Any randomized clinical trials showing that e-cigs help smokers quit?

[swedishfish]

Anything is going to be anecdotal at this point because there aren't a lot of actual studies.

In a very informal poll here on the board, 83% quit smoking cigarettes. True, you don't know if they went back or if they did quit. Patches are around 11%.

For about $30 for a starter kit, it's worth a shot. I think I paid about $300 for a Rx for Chandix that didn't do squat. I smoked 30 years and quit. My mom smoked 60 years and quit.

 

[swedishfish]

Swedishfish...no..it doesnt. When 2 methods havnt been compared head to head in a randomized clinical trial you really cant say what beats what...or what causes more adverse events. Thats not to say that if someone did a good e-cig v patch or inhaler clinical trial that e-cig wouldnt win....it might. Its just that there hasnt been a single randomized trial showing that e-cigs are better than anything, whereas for patch etc there have been dozens showing its better than placebo.

I guess the answer to your original question is no then.

 

[keyzygirl]

Most of us have tried numerous quit methods and nothing worked until we found ecigs.

 

[swedishfish]

Most of us have tried numerous quit methods and nothing worked until we found ecigs.

You got that right!

 

[Bethzilla]

What would constitute a placebo for the e-cig? Water vapor? Even a 0 nicotine PV-VG vapor mimics the motions and throat hit of smoking, so that wouldn't do.

 

[jfjardine02]

Frosting....no Im not a cold turkey quitter....far from it. I agree that there is a large amount of great information on here about e-cigs. I also believe e-cigs have great potential. But I am kind of surprised at the way people on this forum are willing to criticize the results from loads of thoroughly conducted randomized clinical trials on other methods, as if they dont realize that there is virtually nothing...and I mean virtually nothing based on solid research methods that would get published in a medical journal or convince FDA, on the safety and efficacy of e-cigs. I also get a clear message from this forum that e-cigs are not all created equal. Im concerned that while some may be high quality and potentially highly effective in helping smokers quit, others (perhaps the majority purchased) may be low quality and ineffective. Finally, I am concerned that if some solid research doesnt get done quickly, when FDA gets round to exerting jurisdiction over e-cigs as tobacco products (as instructed by the courts), these smaller buisnesses that are supplying them may not be able to handle the data and regulatory requirements and will go under.

 

[swedishfish]

We all understand that. I was aware of that when I started vaping. I weighed the unknowns vs the known facts about smoking. I knew that it was impossible for me to quit, impossible for my mother with COPD to quit. I knew that smoking cigarettes was literally killing my mother and I'd probably share the same fate. I made the decision to vape and I'm very comfortable with that decision. We're all over 18 and we need to make that decision for ourselves.

 

[Bethzilla]

I also get a clear message from this forum that e-cigs are not all created equal. Im concerned that while some may be high quality and potentially highly effective in helping smokers quit, others (perhaps the majority purchased) may be low quality and ineffective. Finally, I am concerned that if some solid research doesnt get done quickly, when FDA gets round to exerting jurisdiction over e-cigs as tobacco products (as instructed by the courts), these smaller buisnesses that are supplying them may not be able to handle the data and regulatory requirements and will go under.

I assume some of them will indeed go out of business, and in some cases that might be as well.

 

[jfjardine02]

Actually that would do just fine. For examples, in placebo-controlled trials of nicotine inhalers or nasal sprays they put stuff in to mimic the sensory effects, just without the active ingredient.

 

[rustybikes]

I'm not convinced that a (double) blind trial for the effectiveness is practical, or even possible. For Nicotine, a smoker or vaper is going to know whether they're getting their dose. That little bit of knowlege can invalidate the study - the participants are absolutely not supposed to know whether they've got the placebo or not.

The costs and logistics involved in setting up such a study are pretty daunting to begin with. The reality is that, even if the study can be funded, it probably won't produce the solid results that we'd all like to see.

 

[jfjardine02]

Swedishfish...I understand the point about all being over 18 and needing to make our own decisions...and I hope your decision works out for you. My point is that in matters relating to health, many people seek the opinion of their doctor, or look for a stamp of approval from FDA on a treatment etc, rather than just trying any old thing because a bunch of people said it works on the internet (not saying thats how you chose, but you know what I mean). Now many doctors may think that ecigs seem like a neat idea, and many organizations that advise people about health and smoking may hope that they work, but they cant go advising the public to use them based on zero randomized controlled trials and hardly any information (on a per product basis) on exactly whats in them, whats inhaled and what the medium term effects are. Usually when that kind of research gets done we find out that some products arnt quite as good as people said. Thats one of the reasons we need better research on these products.

 

[swedishfish]

This is one of those circular arguments that goes nowhere. If you feel in any way that the unknown factors regarding pvs bother you, you shouldn't do it. Do whatever you can to quit smoking and don't look back. Buy Alan Carrs book, try the pills, patches, visit a witch doctor. Then you won't be smoking and you know how healthy that is.

For those of us (I think I read the average age is 50) that tried that route, have health issues or potential health issues, most have decided vaping is a healthier option for us than smoking.

Sure we can hope and dream for better research, more studies and say the same thing over and over until we're blue in the face. Most of us just want to not smoke and we've discovered a way to do that.

 

[jfjardine02]

Rustybikes...no clinical trial is perfect, and there can be imperfect blinding for all nicotine delivery products. Generally speaking people who do well in a drug trial suspect they are taking the "real" drug and and people who dont, suspect they got the placebo. Generally speaking, from the perspective of the trial design and the psychology of the participant, just knowing that there is a chance they got either the "real" product or the placebo creates enough doubt/uncertainty to make it a better way to assess these types of interventions. Also if we consider the early studies of nicotine delivery from e-cigs (Eissenberg, or Bullen) the participants probably believed they were inhaling high nicotine when the blood levels showed they were getting almost nothing. Remember that in a placebo-controlled e-cig trial none of the participants will have used e-cigs before....so again its not so easy for them to guess what they got (same goes for other NRT trials). But if the trial recruited a bunch of heavy smokers who wanted to quit, gave them all a decent e-cig but half got 18mg juice and half got zero nic(double blind) I think that would be a decent test.

 

[frosting]

But I am kind of surprised at the way people on this forum are willing to criticize the results from loads of thoroughly conducted randomized clinical trials on other methods, as if they dont realize that there is virtually nothing...and I mean virtually nothing based on solid research methods that would get published in a medical journal or convince FDA, on the safety and efficacy of e-cigs.

My point is that in matters relating to health, many people or look for a stamp of approval from FDA on a treatment etc

After getting into electronic cigarettes myself... and educating myself on how the FDA would prefer to handle things pertaining to electronic cigarettes, (not that I did before) I do not trust the FDA whatsoever.I'm simply convinced the FDA does not give a rat's behind about you or I.

Loads on other studies? Patches? Gum? If that's what you are referring to that success rate is something like... 3%? I may be wrong, but I do remember it being in the single digits.

People realize loads of clinical studies have not been done yet, they also keep in mind the industry doesn't have the money it takes yet to do those studies. To be regulated by the FDA it takes millions, possibly over a billion dollars to get some things recognized to have health benefits. I hate to make this political but the reality seems to point in that direction. Seriously. Chantix. Like... How in the HELL did that get approved???!! Pfizer and FDA sittin in a tree K-I-S-S-I-N-G...

Our system is so screwed up I have to just try to laugh at it its in such a sad state.

 

[Bethzilla]

Sorry, I'm not seeing the utility of a 0 mg/mL vs 18 mg/mL ecig study. That's treating the ecig as an simple NRT, and it is much more than that: it replicates the smoking experience.

Now a comparison with NRT inhalers might be illuminating, especially if the study includes nicotine and no-nicotine versions of each type of device.

I also think part of the genius of the Italian study was recruiting smokers who didn't particularly want to quit. That's the hardest group of smokers to reach, and the one with the most to gain from a smoking alternative.

 

[Bethzilla]

Swedishfish...I understand the point about all being over 18 and needing to make our own decisions...and I hope your decision works out for you. My point is that in matters relating to health, many people seek the opinion of their doctor, or look for a stamp of approval from FDA on a treatment etc, rather than just trying any old thing because a bunch of people said it works on the internet (not saying thats how you chose, but you know what I mean). Now many doctors may think that ecigs seem like a neat idea, and many organizations that advise people about health and smoking may hope that they work, but they cant go advising the public to use them based on zero randomized controlled trials and hardly any information (on a per product basis) on exactly whats in them, whats inhaled and what the medium term effects are. Usually when that kind of research gets done we find out that some products arnt quite as good as people said. Thats one of the reasons we need better research on these products.

It may be that we users will have to pay for those studies ourselves . . . I don't see anybody else doing it.

 

[classwife]

Merged duplicate threads by same OP

 

[Sugar_and_Spice]

You could read this

Researchers Investigate (Horrors!) Nicotine's Potential Benefits - New York Times

 

[jfjardine02]

Yes...thats why I posted this way earlier in the thread...sorry...hadnt figured out how to find stuff at that point...
"Apologies but there is another thread on this very topic...I just couldnt find it so thought it wasnt posted....probably best to reply on that one rather then have multiple threads on same question....my bad. "

 

[dormouse]

Zero nicotine has no cigarette-like throat hit. Most find throat hit to be a necessary feature for replacing cigarettes with e-cigarettes.