New scientific study in Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology Journal

[caramel]

Link to journal

Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology - Journal - Elsevier

Direct link to article

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0273230014002505

 

[Lessifer]

Good find!

 

[inspects]

Excellent, Caramel.........

I like this portion of the study.

Thus, the results obtained in the aforementioned studies and in the present work broadly support the potential for e-cigarette products to provide markedly reduced exposures to hazardous and potentially hazardous smoke constituents in smokers who use such products as an alternative to cigarettes.

 

[MrSparkle]

Hate to be a downer, but:

"Conflicts of interest

The company for which the study authors work and the companies that manufacture the e-cigarettes tested for this study are owned by the same parent company.

Acknowledgments

We thank the analytical testing laboratories at Lorillard tobacco Company for methods development and testing and Drs. Brown, D’Ruiz, Heck and Stevens for technical discussions."

While good for vaping as a whole, wouldn't this study just serve to reinforce the presence / legality of only cigalikes in the market after FDA deeming regs are passed?

I'm nowhere near academic enough to understand it all, but it would seem to me there's enough nuts and bolts detail in this study to replicate it for PVs and APVs in an independent setting?

 

[Kent C]

Hate to be a downer, but:

"Conflicts of interest

The company for which the study authors work and the companies that manufacture the e-cigarettes tested for this study are owned by the same parent company.

Acknowledgments

We thank the analytical testing laboratories at Lorillard Tobacco Company for methods development and testing and Drs. Brown, D’Ruiz, Heck and Stevens for technical discussions."

While good for vaping as a whole, wouldn't this study just serve to reinforce the presence / legality of only cigalikes in the market after FDA deeming regs are passed?

I'm nowhere near academic enough to understand it all, but it would seem to me there's enough nuts and bolts detail in this study to replicate it for PVs and APVs in an independent setting?

Most would see this as a conflict of interest - the 'link' is direct - Lorillard. Most, (except those who post here or those who 'dig' on their own), wouldn't find the same conflict of interest, but it's still there - by what we've seen here, in what is allegedly "objective scientific studies", under the gov't or nih and other institutions that don't sell products like Lorillard but sell 'policies' under the guise of 'safety' or 'for kids' which fills needs of the socialist/fascist regulations of gov't - where they get their grant money and support. One is more transparent, one more hidden but still a conflict nonetheless. Which is the most truthful?

Also, this study was mainly on eliquid aerosol and the results - using the same wattage - will be the same whether it is a cigalike or an PV/APV. So I don't think that is at issue here.