E-cigarette opponent Daniel Siedman criticizes Polosa study, hawks NRT products

[Bill Godshall]

E-cigarette opponent Daniel Siedman criticizes Polosa e-cigarette study protocol, while touting NRT products that were studied using similar protocols, on Huffington Post at:
Dr. Daniel Seidman: What to Do When You 'Just Can't Quit'

In February, Siedman wrote a scathing criticism of e-cigarettes and Mike Siegel research on Huffington Post at:
Dr. Daniel Seidman: Are E-Cigs Safe? The Debate Continues

The ECA thread about that article is at:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/media-general-news/161952-huffington-post-story-e-cigs.html

 

[sqirl1]

what a hypocrite. I think he just wants people to buy his stupid audio tapes, **** him he can die in a fire.

 

[Vocalek]

When it was pointed out that Polosa's subjects had no interest in quitting smoking, Seidman commented:

They may not have expressed an interest in quitting but it is generally accepted that 2 out of 3 smokers want to quit and about half try to quit each year. If they weren't looking to get out of smoking, what motive did they have to participat.e?

I posted this response:

Dr. Polosa stated in an interview, "The forty volunteers in our study were recruited through advertisin.g in a local newspaper. In the ad, the study was promoted as an opportunit.y to try out a new, cleaner substitute for tobacco smoking (e-cig) and to monitor its impact on smoking habits. It is well known that just by asking people about their smoking frequency may increase their likelihood to think about (or revisit earlier thoughts of) quitting and therefore increases their likelihood of quitting. Being part of our study could have caused participan.ts to reassess their behavior and reduce their smoking anyway. However, selecting smokers 'unwilling to quit' can be a control for this effect." In reference #3, on page 124, "Table 6.29. Meta-analy.sis (2008): Effectiven.ess of and abstinence rates for smokers not willing to quit (but willing to change their smoking patterns or reduce their smoking) after receiving NRT compared to placebo (n = 5 studies)" showed an abstinence rate of 8.4% with Nicotine replacemen.t (gum, inhaler, or patch), and 3.6% with placebo. The three studies of combined NRT that had a 36.5% abstinence rate were aimed at subjects that wanted to quit, and the patch was used for >14 weeks combined with gum or spray ad lib. These unusually high results provide more evidence that replacing smoking with less hazardous sources of nicotine works much better than insisting on nicotine abstinence..