-cigarettes were incorporated too. And a LOT of these fairly restrictive regs were hammered out in backrooms. Before that, pharma lobbyied hard to have them declared as pharmaceutical products. Tobacco of course had their shots at it too. The result is a patchwork quilt of rules from almost no rules to a total ban:


Electronic Cigarettes - Global Legal Status

Don't know how current the site is , but it does give you an idea

And a pharma player known for manufacturing nic patches and nic chewing gum launched a nicotine spray - similar to asthma inhaler spray - with a lot of advertising. Online, print media, prime time TV.
And is using argumets like nicotine not being carcinogenic, not staining teeth yellow etc. etc. Am I missing something here ? So theirs ''good'' nicotine. Our ''bad'' nicotine.
Glad nobody told the nicotine yet it's supposed to have an attitude...

So I guess they're feeling the pinch in their wallet

Nicotine isn't innocuous. But it's not the primary cause of health problems in smokers. It's also not the primary point of contention in e-liquids. It has issues in a prenatal environment, it's debatable about the carcinogenesis potential, it's relatively toxic at low doses and it's addictive. Having said all this, I'm sure most readers here know that the toxicity in cell cultures is tied to all the other ingredients in the liquid and not dependent on the nicotine concentration.