Prue Talbot conducts study on ECF posts, grossly misrepresents facts

[NorthOfAtlanta]

Yeah, that would be one of the non-productive things I was thinking of.

DC2, would it be worth flying out to watch?

 

[Randyrtx]

Yeah, that would be one of the non-productive things I was thinking of.

I'd ask you both to share the joke but Ms. Prue would likely use it to publish a new study on how e-cig use leads to unproductive actions.

 

[xhuffer]

"Highlighted in red is her assertion that a "significant proportion of the data (from ECF) showed . . . adverse health effects."

Dr. Prude, how do you know these observations to be true?

"They must be. After all, I read them on the internet!"

 

[zoiDman]

So where is all this Data that was collected supporting Allegedly adverse health effects?

I’ve been a member here for quite awhile. Haven’t seen many posts of people having problems besides Dry Mouth.

But I have read Thousands of post of people who have switched from Cigarettes and now feel Much Healthier.

 

[rolygate]

There is swelling on my knee where I dropped my PV.

Now let's see if that gets into their next "study."

Be sure to re-post this in the Health section, and you'll get your wish: in the next edition of the Talbot JSLP* Monthly you'll get a mention: Severe Orthopaedic Incidents Related To ENDS Use.



* junk science, lies, and propaganda

 

[rolygate]

That is an awesome way to do a study, ignore the thousands of posts of people quitting smoking and reporting significant health gains while using ones that people confuse withdrawal symptoms with side effects due to lack of knowledge. Sometimes I wonder why people don't lose their license to speak based on some of the things they come up with.

The Talbot JSLP Monthly wouldn't look quite so good, though, if they printed something nearer the truth:

8,497,500 ECF posts revealed health improvements or other assorted positive messages
325 posts reported side effects from smoking cessation
1 post reported a sore throat

 

[Petrodus]

* junk science, lies, and propaganda

Well ...
At least "PRUDE" Talbot (Wicked Witch of the West) is consistent ...
Ya can always count on her for "junk science, lies, and propaganda" !!

 

[StormFinch]

You know, her employer does have a complaint process for unethical research... just sayin. Granted, I'm not sure there are enough rules in place by the various governing bodies to cover internet based research, but they'd have to look into it.

 

[Luisa]

At next week's Society of Toxicology national meeting in San Antonio, e-cigarette prohibitionist and junk scientist Prue Talbot (and/or her research colleagues) will be presenting the following. Highlighted in red is her assertion that a "significant proportion of the data (from ECF) showed . . . adverse health effects."

A second study to be presented by Talbot et al claims that particles of several metals were found in at least one unspecified e-cigarette sample measuring several microns and several hundred nanometers, that she claims "are often above minimal risk levels".



141

Health-Related Effects Reported by Electronic Cigarette Users in Online Forums. M. Hua, M. Alfi and P. Talbot. Cell Biology and Neuroscience, University of California. Riverside, Riverside, CA. Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are battery-operated devices that deliver aerosolized nicotine to users without burning tobacco. Because little data exists on their health effects, we explored the symptoms that e-cigarette use has on humans by analyzing online user posts from three e-cigarette forums with “health and safety” sections. Basic information (location, age, and gender) and health (symptoms and doctor diagnosed signs) information were collected. A total of 405 symptoms (78 positive, 326 negative and 1 neutral) were reported in three forums. Most data analysis was performed on Electronic Cigarette Forum (ECF) posts. A total of 12 systems/anatomical regions were affected in e-cigarette users. Systems most often affected include: mouth and throat, respiratory, neurological, sensory, and digestive. The majority of negative health effects occurred in the respiratory system. We further consolidated reported symptoms into categories to determine which anatomical regions/physiological processes were most affected for each system. For consolidated data, symptoms were most frequently reported for: bronchi/lungs (e.g., wheezing, shortness of breath, difficulty breathing), throat; neurological (headaches), intestine/digestion, and sight. To analyze interactions between systems, interactions were created with Cytoscape software. Interactions were most frequently seen between circulatory/neurological; respiratory/mouth and throat; respiratory/chest, and digestive/neurological systems. Increased blood pressure was the most frequently reported sign diagnosed by physicians treating e-cigarette users. While some positive health effects were reported, a significant proportion of the data showed a correlation with e-cigarette use and onset of adverse health effects. This study is the first to compile and quantitatively assess health data associated with e-cigarette use from online forums.

1753

Identification of Metal and Silicate Particles Including Nanoparticles in Electronic Cigarette Fluid and Aerosol. M. T. Williams1, A. Villarreal1, K. Bozhilov2, S. Lin1 and P. Talbot1. 1Cell Biology and Neuroscience, University of California, Riverside, Riverside, CA; 2Central Facility for Advanced Microscopy, University of California Riverside, Riverside, CA. Electronic cigarettes (EC) deliver aerosol by heating fluid containing nicotine, flavorings, and a humectant. EC cartomizers combine the fluid chamber and heating element in a single unit. Because EC do not burn tobacco, they may be safer than conventional cigarettes. Their use is rapidly increasing worldwide with little prior testing of their aerosol. We hypothesized that EC aerosol contains metals derived from the various components. Cartomizer contents and aerosols were analyzed using microscopy, cytotoxicity testing, x-ray microanalysis, particle counting, and inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry. A nickel-chromium filament was coupled to a thicker silver coated copper wire. The silver coating was sometimes missing. Four tin solder joints attached the wires to each other and coupled the copper/silver wire to the air tube and mouthpiece. All cartomizers had evidence of use before packaging (burn spots on the fibers and electrophoretic movement of fluid in the fibers). Fibers in two cartomizers had green deposits that contained copper. Centrifugation of the fibers produced large pellets containing tin. Tin particles and tin whiskers were identified in cartridge fluid and outer fibers. Cartomizer fluid with tin particles was cytotoxic in assays using human pulmonary fibroblasts. The aerosol contained particles >1μm comprised of tin, silver, iron, nickel, aluminum, and silicate and nanoparticles (< 100 nm) of tin, chromium, and nickel. Of 22 elements identified, 12 were present in concentrations higher than the minimum risk level. Many of the elements identified in EC aerosol are known to cause respiratory distress and disease. The presence of metal and silicate particles in cartomizer aerosol, often above minimal risk levels, demonstrates the need for improved quality control in EC design and manufacture and studies on how EC aerosol impacts the health of users and bystanders.

Should we write letters to the San Antonio newspaper? Unfortunately,the Texas Legislature is in session and this could be very unhelpful when and if the Texas Legislature HHS committee proposes any restrictions on ecigs. Suggestions? Hi,Pru

 

[Petrodus]

You know, her employer does have a complaint process for unethical research... just sayin. Granted, I'm not sure there are enough rules in place by the various governing bodies to cover internet based research, but they'd have to look into it.

Does their Complaint Box look like this ??

 

[StormFinch]

Does their Complaint Box look like this ??

With the National Institute of Health and National Science Foundation setting the bar.... dunno, could be.

 

[Kurt]

The first study based on ECF posts lacks any shred of scientific rigor, on multiple levels. It is laughable at best, and has little chance of being published, in my opinion.

The second study with carto particles seems more scientific, and potentially concerning on the surface. Without seeing the presentation, the controls chosen, and exactly what was found in terms of levels, I cannot critique it just yet.

"Many of the elements identified in EC aerosol are known to cause respiratory distress and disease."

Disease? What disease exactly? And what is meant by "many" when there are not that many to begin with?

"The presence of metal and silicate particles in cartomizer aerosol, often above minimal risk levels, demonstrates the need for improved quality control in EC design and manufacture and studies on how EC aerosol impacts the health of users and bystanders."

The question is how do these compare to smoking aerosols? And are there any people presenting with illness due to these? We are always looking for improved designs, and the silica issue is one of them. I predict the prefilled-carto-only crowd will not like these implications. The second study looks like it cost a ton. It is also in contradiction with Dr. Farsolinos's result of directly applying carto vapor to heart cells...which actually thrived after application.

 

[Petrodus]

I wouldn't put it past the "Prude" to have "spiked" the punch ...
so to speak.

 

[subversive]

There was a thread a few months back where someone claimed that those who think that anyone out there has paid any attention to ECF are just conspiracy theorists. I don't remember the user, nor would I mention the name if I did, but I hope he/she and any others who think that see this thread.

 

[Kurt]

You are given the title "conspiracy theorist" by two types of people: those that cannot see, or those that don't want you to see.

 

[zoiDman]

You know, her employer does have a complaint process for unethical research... just sayin. Granted, I'm not sure there are enough rules in place by the various governing bodies to cover internet based research, but they'd have to look into it.

I sure would like to see the Data and Read the Study.

Then I would know what to e-Mail comments about.

 

[Dave L]

Every politician knows that facts can be used to spread lies.

Obviously, if I post something like, "My vape has suddenly started making my eyes water and my throat sore. What am I doing wrong?" such people would call that a reported negative effect of vaping. The truth would be, the more knowledgeable and experienced people would help me discover what I was doing wrong, which was what I wanted in the first place. Defective equipment? It happens. Allergic reaction? It happens. User error? You bet.

These are the exact tactics that people used to demonize another herb for decades, when the truth was that DuPont Corp. was having trouble finding a market for its new product, nylon, because hemp already did such a great job. Their solution? Stir up a bunch of hysteria, and call it a dangerous narcotic.

For the record: In less than three weeks of vaping, my setups have paid for themselves in tobacco savings. In fact, my wife and I will save nearly $3,000 a year. I breathe better, my sense of smell is returning and so is my sense of taste. I have completely quit smoking, after failing with the gum and patch, even after decades of PAD habit. Vaping has been a life-changer already, and I'm just getting started. The only negative effect I've noticed was when I tried upping my nic level. I could feel it, didn't like it, went back to 12ml. That is so miniscule compared to the positive effects it's hardly worth mentioning.

 

[cherrycakes]

oh for the love of god. I have seasonal depression and PCOS and I've posted about it on ECF, does that mean I got it from vaping?
NO
it's called a pre-existing condition.
What an ......

 

[Trick]

You are given the title "conspiracy theorist" by two types of people: those that cannot see, or those that don't want you to see.

Well, then there are the people who really are paranoid. It's a little silly to try to assert they don't exist.

I'm talking about the type of people who will accuse anyone with anything less than the rosiest of opinions of being some kind of spy. We've got those, too.

 

[pmos69]

The right answer to this would be a poll.