A very helpful article for our cause. Props to NBC news for publishing it!
E-cigarettes as good as patches in helping smokers quit - NBC News.com
E-cigarettes as good as patches in helping smokers quit - NBC News.com
Positive Light Shone On E-Cigs!
- Thread starter State Of Zen
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
I'm happy to see this. Too bad it's not getting the same press coverage that the cdc survey is getting, complete with all the sensational headlines.
Interesting that nbc has this headline at the top (right column) of its web page (where it will be seen by anyone clicking on nbcnews.com, while the CDC press release was relegated to its Health section farther down the page, where people wouldn't see it unless they scrolled down the page to that section. I like that...
I'm curious about one thing. The subjects were given 13 weeks worth of ecigs, but weren't checked on until after 6 months. Don't understand this.
The report doesn't show up yet on Lancet's website. Will keep trying to find a copy of the report.
ETA: Bullen is presenting the paper at the European Respiratory Society Annual Congress in Spain tomorrow (Sunday) which may be why Lancet hasn't posted it yet.
I'm curious about one thing. The subjects were given 13 weeks worth of ecigs, but weren't checked on until after 6 months. Don't understand this.
The report doesn't show up yet on Lancet's website. Will keep trying to find a copy of the report.
ETA: Bullen is presenting the paper at the European Respiratory Society Annual Congress in Spain tomorrow (Sunday) which may be why Lancet hasn't posted it yet.
Last edited:
Just found an article in the New Zealand Herald, won't link to it cause it's mostly rehash of every other article we've already read, but two things made me chuckle. The headline is Sexy and safe? How new fake cigarettes help smokers quit.
The lead-in paragraph:
I like that they say "more effective than" instead of "same as," and while they've got their sequence of events wrong, I do like them saying health workers are consterned... consternated... filled with conster.... :going for a vape:
The lead-in paragraph:
I like that they say "more effective than" instead of "same as," and while they've got their sequence of events wrong, I do like them saying health workers are consterned... consternated... filled with conster.... :going for a vape:
They were not using the products we commonly use. They were using one of the earlier models. The researchers are starting to catch on to the fact that the equipment does make a difference, and I think they will also see (eventually) that higher nicotine levels increase success rates as will.
[edit] Oh, and indefinite use makes a big difference, too. I'm convinced that for many of us, the biggest cause of relapse is nicotine abstinence. And ironically, that's the goal of all medically approved smoking cessation treatments. C'mon ANTZ. Get a clue!
Last edited:
I'm happy to report that this story is getting wide press coverage. A Google search with the terms "e-cigarette help smokers quit" returned 2,500,000 hits. The story has been picked up by Reuters, Yahoo News, NY Times, Huffington Post (really!!), Bloomberg, and Scientific American. And that's just on the first page of the Google hits.
It would help if people who reply to such articles use correct information. Someone said their e-liquid contains nicotine extracted from green tomatoes. Really?
I'm tickled to death to finally see a positive article. I was also surprised at the low success rate numbers. From just personal experience, I think we're going to see an extremely high success rate, I think 70% or more, if it's allowed to grow and improve.
There is a much better article about this study (linked below) that speaks to the relapse rate in favor of e-cigs:
http://www.newscientist.com/article...as-well-as-nicotine-patches.html#.UiwIesaWY9s
I really like that Newscientist article. I'll be bookmarking it for later use.
So probably the best case is they were using 510's or similar with pre filled cartomizers. Limited flavor choices, if any choices. Probably a lower nicotine dose (do you think 12 mg or 6 mg). and once they were out of e cig supplies they were supposed to be "cured" of their nicotine addiction. In my opinion, the fact that e-cigarettes used in this way had a 7.8% success rate over 6 months is amazing.
What I want for Christmas is a study that starts by turning some people loose on ECF for a week or so, and then, after they've had a chance to do a little research allows them a vape budget equal to their normal smoking spending. Go ahead and eliminate the subsidy after 12 weeks or whatever, but allow them to continue purchasing whatever they desire with their own money. Don't have nicotine cessation as the end goal, but smoking cessation. Then come back in 6 months and see what kind of success rate you have.
Are you listening Santa?
There are only two problems with your Christmas wish:
1) It's not a controlled study when you allow the participants to use whatever version of a product they wish to use, so it likely wouldn't hold up to peer review. However, offering higher strengths in e-liquid could be something that would enhance the study.
2) The results of a study of this type are already known (vastly in favor of e-cigs), so it could never be funded by any of the standard sources given there is no chance to get the results they actually want.
Well, I guess we know I'm no scientist then. So if all the subjects used the same EGO type battery would that be acceptable? As far as flavor variation would that be allowed if the PG/VG and nic level were the same? I would also appreciate any information on the study you mentioned. It is either from before my time, or I missed it somehow.
Am I correct that with most of these studies "success" is only measured by complete cessation of nicotine usage?
Here it is only September and you've already ruined Christmas for me.
I want some studies on exactly how nicotine is hazardous to our health. I think the opposition to nicotine is a knee jerk reaction that needs to be looked at a lot more closely. Just because it's addictive should it be considered bad? Caffeine continues to get good press.
Well, I guess we know I'm no scientist then. So if all the subjects used the same EGO type battery would that be acceptable? As far as flavor variation would that be allowed if the PG/VG and nic level were the same? I would also appreciate any information on the study you mentioned. It is either from before my time, or I missed it somehow.
Am I correct that with most of these studies "success" is only measured by complete cessation of nicotine usage?
Here it is only September and you've already ruined Christmas for me.
I am truly sorry for ruining your Christmas! Go and order yourself some good vape supplies to put under the tree and that might help.
I had the same thoughts as you as far as the eGo (Twist) type batteries, maybe using EVODs instead of cartos, and allowing different strengths and flavors. I'm no scientist either, but I believe that would complicate the review process and make it more difficult to prove a direct correlation to patches in the study. Mostly because the better e-cig devices are not as well known by those doing the reviews, and the variations in flavor and nic strength would be difficult to quantify.
As for my second point, I believe you misinterpreted what I wrote (probably my fault in the way I presented it). There has been no study of this type performed (that I'm aware of), and I was speaking more to the BP and BT lobby groups in a kind of tongue-in-cheek manner.
I think the authors acknowledge the limitations of the equipment used. They admit that a single carto equals about 20% of the nicotine that a smoker would normally get. They also wonder if higher nic would improve the success rate. And I bet they are hoping for some funding to answer this very question. Why do one study when you might get to do two or three.
If one group is allowed to have a variety of products, and there were one or more groups that could use only specified products, then that would also be a controlled study. This hypothetical study would be measuring whether variety is more or less effective than dictating to a smoker how they should achieve the switch to e-cigs. (Can you guess what my prejudice is?)
I think an interesting study would be one group given cig-a-likes VS. another group given an "Alice's Resturant" type instructions booklet (full of 8 by 10 color glossies with a paragraph on the back of each one) giving concise information and simple instructions about the different types of equipment. Of course, if this were a real study, by the time that the protocol was approved, the grant applied for and received, etc., the information in the booklet would be obsolete.
It depends on what is being studied, what the control group would/should be.
I think an interesting study would be one group given cig-a-likes VS. another group given an "Alice's Resturant" type instructions booklet (full of 8 by 10 color glossies with a paragraph on the back of each one) giving concise information and simple instructions about the different types of equipment. Of course, if this were a real study, by the time that the protocol was approved, the grant applied for and received, etc., the information in the booklet would be obsolete.
It depends on what is being studied, what the control group would/should be.
Another POSITIVE article here. http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news...e-in-battle-over-smoking-substitute-1-6021819
Call for common sense
Call for common sense
I like your idea, but I believe that would fall more inline with a marketing study than a scientific study. From a marketing standpoint, and to support consumer acceptance of a product to improve public health, it's a sound idea. From a scientific standpoint, I fear that it would be difficult at best to quantify the results into raw numbers, and that the opposition view wouldn't have a difficult time punching holes in it.
- Status
Similar threads
