International expert panel convened by the Independent Scientific Committee on Drugs says cigarettes far more harmful than smokefree tobacco/nicotine

[Bill Godshall]

International expert panel convened by the Independent Scientific Committee on Drugs says cigarettes far more harmful than smokefree tobacco/nicotine products
European Addiction Research 2014, Vol. 20, No. 5 - Estimating the Harms of Nicotine-Containing Products Using the MCDA Approach - FullText - Karger Publishers

Fig. 2. Overall weighted scores for each of the products. Cigarettes, with an overall harm score of 99.6, are judged to be most harmful, and followed by small cigars at 67. The heights of the coloured portions indicate the part scores on each of the criteria. Product-related mortality, the upper dark red sections, are substantial contributors to those two products, and they also contribute moderately to cigars, pipes, water pipes, and smokeless unrefined. The numbers in the legend show the normalized weights on the criteria. Higher weights mean larger differences that matter between most and least harmful products on each criterion.

 

[Uma]

LOL I misread that, had to edit.

 

[DrMA]

Is it just me, or are they really attributing "product-related mortality" to ENDS (i.e. ecigs). It looks like the bar it has some red at the top...

Also they attribute far too high a "harm to user" score to ENDS compared to the nasal spray. These guys obviously never tried that messy and excruciatingly painful product.

 

[Sundodger]

Is it just me, or are they really attributing "product-related mortality" to ENDS (i.e. ecigs). It looks like the bar it has some red at the top...

Also they attribute far too high a "harm to user" score to ENDS compared to the nasal spray. These guys obviously never tried that messy and excruciatingly painful product.

No the Product related mortality is scored at 27. The ENDS total score looks to be just under 5. The last line in the study is the one I like the most.

"Attempts to use other forms of nicotine such as ENDS and NRT to reduce cigarette smoking should be encouraged as the harms of these products are much lower."

 

[DrMA]

No the Product related mortality is scored at 27. The ENDS total score looks to be just under 5. The last line in the study is the one I like the most.

"Attempts to use other forms of nicotine such as ENDS and NRT to reduce cigarette smoking should be encouraged as the harms of these products are much lower."

I haven't read the article in detail, but I noticed, the overall score for ENDS was placed at 4%, and 2% for the "even purer" NRTs. Of course, as the authors state themselves, this is based on "lack of hard evidence for the harms of most products on most of the criteria."

All in all, a pretty good finding for ecigs, considering this study was funded by BP both directly, and thru a couple of the "health" organizations on their payroll.

 

[Bill Godshall]

Please note that the 12 person panel included several folks and organizations that have opposed e-cigs, and that the resulting score for each product was based upon weighted scores. So higher scores assigned by one, two or a few panelists (who aren't as supportive of THR) would have increased the overall score for e-cigs (and for smokeless tobacco and snus) to be higher than scores for NRT.


Nutt D.J. from Imperial College London, UK
Phillips L.D. from the Department of Management, London School of Economics and Political Science, and Facilitations Ltd., UK;
Balfour D.f from University of Dundee, Dundee, UK (who used to be, and may still be the editor of SRNT's journal, which opposed e-cigs)
Curran H.V.from University College London, UK
Dockrell M. from Action on Smoking and Health London, UK (ASH UK urged UK MHRA to regulate e-cigs as medicines)
Foulds J. from Pennsylvania State University, College of Medicine, Hershey Pa., USA (JF still urges smokers to use FDA approved drugs for smoking cessation)
Fagerstrom K. from Fagerström Consulting, Vaxholm, Sweden
Letlape K. from World Medical Association, Johannesburg, South Africa (WMA has opposed e-cigs)
Milton A. from World Medical Association, Milton Consulting, Stockholm, Sweden (WMA has opposed e-cigs)
Polosa R. from Centre for the Prevention and Cure of Tobacco Use, University of Catania, Catania, Italy
Ramsey J. from TICTAC Communications Ltd. at St. George's, University of London, London, UK
Sweanor D. from Faculty of Law, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada

 

[stangela]

Please note that the 12 person panel included several folks and organizations that have opposed e-cigs

I noticed the same thing Bill. I may have to email some of them to see if this has swayed them at all....

 

[EleanorR]

I'm sorry to be so out of the loop . . .


But what the heck does "ENDS" stand for?

 

[Kent C]

I'm sorry to be so out of the loop . . .


But what the heck does "ENDS" stand for?

electronic nicotine delivery system

 

[EleanorR]

electronic nicotine delivery system

Thank You!

 

[catlady60]

Is it just me, or are they really attributing "product-related mortality" to ENDS (i.e. ecigs). It looks like the bar it has some red at the top...

Also they attribute far too high a "harm to user" score to ENDS compared to the nasal spray. These guys obviously never tried that messy and excruciatingly painful product.

The only harm that could come from ENDS is the unfortunate few people with severe allergies to PG or VG that could cause anaphylixis, and that's rare AFAIK.

 

[Kent C]

Is it just me, or are they really attributing "product-related mortality" to ENDS (i.e. ecigs). It looks like the bar it has some red at the top...

Also they attribute far too high a "harm to user" score to ENDS compared to the nasal spray. These guys obviously never tried that messy and excruciatingly painful product.

I'm surprised at some of the categories of 'loss' Imagine what the graph would look like if they included "loss of government grants to ANTZ", "loss of taxes to fed., state, and local gov'ts", "loss of face time by ANTZ on major media".

 

[supertrunker]

electronic nicotine delivery system

Not to be confused with 'personal electronic nicotine inhalation system'

I'll get my coat....

T

 

[rothenbj]

Is it just me, or are they really attributing "product-related mortality" to ENDS (i.e. ecigs). It looks like the bar it has some red at the top...

Also they attribute far too high a "harm to user" score to ENDS compared to the nasal spray. These guys obviously never tried that messy and excruciatingly painful product.

They have to assign some mortality risk for anything that hasn't gotten FDA approval as being "safe and effective". After all, the FDA is there to protect us.

 

[DrMA]

They have to assign some mortality risk for anything that hasn't gotten FDA approval as being "safe and effective". After all, the FDA is there to protect us.

watch out with statements like this. you could sprain your eyes from all that rolling.

 

[rothenbj]

watch out with statements like this. you could sprain your eyes from all that rolling.

Let's revisit history as most of us are good candidates for a propaganda blitz. Risk is politically transferable. The one thing that is certain is that we're all going to die and many of us are already labeled as future "smoking related" mortality. As the SG expands the diseases related to smoking each year, the odds of us becoming a negative statistic is ever increasing.

Now they just need another check box or use the same one for any nicotine use and let the stats fall where they surely will.

 

[Desert Willow]

Please note that the 12 person panel included several folks and organizations that have opposed e-cigs, and that the resulting score for each product was based upon weighted scores. So higher scores assigned by one, two or a few panelists (who aren't as supportive of THR) would have increased the overall score for e-cigs (and for smokeless tobacco and snus) to be higher than scores for NRT.


Nutt D.J. from Imperial College London, UK
Phillips L.D. from the Department of Management, London School of Economics and Political Science, and Facilitations Ltd., UK;
Balfour D.f from University of Dundee, Dundee, UK (who used to be, and may still be the editor of SRNT's journal, which opposed e-cigs)
Curran H.V.from University College London, UK
Dockrell M. from Action on Smoking and Health London, UK (ASH UK urged UK MHRA to regulate e-cigs as medicines)
Foulds J. from Pennsylvania State University, College of Medicine, Hershey Pa., USA (JF still urges smokers to use FDA approved drugs for smoking cessation)
Fagerstrom K. from Fagerström Consulting, Vaxholm, Sweden
Letlape K. from World Medical Association, Johannesburg, South Africa (WMA has opposed e-cigs)
Milton A. from World Medical Association, Milton Consulting, Stockholm, Sweden (WMA has opposed e-cigs)
Polosa R. from Centre for the Prevention and Cure of Tobacco Use, University of Catania, Catania, Italy
Ramsey J. from TICTAC Communications Ltd. at St. George's, University of London, London, UK
Sweanor D. from Faculty of Law, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada

I just used this information to respond to an article that I came across tonight that made me so upset that I had to speak up. It was on the T Y T network facebook page and I did not cite you as the author without your permission. It is after 5am and I need to sleep, but I wanted to let you know asap. This is the link to a horrid "report" in their "news":

https: www facebook [ / url ] . com /The...5 ?comment_id=29789772&ref=notif&notif_t=like

 

[Desert Willow]

All in all, a pretty good finding for ecigs, considering this study was funded by BP both directly, and thru a couple of the "health" organizations on their payroll.

I also used this in the same response, only slightly modified. I did not cite you as the source without permission.

Perhaps I over-reacted, but their version of the dangers of e-cigs was just too outlandish to go unchallenged.

https: www facebook [ / url ] . com /The ...mission to give out any names before I do it.

 

[rurwin]

This is a gratifying example of the ENDS not justifying the meanies.

I'll get my coat....

Me too.

 

[Desert Willow]

Update

The video of that "news" report is now missing from their article. It has been replaced with a video about air quality in China in an article about e-cigs being deadly. Not only is it missing from their article, but it is not listed on their utube channel either.

Most strange.