Dr. Mintz' Blog

[LaceyUnderall]

So, I am having an odd conversation with Dr. Mintz on his blog after a recent post regarding the electronic cigarette.

I just thought I would share it... Be warned... it has taken some odd turns.

Dr. Mintz' Blog: Electronic Cigarettes

 

[B&BsMom]

Wow Lacey that conversation did have some very interesting twists and turns. This probably isn’t the right place to ask and if it’s not forgive I’m new but you seem to be quite knowledge on the research side. Has any University shown an interest in studying this new ‘habit’? I only ask because they seem to like to study every new trend.

 

[LaceyUnderall]

Wow Lacey that conversation did have some very interesting twists and turns. This probably isn’t the right place to ask and if it’s not forgive I’m new but you seem to be quite knowledge on the research side. Has any University shown an interest in studying this new ‘habit’? I only ask because they seem to like to study every new trend.

So far the big one is the University of Alberta. Tobaccoharmreduction.org. They aren't focused as much on the study of the ecig, but on it's tobacco harm reduction philosophies. I am going to see if Dr. Mintz returns a response regarding what he would like to see from a 12 week study and see what my contact at THR says. Being a university, there has to be a grad student somewhere who needs a doctorate topic!

Oh and PS: Welcome to the Forum!

 

[surbitonPete]

I have just read through that blog lacey......the guy is very deeply entrenched in his beliefs and may not have the ability to think outside of all his parrot like statements about FDA approved smoking cessation methods and quit smoking plans and such like. It's a bit like talking to a machine that has been programmed with only one line of logic.

 

[LaceyUnderall]

I have just read through that blog lacey......the guy is very deeply entrenched in his beliefs and may not have the ability to think outside of all his parrot like statements about FDA approved smoking cessation methods and quit smoking plans and such like. It's a bit like talking to a machine that has been programmed with only one line of logic.

yeah... i know. The last paragraph of his blog really does state where he is coming from. He lists every pharmaceutical on the market for smoking cessation. I know his intentions. BUT - if he can give me a hint on what he would like to see, I am all for it. I have no desire to spend money on tests that people are going to say "well, you should have done it this way". They are bloody expensive!

Plus, he quoted my site in his blog and I had to respond. Links are great but I do like to squash misconceptions about what I have said whenever I can. I think I am a pretty clear writer so when someone wants to put me out there in front and misquote what I have said, I have to rebut... no matter how in their box they may be.

 

[Closet Toker]

You are doing awesome!
He uses his "professional knowledge" as tool to twist simple logic.
I need to go back to tobacco to protect myself from ecigs?
What kind of logic is that?

 

[pwholmes]

Excellant, Stacey! I think you and Anonymous actually made a dent in Dr. Mintz's thinking. It sounded like he's a decent doctor with a knee-jerk reaction to anything that has the label "smoking" associated with it. I have a feeling he may be doing a little re-thinking of his position. Let's hope so.

Paul

Edit: Whoops, now I'm calling you Stacey, Lacey, sorry about that!

 

[surbitonPete]

Well if anyone has a chance of getting through his Endless loop programming then it's you lacey...... I too am curious about what exactly are the tests that would make 'all' the people like him accept the results as being 'official'.......I bet there wouldn't be any shortage of volunteers.

 

[B&BsMom]

I bet there wouldn't be any shortage of volunteers.

Waving hand wildly in the air....Sorry couldn’t help myself. I am very curious as to what type of testing he wants to see. I found it interesting that he was talking about only a 12 week study, everything else I had been reading was suggesting years of study. I agree with you Lacey there must be someone looking for a topic for their doctorate. How would we go about getting this out there to the Universities though? Could prove an interesting topic for someone’s thesis, and the idea of being one of the first to study it must have some draw to those still wrapped up in the idealism of becoming a doctor as opposed to those already drug pushing for big pharmaceutical companies.

 

[surbitonPete]

Waving hand wildly in the air....Sorry couldn’t help myself. I am very curious as to what type of testing he wants to see. I found it interesting that he was talking about only a 12 week study, everything else I had been reading was suggesting years of study. I agree with you Lacey there must be someone looking for a topic for their doctorate. How would we go about getting this out there to the Universities though? Could prove an interesting topic for someone’s thesis, and the idea of being one of the first to study it must have some draw to those still wrapped up in the idealism of becoming a doctor as opposed to those already drug pushing for big pharmaceutical companies.

Lmao ... well all of us guinea pigs on this forum are 'already' conducting our own unscientific study on ourselves.....and all the health reports coming in so far are pretty good. I have just managed to cycle all the way to the top of a hill that I have only ever managed to get half way up until now.

 

[sherid]

Lacey,
Dr. Siegel shows signs of wanting to make amends for the harm the anti smoking zealots are inflicting upon smokers and society in general. He is a professor of public health at Boston University. His students are graduate level. Perhaps he would be a good contact for studies. I know from his posts yesterday that he supports e cigarettes.

 

[LaceyUnderall]

How would we go about getting this out there to the Universities though? Could prove an interesting topic for someone’s thesis, and the idea of being one of the first to study it must have some draw to those still wrapped up in the idealism of becoming a doctor as opposed to those already drug pushing for big pharmaceutical companies.

The suppliers have come together and are in the process of forming an association. This is a topic we discussed in our bi-weekly conference call last night. We all agree that this is a HUGE topic for us and we will focus on working out something. Still in the early planning stages... but we seem to have an extremely proactive group of people who want to do the industry right.

Give us a little time... and we will give you great things. I am sure of it

 

[LaceyUnderall]

Lacey,
Dr. Siegel shows signs of wanting to make amends for the harm the anti smoking zealots are inflicting upon smokers and society in general. He is a professor of public health at Boston University. His students are graduate level. Perhaps he would be a good contact for studies. I know from his posts yesterday that he supports e cigarettes.

Thanks Sheri. I will confer with the association members and we will contact him. He is a good referral.

 

[surbitonPete]

If there is a study .....It has to be a study that they 'all' accept and cannot simply dismiss.

 

[Brando]

Greetings All,

I've been vaping for a few weeks and really enjoy it! I did a lot of research on this and other site prior to making the plungs and have finally decided to be more active in the forum.

What I wrote:
"Dr. thanks for your comments and insight. I too would like studies completed on the nicotine blood levels compared to tobacco cigarettes. If your anything like my Dr. who has repeatedly encouraged me to quit smoking, lose weight and live healthy it's all good advice, yet I still smoked (until e-cigs) and struggle with eating right.
But here's my point...it's advice. Honestly, I don't want to quit nicotine! I want to quit the dirty delivery system. Nicotine levels that are comparable to cigarettes or lower are no more dangerous than coffee and the corresponding caffine which I am also addicted to and can also raise heart rate (and alertness). My view is that it's my body and it's my life so if I want to "vape" (the term for using an e-cig) with smoking juice instead of using tobacco, then I should have a right to do so without government interference as long as tobacco cigarettes are legal and available. The references to the WHO and FDA needing to approve is suspect at best. There is mounting evidence to believe that this new phenomena is being suppressed by pharmacutical and tobacco companies (strange bedfellows) since they have the resources to limit widespread acceptance, both industries stand to lose the most by these devices. It's obvious to me there is a concentrated effort to promote an anti-ecig propoganda.
The problem with that thinking is that for people who can't (or won't) quit by any other means, as long as it's shown (and it has been) to be even a little less harmful that cigarettes it should be a viable option for individual Americans to choose for themselves. There have been studies all the way back to the early 70's on proplene glycol including inhalation which is the main ingredient and scientific deductions can be made on the rest of the ingredients. Just like many of the dangerous prescriptions you may prescribe with nasty side effects it's definitely a "Use as your own risk" type of product.
The LESS government we have in our lives the better off we'll be. I choose to be personally responsible for my behaviour and as long as I'm not impacting those around me I don't require the input of my government to tell me how to live my life."

 

[LaceyUnderall]

Brando - Very good points you made there.

As my hubby says: It isn't the governments responsibility to protect me from myself

 

[LaceyUnderall]

So... Dr. Mintz has posted a "conspiracy theory" post... and his evaluation of this theory is quite good actually...

I do find it humorous that he notes "Who Killed the Electric Car?"

Dr. Mintz' Blog: Diabetes Conspiracy

Edit: OH!!! And this one too http://drmintz.blogspot.com/search?q=cheerios

Check out #4!!!!! The ecig!

Edit #2: I guess he learned last time... he set comment moderation to "ON"

 

[TropicalBob]

Minds were not changed. Yours or his. Pro or anti.

Frankly, no one stumped him. He really argued nothing we don't already know and have discussed hundreds of times on this forum. And his arguments are based on perceptions ... but he does have credentials, so his voice is heard louder by regulatory ears.

We must be very careful in exchanges with professionals that they don't come off as calm and reasoned, while e-cig proponents are perceived as biased and bitter. Wanna bet how a neutral third party would judge the outcome of that exchange?

The inexcusable travesty is that his 12-week study has not been conducted, despite the unknowns voiced on this forum since January 2008. We knew the questions; we were willing guinea pigs. And, no, the study does not need non-smokers. But makers (with the singular exception of Ruyan) just turned a blind eye to unknowns and kept pumping out products without regulations or assurances backed by science.

Astute forum members knew long ago that that would bite us. And now we feel teeth coming down.

 

[LaceyUnderall]

Mine wasn't changed because I specifically asked him for guidance as to what kind of study he would like to see and was ignored. But then again, his paragraph on the "proper" ways to quit was telling.

I have friends who are doctors and nurses. I see what the pharmaceutical companies bring them for lunch.

 

[sherid]

I do not play nice nice with these people. It is time to stop caving to them. Here is my response to Dr. Mintz's blog on electronic cigarettes.
Score: Known deaths from Chantix due to suicide: 34 Known deaths from the use of e cigarettes: 0
Yet, you promote it and write prescriptions for it as you dismiss the use of electronic cigarettes. I am particularly intrigued by the studies of veterans with PTSD who were prescribed Chantix despite the knowledge that Chantix is particularly dangerous for those with mental illness like PTSD victims. Chantix obviously is a very profitable drug made by a company with very big pockets. As for continued use of other NRT's, many users of the gum, in particular continue using it for many years and become addicted to it. Even President Obama continues to chew it three years after announcing his intention to quit smoking. You endorse this product, but you object to e cigarettes because people may continue using them. Why is it that BP is allowed to market their gum to children with flavorful choices like fruity flavors and cinnamon burst and no regulation, yet the anti-tobacco crowd cries foul when they see a smokeless product, already regulated with no sales to anyone under 18, offer a smokeless choice to adult consumers? The hypocrisy within the anti tobacco movement is blatantly obvious to any who examine its policies. This condemnation of e cigarettes is a perfect example of that.