Is this a real study...?
I didn't find it in the journals, of course one of them requires a paid subscription. None of the articles I have read yet actually have the study or links to it or even a link to the journal itself.
Of course, the "story" has been picked up by LOTS AND LOTS of re-publishers who 'edit'.
So, only going on the 'articles' or 'stories' I have read... the study doesn't make sense anyway... doesn't say ANYONE was trying to quit, only involved people who used cigs and e-cigs... only involved e-cigs not APVs... seemed to eliminate anyone who did end up quitting cigs... and is obviously biased and intentionally misleading when they say things along the lines of e-cig use raised over time... well yeah, that's what we want right, more e-cig use and less cig use, but it SEEMED to get treated like a BAD thing... I have the same feeling when they bring up the kneck cancers etc... FEELS like they want me to assume it's related somehow... although the people are ALREADY cancer patients.
I guess, what I can take from this though is that someone who even AFTER they have been diagnosed with cancer, continue to smoke... there may not be much help for them. Depending on their goal, it may not even be something I would call 'help' anyway. I'm just not sure, I would need more details like were their treatments only intended to extend their life short term or what?!
I agree, it's also an old study for such a rapidly changing industry as vaping. I really wish there was a better way to separate e-cigs from vaping... but it seems the two will forever be intertwined like "beer & wine", etc.
I didn't find it in the journals, of course one of them requires a paid subscription. None of the articles I have read yet actually have the study or links to it or even a link to the journal itself.
Of course, the "story" has been picked up by LOTS AND LOTS of re-publishers who 'edit'.
So, only going on the 'articles' or 'stories' I have read... the study doesn't make sense anyway... doesn't say ANYONE was trying to quit, only involved people who used cigs and e-cigs... only involved e-cigs not APVs... seemed to eliminate anyone who did end up quitting cigs... and is obviously biased and intentionally misleading when they say things along the lines of e-cig use raised over time... well yeah, that's what we want right, more e-cig use and less cig use, but it SEEMED to get treated like a BAD thing... I have the same feeling when they bring up the kneck cancers etc... FEELS like they want me to assume it's related somehow... although the people are ALREADY cancer patients.
I guess, what I can take from this though is that someone who even AFTER they have been diagnosed with cancer, continue to smoke... there may not be much help for them. Depending on their goal, it may not even be something I would call 'help' anyway. I'm just not sure, I would need more details like were their treatments only intended to extend their life short term or what?!
I agree, it's also an old study for such a rapidly changing industry as vaping. I really wish there was a better way to separate e-cigs from vaping... but it seems the two will forever be intertwined like "beer & wine", etc.
)
and I guess a whole slew of articles to go comment on... 
