Protecting our children: The missing data.

[Steam Turbine]

I would like to expose a fallacy that is very common within the "what-about-the-kids" proponents...

Yes, I know, I'm not the first one making this point, if you dont want to ear it, stop reading right here.

Let's take an exerpt out of this article posted in Bloomberg Business Week:

The Essentials
1. As e-cigarettes become more popular, the federal government is looking for ways to regulate their use, especially among teens. A March study in the journal JAMA Pediatrics reported that 3.3 percent of 6th to 12th graders said they’d tried e-cigarettes in 2011. In 2012 the number more than doubled, to 6.8 percent. Using data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the study found kids who tried e-cigarettes were more likely to try real cigarettes than those who hadn’t.

See how they did that?

Now, let's assume that they got there numbers right... By reading this, one would think that, not only is ecigs gaining in popularity, but that vaping is a gateway to smoking.

But there is a key statistic that is missing here: the % of children that tried cigarettes.

Without this percentage, we cannot arrive at any meaningful conclusions. One would not be surprised that kids who tried smoking also have tried vaping... Therefore , as they put it, kids who have tried ecigs are more likely to try cigarettes aswell, it is the same statement.

It does not confirm nor invalidate the idea that ecigs are on the rise with kids that would not have tried smoking in the first place. It is nothing more than empty, meaningless statistics.

And usually meaningless statistics are employed to wrap facts to ones advantage.

 

[WattWick]

It also completely excludes any quantification of the number of kids who don't start smoking because they started vaping instead. A good number of new kid smokers start their habit every year. Until proven otherwise, I firmly believe that vaping only helps lower this number, not increase it.

Besides, it's all emotional hogwash. The only known (at least to me) research on this is referred to by Dr. Farsalinos in the excellent interview by ECF.

Yet the press often runs stories about children vaping, or how vaping is considered cool amongst their peers, just like smoking. Is there any truth in that?

We have data from the USA and the UK on this, but the headlines don’t match the results once you look at them properly – the best example being the latest CDC study.

Some very vocal people at the CDC are making out that we are witnessing a new nicotine epidemic from e-cigarettes. But they weren’t asking these young people if they were regular users. The results were based on the question ‘have you tried an e-cigarette in the last 30 days?’ According to the CDC you’re a user if you’ve had even one puff in the last 30 days. Yet if you took the number of young people who were not smokers but had tried an e-cigarette over the last 30 days, the number was just 0.5%. They presented that result as a problem, which it is not. According to common sense, 0.5% is almost non-existent.

 

[Talyon]

Here's another article and a great read, that touches on this very subject.

Achieving appropriate regulations for electronic cigarettes

All Vapers alike should read this.

 

[WattWick]

For all I care... set the minimum age to 25 or higher. The only thing this will achieve is more kids picking up smoking.

(Not entirely serious. Just exaggerating a little to make a point.)

 

[Nermal]

It also completely excludes any quantification of the number of kids who don't start smoking because they started vaping instead. . .

No comment. I just quoted that because I wanted to see it again.

 

[Anthal69]

What about the sample age group? Instead of 6 graders, why not just sample all K-12 students. It would make more of a shock factor if the public thought a 5 year old may try an ecig. Did they even take in to account the children that came from a family with at least one adult smoker? How about a hereditary disposition to have an addictive personality. It's the same old diatribe. Them fruity favors are gonna make a druggies outta our kiddies!

 

[PeppermintPatty]

Here's another article and a great read, that touches on this very subject.

Achieving appropriate regulations for electronic cigarettes

All Vapers alike should read this.

An intersting thing to note is that while some of the recommendations of regulation seem logical and safety-geared (clear labeling, childproof caps, safe handling practices), isn't is just amazing that every e juice I have bought online has come with just that? Easy to read label contining ingredients and amounts, the childproof caps, in a bottle that will not easily break? Egads how did they do it without government regulation? Is it at all possible that the consumers themselves would reject a shoddy questionable product? No way, we are too stupid.

I understand the desire for government regulations, but the vaping industry, IMO, is a fascinating look at what happens when the public has started to research, create, and self regulate their own product. And I think we are doing pretty good.

 

[meanckz]

But there is a key statistic that is missing here: the % of children that tried cigarettes.

HA! I read that article too....and was thinking exactly that!


I just didn't think to put it here

 

[Hulamoon]

Agreed. If you look at ANY of the ANTZ & Glantz propaganda, you will notice that ALL their studies lack a comparative - ie vaping vs ??? uhh... how about a cigarette? OK.... ummmm....air pollution....no? Heck what about compared to the chemicals and other nasties that you breathe out anyway purely from being alive and breathing?

As I mentioned elsewhere, vaping has been around for 10-15? years now. If Pfizer/Glaxo/BT/that Aunt Fanny who lives at the corner of your street and is always twitching her net curtains, had ANY proof whatsoever, (and believe me they have been ferreting away in their labs looking for everything and anything they can hang their hat on), they would have been all over vaping and how terrible it is etc ad nauseum like flies on sh....excuse me.... poop. It would have been on every media outlet. It would be driven into children's heads at school, people would cross the street when they see us coming.

All their "children" arguments are absolutely as silly - it assumes that no kid ever again would ever light up a cigarette for the first time. Of course there are, and of course they will. Hands up all of us who had tried - and even begun to form the habit of smoking by the age of, I dunno....14?

 

[Jarbs]

They also forgot to mention that kids are curious creatures that just want to try things in general.

 

[Botomline]

I would like to expose a fallacy that is very common within the "what-about-the-kids" proponents...

Yes, I know, I'm not the first one making this point, if you dont want to ear it, stop reading right here.

Let's take an exerpt out of this article posted in Bloomberg Business Week:



See how they did that?

Now, let's assume that they got there numbers right... By reading this, one would think that, not only is ecigs gaining in popularity, but that vaping is a gateway to smoking.

But there is a key statistic that is missing here: the % of children that tried cigarettes.

Without this percentage, we cannot arrive at any meaningful conclusions. One would not be surprised that kids who tried smoking also have tried vaping... Therefore , as they put it, kids who have tried ecigs are more likely to try cigarettes aswell, it is the same statement.

It does not confirm nor invalidate the idea that ecigs are on the rise with kids that would not have tried smoking in the first place. It is nothing more than empty, meaningless statistics.

And usually meaningless statistics are employed to wrap facts to ones advantage.

They got it wrong for a whole lot of reasons. They didn't prove anything. Correlation is NOT causation. Nor does it provide anything more than a lot of unconnected data. Drawing any conclusions from data like that is a joke and most of the legitimate researchers are blowing holes in it. Also, they are often only reprinting summaries of the actual papers that don't include the caveats the researchers included to point out the fact that they know that no valid conclusions could be drawn from the analysis and data. The sad part is that the researchers only did that to cover their ...., because they then went on to draw the false conclusion knowing people would only grab the juicy parts to support their little spin.

 

[coalyard]

I would like to expose a fallacy that is very common within the "what-about-the-kids" proponents...

Yes, I know, I'm not the first one making this point, if you dont want to ear it, stop reading right here.

Let's take an exerpt out of this article posted in Bloomberg Business Week:



See how they did that?

Now, let's assume that they got there numbers right... By reading this, one would think that, not only is ecigs gaining in popularity, but that vaping is a gateway to smoking.

But there is a key statistic that is missing here: the % of children that tried cigarettes.

Without this percentage, we cannot arrive at any meaningful conclusions. One would not be surprised that kids who tried smoking also have tried vaping... Therefore , as they put it, kids who have tried ecigs are more likely to try cigarettes aswell, it is the same statement.

It does not confirm nor invalidate the idea that ecigs are on the rise with kids that would not have tried smoking in the first place. It is nothing more than empty, meaningless statistics.

And usually meaningless statistics are employed to wrap facts to ones advantage.

Not included in those statistics are what qualifies as "trying" an e-cigarette. I have tried a lot of things in life I chose not to continue to do. It really blows my mind that many people (you know who you are) will argue that we need sex education, or we need to hand out free condoms to kids, or we can give a morning after pill to kids without parental consent, because "they're just going to do it anyway."

Children, by virtue of being inexperienced and rebellious, are going to potentially engage in any number of dangerous or harmful things, including experimenting with real cigarettes, drugs, alcohol, and yes, sex. How that is dealt with is more properly the concern of parents, not the government.

It isn't about the children. It never was. It is about control.

“Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the government
take care of him better take a closer look at the American Indian.” --Henry Ford

 

[Glen Snyder]

Nothing new about the 'statistics' tactic. That's been going on for years in propaganda campaigns. There is no 'gateway'. It all boils down whether or not the individual user is prone to so called high risk behavior. An interesting fact about this particular mis information is that there is no mention of what percentage or how many of those teens polled used an e-cig more than 1 time or are regular users, just that they had tried e-cigs. In addition, the same survey indicated higher numbers using the same statistics for those very same teens in the trial of both cigarettes and what we'll call 'the devils lettuce' so as not to violate the forum drug talk policy. Funny that this particular survey seems to contradict other recent CDC information that concludes the percentage of teen smokers is on the decline. Of course the credit is given to the anti tobacco initiatives sponsored by the government.

The following has been said of statistics:

There are lies, there are damn lies, then there are statistics.

 

[Recycled Roadkill]

The following has been said of statistics:

There are lies, there are damn lies, then there are statistics.

Amen to that.

 

[skoony]

its the children.
thats why vaping is doomed.
the buffet at the casino has banned smoking and vaping(the seven table section in a 150 table buffet) because the
socker moms screamed murder.there poisoning my kids.
this is after they dragged there kids through the gambling area where smoking is allowed.
didn't even consider the fact that gamblers have a higher percentage of smokers and drinkers
than the general population.
its this type of thinking we are up against.

regards
mike

 

[Stosh]

One other stat missing, the percentage of children that smoked and gave it up for vaping.

 

[makeyourself]

1. As e-cigarettes become more popular, the federal government is looking for ways to regulate their use, especially among teens. A March study in the journal JAMA Pediatrics reported that 3.3 percent of 6th to 12th graders said they’d tried e-cigarettes in 2011. In 2012 the number more than doubled, to 6.8 percent.

What are the figures for the general population during this period? How many of the children that "tried" e-cigarretes actually became users? Were these e-cigarette users existing smokers or non-smokers? Did it help them stop smoking? Was there a corresponding decrease in cigarette use? All of the data is missing and therefore the figures are meaningless. If e-cigarette use increased in popularity amongst the general population during that period then would it not be reasonable to expect that more teenagers would also try the product?

Using data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the study found kids who tried e-cigarettes were more likely to try real cigarettes than those who hadn’t.

Well there's a shocker, study finds that product used for tobacco harm control is used by tobacco users. One way of interpreting this completely ambiguous information that is utterly devoid of any substance whatsoever of course. If some of these children actually started smoking cigarettes and then switched to vaping, then how is that a bad thing exactly? NRT products get handed out to under 18s.

Here is a couple of excellent articles by renowned e-cig campaigner Clive Bates completely destroying the pseudo-scientific "save the children" / gateway propaganda:
We need to talk about the children – the gateway effect examined « The counterfactual
Cease and desist: making false claims about the gateway effect « The counterfactual