So, NBC thought they would bring in Dr. Nancy Snyderman to attempt to debunk e-cigarette myths. The only problem is they failed! Take a look at this: NBC Brings in a Dr. to Debunk E-Cigarette Myths
NBC Brings ins a Dr. to Debunk E-Cigarette Myths but Fails
- Thread starter sherwood865
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
I'll do the 'obligatory' : "I don't usually listen to or watch
Thanks for posting Sherwood!
Last edited:
I'll do the 'obligatory' : "I don't usually listen to or watchFox or RushNBCCBSABCNPRCNNMSNBC, but" .... oh, no 'but'...and this is the reason why!
Thanks for posting Sherwood!
I am definitely with you on that. These people are ridiculous! That last myth she was just making stuff up or drastically stretching the truth. People do talk about the ingredients in e-cig liquid being on the FDA GRAS list but I haven't heard anyone talking about e-cigs being FDA approved.
Had my cousin the other day, who smokes, go....those things are bad for you. So I said "how?"....end of conversation lol can't wait till people open their eyes but none the less it will take a long long while.
Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk
Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk
"ridiculous" while true, is simply not strong enough. If anyone mentions 'anti-freeze' in relation to eliquid (except responding to these idiots by pointing out the only common ingredient (PG) recently added was to make it safer and is used to saves lives of animals), they should be dismissed out of hand, as not having done as much research as would be expected by any 10 year old writing an essay on anything.
I completely agree! It's as if these people are given a 30 second notice that they are going to be doing a report on e-cigarettes so they summon everything inside their tiny little brains to try to scare people. Nothing they say is based on any type of research and they keep saying things like, “While it’s not been proven…While there’s no evidence…No long-term studies have been done that prove…” C'Mon! Give me a break!
Mainstream media has become Entertainment Tonight; their "news shows" -RT, and their newspapers - Pravda. (ie. similar to).
One thing is for sure, if they ever lose their jobs as journalists/broadcasters they will have a hell of a career writing Fiction novels.
While presented badly, it does bring up a few points.
1) We don't know the long-term effects of chronic, high concentration PG inhalation. We're the test group. I should point out that I'm confident enough about it to be willing to be part of the test group because we already know the effects of chronic cigarette smoke inhalation. Plus I'm comfortable enough with the long-term effects of low concentration PG inhalation, which are none.
2) We don't know the quit percentage. Large, unbiased studies (the recent one was neither large nor unbiased) have not yet been done. Anecdotal information, which we all have, is very nice...but it isn't scientific data. I fully expect that the quit percentage will be impressive compared to other NRTs given my own anecdotal experience--but we don't yet have the data to state that as a fact.
3) The cake I baked this week wasn't FDA-approved even though all the ingredients were. Strangely, I had no issues eating it. This one is a complete red herring and I'm not sure where she pulled it from (actually, I am, but don't use that kind of language).
1) We don't know the long-term effects of chronic, high concentration PG inhalation. We're the test group. I should point out that I'm confident enough about it to be willing to be part of the test group because we already know the effects of chronic cigarette smoke inhalation. Plus I'm comfortable enough with the long-term effects of low concentration PG inhalation, which are none.
2) We don't know the quit percentage. Large, unbiased studies (the recent one was neither large nor unbiased) have not yet been done. Anecdotal information, which we all have, is very nice...but it isn't scientific data. I fully expect that the quit percentage will be impressive compared to other NRTs given my own anecdotal experience--but we don't yet have the data to state that as a fact.
3) The cake I baked this week wasn't FDA-approved even though all the ingredients were. Strangely, I had no issues eating it. This one is a complete red herring and I'm not sure where she pulled it from (actually, I am, but don't use that kind of language).
Or just....
If I'm not mistaken, this was taken at the last tobacco Control Summit Meeting... (L to R: Simon Chapman, Linda McAvan, Mitch Zeller, Truebot, Slantzz, Ellen Hahn.)
Actually, what this report succeeds in debunking is the validity of any statement on ecigs by any medical professional. Said it before, will say it again: These ANTZ rent-a-docs are giving the entire profession a bad name. So much for "First, do no harm.")
It's a bit like "experts" brought into court. Both sides have them and they support their side, but in the end, a gov't official decides. This is why it's political, despite the fact that most people here, don't want it to be.
It sucks that there is such a bias against eliquid right out of the gate. The thing that many other smoking replacements lack is the ENJOYMENT. I find myself consistently dropping the nicotine in my liquid so that I can enjoy more flavor. I am sure I am not the only one. Vaping is fun! I started at 18mg and am now down to 3-6mg in a dripper.
Maybe they don't want that data. They might have to change their story.
Anything is possible, I suppose, but zealots have never been motivated by data.
If e-cigs were to come back with a quit percentage no better than any other NRT then that doesn't change one critical fact--they worked for me. It just means we add them to the round of things to try as a trial is inexpensive compared to some other methods.
If e-cigs come back with a higher, much higher, or astronomically higher quit percentage than other NRTs, then the zealots simply ignore the study and keep quoting the ANTZ studies that say it doesn't.
For us, there's no loss in either answer. For them, there is--in both, actually.
The only answer that harms us is finding that e-cigs have drastically lower quit percentages, but the limited data we have so far doesn't support that statement. Even the ANTZ can't fudge it below equally effective.
No comment but I just noticed your "Footer":
1 year 6 months and 22 days
32,381 cigarettes
That is quite impressive and a great accomplishment. 3 PAD. I would assume you are over the "Hump" now.
What hump?
No, seriously, the first three months were a progressively easier struggle, but never anything too severe. My ability to deal with the issue got weaker roughly at the same speed as the remaining cravings did, so it all worked out.I hate people like my mom, who simply put down the cigs and went on with her life, vaping away. She never even noticed.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
