From CNN.com Today/Eissenberg study with feedback

[revoblution]

As a healthcare professional, I would like to actually SEE the study(methodolgy, sample size, randomization, controls, actual data, etc...) before coming to any conclusions. I know the placebo effect does exist and can be quite powerful. Without seeing the actual study, it does also seem to back up the New Zealand study which showed very low levels of bioavailable nicotine in ecig vapor(although there were some problems with that study design as well)

As a vaper myself, I can't honestly believe that we are all experiencing a shared placebo effect delusion. The suspicious conflict of interest of the main study designer also may lend some credence to the study being poorly designed or carried out. But without actually seeing the clinical study in it's entirety, there is no way to be sure.
This is why I hate when news outlets report apparent results of studies before they appear in peer reviewable journals.

Just as a small correction to the OP. This study is not going to be published in the British Medical Journal rather tobacco Control, a product of the British Medical Journal Group. Keep your eye out for it. the link is here:

I agree! and I would also like to see some clinical research into e-cigarette smoking. I had been a smoker for years. If eliquids are proven safe... I will now continue to vape instead... but if this is ultimately proven unsafe, I'll need to quit vaping e-cigarettes as well. It would be nice to know exactly what the health risks are and it would be nice if the study could include various eliquid manufacturers products and different ecigs. (I'm going to go back to reading this entire thread now ;-)

 

[deewal]

Hi,

Just registered at this message board but been reading for a few weeks.

I've got an e cigarette starter kit sitting on my kitchen counter unopened.

I want hard proof or my money back.

Thanks.

Get you money back and Carry On Smoking.

 

[jace]

I am highly interested in the results of any study, however....

For me, the personal vaporizer whether it delivers nicotine or not is an important component in harm reduction. If the personal vaporizer is only a placebo, I am still satisified with its performance in reducing my use of a known, harmful product. Nicotine replacement therapies have been ineffective in my experience. The personal vaporizer has been the one thing that has truly and consistently lowered my use of tobacco cigarettes.

If personal vaporizers are banned I will quickly increase my knowledge level to the point where I can manufacture my own devices for personal use. I will determine how to create or obtain through any channel available nicotine liquid to continue what I believe to be an effective harm reduction treatment for me.

 

[ilk80]

^ I think you will have many clients rolling over your way too.

 

[iclavdivs]

Get you money back and Carry On Smoking.

Would appreciate any serious responses to my post. I haven't had time to read all the posts here so maybe I'm rehashing something here?

Seriously, I don't mind purchasing a vapor inhaler as a way to quit smoking but I don't want to be told I'm getting nicotine when I'm not.

Also, how successful would you all have been if you knew you weren't actually delivering nicotine to your bloodstream? How many of you would have even bought the product in the first place if you knew it wasn't delivering nicotine?

Do you think you will feel differently about continuing to 'vape' knowing that you're not getting any nicotine?

Also I purchased 24mg and 36mg - what was the point of me doing that?
What's the point of even selling juices at different nicotine levels?
How do they even determine the different nicotine levels in the juice?

Are e-cig retailers going to stop doing that and just sell the different flavors instead?

From now on will e-Cigarette forum members be telling newbies that they won't actually be getting any nicotine in these products?

Sorry for the negativity I'm just so disappointed.

 

[curiousJan]

Would appreciate any serious responses to my post. I haven't had time to read all the posts here so maybe I'm rehashing something here?

Seriously, I don't mind purchasing a vapor inhaler as a way to quit smoking but I don't want to be told I'm getting nicotine when I'm not.

Also, how successful would you all have been if you knew you weren't actually delivering nicotine to your bloodstream? How many of you would have even bought the product in the first place if you knew it wasn't delivering nicotine?

Do you think you will feel differently about continuing to 'vape' knowing that you're not getting any nicotine?

Also I purchased 24mg and 36mg - what was the point of me doing that?
What's the point of even selling juices at different nicotine levels?
How do they even determine the different nicotine levels in the juice?

Are e-cig retailers going to stop doing that and just sell the different flavors instead?

From now on will e-Cigarette forum members be telling newbies that they won't actually be getting any nicotine in these products?

Sorry for the negativity I'm just so disappointed.

Why are you disappointed? You said that you've been reading the forum for weeks, correct? Then I would think at this point you would have formulated your own opinion as to nicotine absorption. There have been multiple reports of mild overdose of nicotine, and I myself have experienced it. Under the conditions of the VCU study, the nicotine uptake from ecig use was not sufficient to overcome the statistical margin of error. This doesn't mean that further chronic, rather than acute, studies won't show what we all know to be true. Nicotine is delivered. If you search for cotinine levels you will find that some have done the testing and some plan to do the testing. I expect nothing surprising in the reported results ... nicotine is being delivered.

 

[dave8944]

Would appreciate any serious responses to my post. I haven't had time to read all the posts here so maybe I'm rehashing something here?

Seriously, I don't mind purchasing a vapor inhaler as a way to quit smoking but I don't want to be told I'm getting nicotine when I'm not.

Also, how successful would you all have been if you knew you weren't actually delivering nicotine to your bloodstream? How many of you would have even bought the product in the first place if you knew it wasn't delivering nicotine?

Do you think you will feel differently about continuing to 'vape' knowing that you're not getting any nicotine?

Also I purchased 24mg and 36mg - what was the point of me doing that?
What's the point of even selling juices at different nicotine levels?
How do they even determine the different nicotine levels in the juice?

Are e-cig retailers going to stop doing that and just sell the different flavors instead?

From now on will e-Cigarette forum members be telling newbies that they won't actually be getting any nicotine in these products?

Sorry for the negativity I'm just so disappointed.

I've always argued that most of the nicotine one gets is from lip and other skin contact. I wouldn't worry that the vapor delivers little nicotine. I smoked for 25 years, so I definately know the difference between getting nicotine in my system versus not. I did have to switch from 24mg to 36mg nicotine initially, but I'm down to a 30mg mix now. The liquid nicotine is VERY absorbable through the skin, and I still think filling the carts which results in small amounts of juice on the skin, and overflow on the lips from a fresh cart is the primary way nicotine gets in your system. Having said that, your mind will quickly associate the nicotine in your system with the vapor you see. So, it's just like smoking in the end. We should all probably just wear a nicotine patch and vape 0mg liquid. It would be exactly the same.

 

[jace]

Would appreciate any serious responses to my post. I haven't had time to read all the posts here so maybe I'm rehashing something here?

Seriously, I don't mind purchasing a vapor inhaler as a way to quit smoking but I don't want to be told I'm getting nicotine when I'm not.

Also, how successful would you all have been if you knew you weren't actually delivering nicotine to your bloodstream? How many of you would have even bought the product in the first place if you knew it wasn't delivering nicotine?

Do you think you will feel differently about continuing to 'vape' knowing that you're not getting any nicotine?

Also I purchased 24mg and 36mg - what was the point of me doing that?
What's the point of even selling juices at different nicotine levels?
How do they even determine the different nicotine levels in the juice?

Are e-cig retailers going to stop doing that and just sell the different flavors instead?

From now on will e-Cigarette forum members be telling newbies that they won't actually be getting any nicotine in these products?

Sorry for the negativity I'm just so disappointed.

A serious reply? I think the poster of that "get your money back" reply was serious. If you're already disappointed with the product, and haven't even given it the chance to see if it will work for you, I would agree: get your money back because the overwhelming edvidence suggests that you will NOT be happy.

For myself, I can feel the buzz and tingle of the nicotine in my vapor. That works for me. Am I getting as much nicotine as I would with traditional tobacco products? It only takes a few threads to figure that the answer to this question is currently highly contested by lay people and scientists alike. I have read "studies" that state anywhere from 0% to 98% absorbtion from personal vaporizers.

At this point, I don't care if it actual nicotine, or a placebo effect, because I am getting the same enjoyment out of vaping that I do from smoking, regardless of the physiological effect on my body. I do hope you decide to at least give it an honest try. You'll save money, and potentially reduce the amount of known carcinogenic chemicals you introduce in to your body daily. There is noone in this community, or any other that can give you the definitive answer you are asking for, because of the debate of "scientific trials" currently being presented and/or conducted.

It sounds like you've already made up your mind to fail. So my answer is no, the personal vaporizer will not work for you... Sorry you were so sorely disappointed before you even gave it a shot.

 

[anim8r]

Your concerns, and other recently voiced ones, were brought up and addressed by Dr. Eissenberg earlier on in this thread. If it seems nobody is responding to those concerns now, it's because the thread has moved on from there. The study "is what it is" and Dr. Eissenberg has expressed willingness and intent to address many of the those concerns in future studies. If anything can be taken away from the study, it is that some manufacturers have a lot of work to do to make PV's more new-user friendly - something that I don't think anyone here would disagree with.

P.S. I'm not trying to suggest you shouldn't voice your concerns. I'm just trying to explain why they might appear to go unanswered.

I don't think my key issues were addressed.

I'm still concerned over WHO is going to do the test.

The first test was like testing motorcycles as a "replacement" means of transport and ONLY allowing experienced car drivers and only people that HAVE NEVER RIDDEN a motorcycle to participate in the test.

And then publishing the quote, "Motorcycles are so dangerous, it would be better to drive over yourself with a car than to attempt riding a motorcycle off a dealer's lot."

And then have the tester "Stand by" his quoted statement after others point out some serious flaws in the test.

That was my point. Do I really want that same guy to continue testing motorcycles? Ummm.... hell no.


It took me a few days and experimentation (with a LOT of reading up) to get the hang of e-smoking.

It took my wife considerably longer.

I would go so far as to say an experienced smoker would be able to get a LOT more nicotine from a cigarette than a non-smoker could. So, in essense, non-smokers should have been the only people allowed in the test if they didn't allow experienced vapers.


If there is more testing to come, then great. I wholeheartedly agree that more testing needs to be done. But seriously, I think we have enough misinformation in the press as it is, and this test (as described) is just more useless crap I'm going to have to defend against when trying to get heavy smokers to at least try an e-cig.

 

[cmdryker]

And stock up on attys be OK for rest of my life, no matter what the out come is, seeing how FDA is in the pockets of big pharma, and tobacco.



Brian

 

[iclavdivs]

For me, the personal vaporizer whether it delivers nicotine or not is an important component in harm reduction.

If personal vaporizers are banned..... I will determine how to create or obtain through any channel available nicotine liquid to continue what I believe to be an effective harm reduction treatment for me.

But why would you seek "available nicotine liquid" if the nicotine delivery is not an important component for you? And when you seem to have accepted that maybe no nicotine is being delivered anyway?

Why not just get a cheap bottle of gloop from Walmart to vaporize?

 

[jace]

But why would you seek "available nicotine liquid" if the nicotine delivery is not an important component for you? And when you seem to have accepted that maybe no nicotine is being delivered anyway?

Why not just get a cheap bottle of gloop from Walmart to vaporize?

"For me, the personal vaporizer whether it has been scientifically proven to deliver nicotine or not is an important component in harm reduction."

Fixed for the semanti-nazi

 

[Belletrist]

iclavidivs, i pm'd you. also, you should know that dr. e does not think it's impossible that PVs are in fact delivering nicotine during normal use. have you actually read the study? if not, please pm me your email address and i'll send it to you. the conditions of the study probably did not allow for significant nicotine absorption.

 

[kai kane]

iclavdivs:

positive tests of continine have been done by PV users who are non-smokers. it works, but has to be done correctly.

this thread has life because, tho the media hyped and apparently misinterpreted Dr. E's test, these things DO work. go ahead -there's plenty of instruction here (and in noob sections) to make it work for you. DUMP TOBACCO!

 

[lorikay13]

"They are as effective at nicotine delivery as puffing on an unlit cigarette," said Dr. Thomas Eissenberg, at the school's Institute for Drug and Alcohol Studies.


I think this is a wonderful study!!! In fact it's so good I think the FDA can just stop studying it and leave us alone

 

[thoqub]

I have a choice of words that I would like to say to those people. But they are far too innapropriate to post here so I will give you a hint. It starts with a "BUL" and Lovingly Slides down to "HIT". If you chatch my drift.

HAHA get it? get it????

 

[Tom09]

Tom09:

You asked:

To re-iterate: Do we expect (as an informed prediction, and for methods of Eissenberg 2010) to find plasma nicotine levels - after 10 inhalations from the Inhaler - that are statistically significant?

and then I think you are asking the same question about the 2 mg nicotine gum.

I thought I answered the first question already: my answer is I have not worked with the inhaler, though I have read the data, and I would guess it would deliver a low, slow, but statistically significant dose under the conditions described in Eissenberg, 2010 and elaborated in more detail in Cobb et al., in press. However, the only way to know is to conduct the study and I am uncertain that it has been conducted. I also should note that my response is only a prediction, and I am rarely surprised when my predictions are wrong.

As for the gum, I have worked with it and am very confident that it would deliver statistically significant increases under the conditions described. In fact, I am so confident that when we conducted a study with it a few years back, we did not even measure plasma nicotine levels -- we used heart rate as a proxy measure and saw significant heart rate increases after 2 and 4 mg gum doses (See Blank et al., 2007). Others of course have measured blood nicotine levels in the laboratory and I am sure you can find those papers if you want them.

Thanks for responding,

I re-iterated the question, since a first reply went without specifications about the Inhaler’s dosing. As for the best guess that 10 inhalations of the Inhaler would deliver a statistically significant dose (under the conditions described in Eissenberg, 2010 and elaborated in more detail in Cobb et al., in press): I’m pleased to learn about an informed prediction, only experiments would tell.
Regarding the 2-mg Gum, I still wonder how this can be expected to deliver statistically significant doses under the conditions described. The 2-mg Lozenge failed to do so (Cobb et al., in press), and pharmacokinetic properties of 2-mg Gum and 2-mg Lozenge, single doses, are virtually identical (Choi et al. 2003). The expert may guide me to some literature - which I am not aware - that may have put Choi et al. 2003 in question.

Anyhow, the confirmation that one Nicotine Lozenge (2 mg) does not deliver a statistically significant dose - under the conditions described in Eissenberg (2010) and elaborated in more detail in Cobb et al. (in press) - is presently enough to know.

Thanks for making the limitations of this pilot e-cig study much better understandable.

Tom09

 

[speedinggt]

Im still waiting on my first pv...should be he today
I have high hopes because I have read and listened to
what the real people were saying that used them.

As far as the FDA....All I have to say is I think a bolt of lighting
is dangerous...so go waste your time and my tax dollars trying
to regulate that

 

[mpetva]

VCU researcher says electronic cigarettes don’t deliver the nicotine they promise.
VCU researcher says electronic cigarettes don't deliver the nicotine they promise | Richmond Times-Dispatch

I wonder how truthful this article is quoting Dr. Eissenberg

Partial quote of article:

Eissenberg said he's concerned about how people are using the devices.

"If people are reporting what they are reporting about cravings, the data suggest it's not because of the drugs in the device," he said.

But Eissenberg said he's concerned about comments he has seen on blogs that some e-cigarette users are "dripping," or letting liquid from the devices' cartridges fall directly onto the heating element.

That means they may be getting relatively large doses of nicotine, which can be toxic in amounts of about 50 milligrams, Eissenberg said.

While the cartridges contain 16 milligrams, they can be refilled from bottles labeled as containing 500 milligrams, or 10 times the toxic dose, he said.

 

[Heed]

I seriously hope that's a misquote/misinterpretation because that doesn't reflect the reality of dripping in the slightest.

Also, we've now gone from no nicotine to overdose levels? C'mon.