Intellicig will reveal results from major research project tomorrow

[davielawson]

Here is the final draft of the report with conclusion...

Preliminary Analysis of Blood Nicotine Concentration : IntelliCIG Electronic Cigarette, The Best Online Store

 

[davielawson]

To keep you all updated....

We have begun a second round of trials here at Intellicig Manchester. We are currently awaiting the results of the blood samples...

 

[MoonRose]

Thanks for keeping us updated on all of your research.

 

[tardcore]

yay! results from a scientific study that shows what we all know: these things DO deliver nicotine. they DO work. wooo!

 

[davielawson]

Personally I have seen claims from 0% absorbency of nicotine - 95% absorbency of nicotine from electronic cigarettes, however I have never seen any research to substantiate this. No research until Intellicig began their research that is!

 

[jimho]

Personally I have seen claims from 0% absorbency of nicotine - 95% absorbency of nicotine from electronic cigarettes, however I have never seen any research to substantiate this. No research until Intellicig began their research that is!

Maybe I'm missing something here, but the study doesn't tell us the actual absorbancy, just that it the absorbtion rate is similar and it maxes out with the same profile.

Not to say that it's of no value, it is if you are intellicig trying to market this product for NRT, but until the data for xxx ng/ml Cmax for e-cigs vs analogs is available, it's of limited value to those of us that want to get an idea of how much nic were actually getting.

 

[instamix]

Maybe I'm missing something here, but the study doesn't tell us the actual absorbancy, just that it the absorbtion rate is similar and it maxes out with the same profile.

Not to say that it's of no value, it is if you are intellicig trying to market this product for NRT, but until the data for xxx ng/ml Cmax for e-cigs vs analogs is available, it's of limited value to those of us that want to get an idea of how much nic were actually getting.

Good point.

But I think the purpose of this study was to De_Bunk guesstomations and wild claims....

And it's off to a Great start...

 

[jimho]

please elaborate- what wild claims does it debunk?

 

[Xanax]

Maybe I'm missing something here, but the study doesn't tell us the actual absorbancy, just that it the absorbtion rate is similar and it maxes out with the same profile.

Not to say that it's of no value, it is if you are intellicig trying to market this product for NRT, but until the data for xxx ng/ml Cmax for e-cigs vs analogs is available, it's of limited value to those of us that want to get an idea of how much nic were actually getting.

Yeah, no kiddin. Agreeing here.
Also, we can't even read any of the results due to the boxes blocking everything out... not from what I've seen at least.

Edit: realized you were referring to the same thing, derrrr. Sorry.

 

[tardcore]

it's debunking the wild claim that we don't get nicotine from these things. which we most certainly do.

 

[jimho]

it's debunking the wild claim that we don't get nicotine from these things. which we most certainly do.

Really?.. where do you see that? My initial response was the same but look agian...How much nicotine do we get? - it says the profile is the same but it doesn't give us the amount of nicotine absorbed in the test from either the analog or the e-cig ... it could be 5% it could be 95% of the nicotine we get with an analog - the average amounts absorbed are deliberately not disclosed. Nothing has been debunked-

Again, not being critical of intelicig for sharing what they have so far and I respect that they may have business reasons for not releasing the numbers just yet. The fact that there is some data that will be available, and some scientific testing is good, but the only conclusive information is that the absorption (rate nicotine is abosrbed) profile is similar.

Without the data we're still gesticulating.

 

[Xanax]

Really?.. where do you see that? My initial response was the same but look agian...How much nicotine do we get? - it says the profile is the same but it doesn't give us the amount of nicotine absorbed in the test from either the analog or the e-cig ... it could be 5% it could be 95% of the nicotine we get with an analog - the average amounts absorbed are deliberately not disclosed. Nothing has been debunked-

Again, not being critical of intelicig for sharing what they have so far and I respect that they may have business reasons for not releasing the numbers just yet. The fact that there is some data that will be available, and some scientific testing is good, but the only conclusive information is that the absorption (rate nicotine is abosrbed) profile is similar.

Without the data we're still gesticulating.

I just don't really understand the point of publishing/ releasing the results if they won't tell us what the actual results ARE.

 

[jimho]

I just don't really understand the point of publishing/ releasing the results if they won't tell us what the actual results ARE.

Product Marketing/ name brand recognition- not a bad way to generate buz.

 

[Xanax]

Product Marketing/ name brand recognition- not a bad way to generate buz.

I dunno, I guess it just sucks for those of us looking for the actual numbers. Hopefully they'll make those numbers available in the near future.

 

[davielawson]

For commercial reasons the concentrations of nicotine in blood were redacted for the public domain. The purpose of the information available is to clearly show that there are pharmacokinetic similarities between traditional smoking and electronic cigarette smoking.

One point that must be made, and has been made previous by Mr. Newns, is that these results are specific to the Intellicig. Changing the vaporiser, programme, battery, liquid (strength, ingredients, viscosity) will all alter the absorbance.

I can confirm in terms of safety (Cmax and AUC) are both below that of the traditional cigarette and more similar to that of traditional NRTs. Tmax does however differ greatly from gum, patches, lozenges and inhalators.

 

[tardcore]

true, we don't have the hard numbers (for the reason provided). what we do have are the graphs and the conclusions in the study.

edit: i also agree that the numbers would be nice (even if we don't understand all of it) more information is usually a good thing (imo, at least).