NIH gives grant to UC Riverside grad student to confuse and scare public about e-cigarettes

[Bill Godshall]

NIH gives grant to UC Riverside grad student (who works for Prue Talbot) to confuse and scare public about e-cigs.
UCR Today: Graduate Student Awarded NIH Fellowship to Study Electronic Cigarettes

 

[Petrodus]

Prue Talbot at UC Riverside
Why am I not surprised ??!!

 

[yellowxboy]

UC Rejects is what my friends called it back in high-school.

 

[Petrodus]

Note ...
There's no comment section.
Another big surprise ... (sarcasm)

 

[sbdivemaster]

"I will isolate chemicals in the most cytotoxic aerosols and test them on human embryonic stem cells to mimic exposure during early stages of development."

And what if your early preparations deliver zero cytotoxic aerosols...? You would have nothing to test on embryonic stem cells (avoiding mention of where those come from); what would happen to your grant money?

Why do I get the feeling that there WILL be cytotoxic aerosols...?

( Ms. Hua and Ms. Alfi) .........................

 

[gayhalo]

No chance to comment! I want to shout THEY ARE NOT SMOKING CESSATION devices. THEY ARE NOT ADVERTISED AS SUCH AND THE USERES ARE RESTRICTED TO SMOKERS, NO UNDER 18s AND NO PREGNANT PERSONS. They are just trying to make bad news by the misuse of the product.

 

[Vocalek]

It's been done.

http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/08958378.2013.793439

Cytotoxicity evaluation of electronic cigarette vapor extract on cultured mammalian fibroblasts (ClearStream-LIFE): comparison with tobacco cigarette smoke extract

Conclusions: This study indicates that EC vapor is significantly less cytotoxic compared tobacco CS. These results should be validated by clinical studies.

Read More: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

But how much you want to bet that UC Riverside won't bother to compare the effects to smoke?

 

[Tache]

Maybe I'm naive but this phrase from the article ("...the ultimate goal being to make e-cigarettes more effective smoking cessation devices.") is what I picked up on as what her work is about. I don't see anything wrong with that.

 

[AgentAnia]

Maybe I'm naive but this phrase from the article ("...the ultimate goal being to make e-cigarettes more effective smoking cessation devices.") is what I picked up on as what her work is about. I don't see anything wrong with that.

Except that once ecigs are considered smoking cessation devices, FDA can and will regulate them as medical devices and if that happens, ecigs are toast... With all due respect, Tashe, I see everything wrong with that!

 

[NorthOfAtlanta]

It's been done.

An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

Cytotoxicity evaluation of electronic cigarette vapor extract on cultured mammalian fibroblasts (ClearStream-LIFE): comparison with tobacco cigarette smoke extract





Read More: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

But how much you want to bet that UC Riverside won't bother to compare the effects to smoke?

Not only this, I would be willing to bet that there will be "leaks" from this study within 3-6 months as they need ammunition for their E-cigarettes bad story.

 

[AgentAnia]

Not only this, I would be willing to bet that there will be "leaks" from this study within 3-6 months as they need ammunition for their E-cigarettes bad story.

Absolutely! Since they already know what their conclusions will be...

 

[Petrodus]

Sarcasm Alert

I suggest NIH couldn't "officially" give the grant directly to THE PRUDE
because everyone knows she's on BP's payroll and Fakes e-cigarette studies.
So ... They cut a deal with her ... Find a lamb for the slaughter who will
do as she's told.

Student gets the credits ... The Prude ... gets the money !!

 

[NorthOfAtlanta]

Sarcasm Alert

I suggest NIH couldn't "officially" give the grant directly to THE PRUDE
because everyone knows she's on BP's payroll and Fakes e-cigarette studies.
So ... They cut a deal with her ... Find a lamb for the slaughter who will
do as she's told.

Student gets the credits ... The Prude ... gets the money !!

I'm not really sure this is sarcasm.

 

[sebt]

This:

“I will isolate chemicals in the most cytotoxic aerosols and test them on human embryonic stem cells to mimic exposure during early stages of development.”

(Behar)

is perfectly good scientific practice.

This, on the other hand:

“A lot of people are switching to e-cigarettes as smoking cessation devices, “ said Prue Talbot, the director of the UCR Stem Cell Center and Behar’s advisor. “A significant percentage of pregnant women are interested in trying these devices as alternatives to cigarette smoking.”

is scaremongering, reprehensible bull****, riding on the science in the same way that a flea rides on a dog. Memo to Prue Talbot: when women get pregnant, the embryo doesn't develop in the lungs, but in a different, more suitable organ. Don't take my word for it, ask an obstetrician!

 

[Petrodus]

When the results of this "so-called" study is published ....
We're going to have a "feeding frenzy"
Just like every time her mentor (The Prude) publishes
her garbage junk science studies.

 

[Vocalek]

Well, I see one big problem with drawing conclusions about this:

“I will isolate chemicals in the most cytotoxic aerosols and test them on human embryonic stem cells to mimic exposure during early stages of development.”

Embryos would never come into contact with aerosols (vapor). First, chemicals in the vapor needs to get into Mom's bloodstream. There is no way that 100% of inhaled vapor makes it even as far as the bloodstream. Some of what's inhaled get's exhaled, no?

Then, those chemicals need to make it to the womb, and then they need to cross the placenta.

I've heard that the placenta is an effective barrier against many things that might harm the embryo.

So this seems like a silly and useless--quite possibly worse than useless--experiment to me.

There have been many claims about smoking while pregnant causing this and that, but not any definitive link between diseases and particular chemicals in smoke. Does she plan on only testing chemicals that appear in vapor, but not in smoke?

 

[Petrodus]

So this seems like a silly and useless--quite possibly worse than useless--experiment to me.

She's don't care ...
The study is intended to publish anti-ecig junk science results.
The majority today just assume if there's a scientific study
then the results must be true and of value.

Save the Childreeeen !!

 

[TomCatt]

Hmmm, no one has mentioned this part of the article here:

Specifically, Behar, who is currently a third-year student in the Cell Molecular and Development Biology graduate program, will collect a variety of refill fluids representing different flavoring agents such as sweet, fruity, and even savory. She will then heat these fluids to generate aerosols that can be applied to different cell cultures to test their cytotoxic effects.

"SHE WILL HEAT" ?!? How and why would 'she heat' e-liquid to generate aerosols? Wouldn't using an e-cig (in a correct manner) to generate the aerosols be the correct way to do this? Don't know if this is 'misinformation' from the reporter or Behar; but hopefully she won't be sticking a bunsen burner under a beaker of juice.

 

[DC2]

Maybe I'm naive...

It is worth noting that Prue Talbot is the author of two significant anti-electronic cigarette junk science studies.