Prue Talbot conducts study on ECF posts, grossly misrepresents facts

[stauglocal]

Unbelievable. What will they try next?

 

[Petrodus]

Unbelievable. What will they try next?

Q: What will they do next ??
A: Anything and Everything !! (Truth means nothing to them)

 

[rolygate]

Yes, our own health-related poll would probably be better than this kind of agenda-based rubbish.

However we would need certain technical controls on a poll of this type:

1. Minimum 50 posts
2. Minimum 6 months membership
3. Secret voting; but where admin can determine who voted in case of later questions

For example we don't want a situation where newly-created members can flood it with negative votes; or where someone can vote negative and include something like, "vaping gave me Multiple Sclerosis and Lupus", without being able to verify such claims.

As we don't have a way to run a poll of this nature, it is unlikely to be done.

We already know that vaping has zero to minimal implications for health after 7 years widespread use: the FDA has received over 10,000 serious incident reports from Chantix users or their surviving relatives, but only 47 reports for vaping, in the same timescale. Prof Rodu examined the vaping-related reports and dismissed them as inconsequential and irrelevant.

If the FDA don't have any evidence for health issues, with all their resources and their massively pro-pharma pro-smoking anti-vaping agenda, with a userbase of 3 million vapers to draw on just in the USA, then it is fair to say at this stage that "E-Cigarette use has no demonstrated short-term impact on health". As for the long term, come back in two decades.

It doesn't matter what paid propagandists like Talbot say, apart from the media presence that assorted loonies and liars have.

 

[pmos69]

You're right. Controls are required for something like this.
Perhaps some day.
Results would certainly be valuable.

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Vocalek]

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.

Haven't you ever heard the saying, "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean that they aren't out to get you"?

 

[Petrodus]

The reason why the "Prude" publishes her Junk Science is
because no one will do anything about it !!

She couldn't care less about truth
That's not a rant ... Its a Fact.

 

[DrMA]

The reason why the "Prude" publishes her Junk Science is
because no one will do anything about it !!

She couldn't care less about truth
That's not a rant ... Its a Fact.

I think these articles alone would be enough to show that Prude Talbot is guilty of serious academic misconduct, including making false claims, misrepresentation of data, misinterpretation of results, pseudo-scientific paranoia, and flat out being a greedy sociopathic agent of special interest groups.

 

[rolygate]

I admire her for getting $850,000 for trials that included watching YouTube videos of vapers and then making up some specious rubbish about it.

You have to admit she's got talent - talent for defrauding pharma relieving pharma of significant funds for utterly useless purposes. I like that.

We need more people like her because (a) pharma will lose pots of money, and (b) the more loony toons publishing anti-ecig twaddle, the better we look. If that's the best they can do, there are clearly no real issues to address.

You have to admire someone who is so useless they can't even figure out that an ecig user doesn't employ a lung inhale like a cigarette smoker, but can still convince someone to pay up hundreds of thousands of dollars for useless tosh. It's kind of like a reverse intelligence quotient for getting big bucks - the stupider you are, the more they pay you. I love it.

 

[Kweb]

I am working on my PhD right now- candidacy exam due next Friday- and I can tell you with absolute certainty- theoretical data is malleable. It is like clay. You can shape it in any way you wish. Whenever you see a study that isn't completely scientific in nature, you need to ask yourself a few questions about context. Never take statistics at face value. They are always skewed to benefit the research study.

 

[DrMA]

That's right, kweb. Anybody who's read this book can do it.
Amazon.com: How to Lie with Statistics (9780393310726): Darrell Huff, Irving Geis: Books

 

[aubergine]

Here's the thing - there's been enough money and will floating around that if there was even one case of significant health problems conclusively linked to vaping, it'd be out there, with trumpets. And they need that to even approach credibility. The rest is just easily challenged agitprop.
We can't have long-term data yet but I've been vaping for over 3 years and I chain-vape, 24/7 - I'm an extreme vaper by anyone's standards. I'm 62 years old. I feel wonderful, so much better than I did in my 50s when I smoked, and doc calls my lungs absolutely clear (I smoked for decades) and all systems 100% go. I run, I leap, I frolic, I BREATHE again. Like so many of us in here.
What P. found was health conscious concerns within a health conscious community, akin to the same phenomena among foodies who wonder if they should cook with Teflon and whether the rash on their nose has to do with too much sugar. (I also happen to be a very health conscious foodie, and I could go on about the regulatory corruption on that front.) Those might be legitimate inquiries/anecdotes but hardly the sort of stuff to support legislative intervention.

But wait - $850,000? THAT might really inspire some serious action... I'm hastily rethinking...

Dear ECF friends,
Please send me detailed descriptions of any and all medical problems you have had since vaping. Do not mention any related previous conditions. Do not send me information involving spontaneous relief from or discovery of other causes for symptoms. Try especially to capture moments of high anxiety that reflect normal fear of change; take these as moments of truth. I especially welcome reports by persons who suffer from somatic disorder or any of the paranoias. And who are using [rocks of nasty stuff] concurrently. Just don't put that stuff in. If possible please try really hard to explode your ecig and send photos. This is for your own good. PM me concerning remuneration.
Aubs

 

[Petrodus]

The problem with requesting medical conditions relating to vaping
is "PROOF" the conditions were caused by e-smoking. The "Health, Safety, & E-Smoking" forum
is full of posts and discussions where vapers attribute this and that to e-smoking
and much is due separate medical conditions or attributed to withdrawal from smoking tobacco.

 

[DC2]

The "Health, Safety, & E-Smoking" forum
is full of posts and discussions where vapers attribute this and that to e-smoking
and much is due separate medical conditions or attributed to withdrawal from smoking tobacco.

Exactly....

 

[aubergine]

Petrodotus, you understood that I was being satirical, right?

 

[Petrodus]

Petrodotus, you understood that I was being satirical, right?

I should have known that !!

 

[rolygate]

...........But wait - $850,000?

Dear ECF friends,
Please send me detailed descriptions of any and all medical problems you have had since vaping. Do not mention any related previous conditions. Do not send me information involving spontaneous relief from or discovery of other causes for symptoms. Try especially to capture moments of high anxiety that reflect normal fear of change; take these as moments of truth. I especially welcome reports by persons who suffer from somatic disorder or any of the paranoias. And who are using [Bolivian marching powder] concurrently. Just don't put that stuff in. If possible please try really hard to explode your ecig and send photos. This is for your own good. PM me concerning remuneration.
Aubs

You might get $1,850,000 if you keep this up

 

[StereoDreamer]

Prue Talbot's Professional website:
UCR Faculty Directory: Individual Listing

Her "personal" website:
Welcome to Talbot Central

Contact info:
Phone: (951) 827-3768
Fax: (951) 827-4286
E-Mail: talbot@ucr.edu


Don't mean nothin' by that. Just sayin... ;-)

 

[aubergine]

That's so funny... I was in the tub and suddenly thought, "Oh jeez I inadvertently made a drug reference", and just this minute popped in here to change it.
I loves you rolygate.

 

[Boden]

I'm gonna have fun with this one.

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.

Well that's just a bunch of nonsense..

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. OOHHAAA fancy

A nickel-chromium filament was coupled to a thicker silver coated copper wire. The silver coating was sometimes missing.
That happens when you work wire, the missing bits are probably on the floor of some factory.

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.

Oh No... not copper. "Inhalation: Dust is irritating to the respiratory tract." source: http://fscimage.fishersci.com/msds/05430.htm


Centrifugation of the fibers produced large pellets containing tin. So???

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.


Cytotoxic??? not likely

Tin:
Potential Acute Health Effects: Slightly hazardous in case of skin contact (irritant), of eye contact (irritant), of ingestion, of inhalation.
Potential Chronic Health Effects:
CARCINOGENIC EFFECTS: Not available. MUTAGENIC EFFECTS: Not available. TERATOGENIC EFFECTS: Not available.
DEVELOPMENTAL TOXICITY: Not available. Repeated or prolonged exposure is not known to aggravate medical condition.

Effects of overexposure, Acute and Chronic: No effects expected to skin. May cause mechanical abraision to eyes. Prolonged inhalation of dust or fume may result in a benign pneumoconiosis, producing distinctive changes in the lungs with no apparent disability or complications.
Source: http://avogadro.chem.iastate.edu/MSDS/sn-mossy.htm

Benign Pneumoconiosis:
CAUSE
Benign Pneumoconiosis caused by inhalation of dust can be ferrous metal, silver / tin and barium.
Siderosis occur as a result of inhalation of iron oxide, barium baritosis due to inhalation and suctioning stannosis occurred because the elements of silver. Iron dust exposure occurred in the mining, milling and cutting metals.
Inhalation of dust iron, silver and barium, lead to changes in lung structure that is very light so that only cause few symptoms. But the reaction network can be seen on chest x-rays as a large number of small areas of opaque.

During the process of inspiration (breathing air), airborne dust particles that have diameters of more than 10 mm, filtered by the nose hairs. Other dust particles, which enter through the mouth, is stored in the upper respiratory tract.
Dust particles with a diameter of 5-10 mm, are likely to be living in the mucus surrounding the bronchi and bronchioles, then swept toward the throat by a delicate hairs (cilia). They are coughed from the throat or thrown away, but some of them have swallowed. Particle diameter of less than 5 mm, more easily reach the lung tissue.

SYMPTOMS
Although the dust from the metal chest was clear on the photo, but did not cause much reaction in the lungs so that no symptoms or impaired lung function.

TREATMENT
Because no symptoms develop, then no special treatment.
Source: Benign Pneumoconiosis | anmedicaldisease.com


The aerosol contained particles >1μm comprised of tin, silver, iron, nickel, aluminum, and silicate and nanoparticles (< 100 nm) of tin, chromium, and nickel.

Ok, what's left. aluminum, chromium, nickel and silicate.

Aluminum: Dust can cause irritation of the resperatory tract
Source: http://www.alcoa.com/global/en/environment/msds_view.asp?LoadMSDS=199691
They know a thing or two about aluminum.

Chromium: Inhalation: Irritation
Source: http://www.laddresearch.com/wsmsds/30500msds.pdf

Nickel: another irritant, couldn't find anything definitive. Found a bunch of maybe's

Silicate: Definition: A salt or ester derived from a silicic acid; especially : any of numerous insoluble often complex metal salts that contain silicon and oxygen in the anion, constitute the largest class of minerals, and are used in building materials (as cement, bricks, and glass)

???? Which silicate are they referring to ????
My guess: Amorphous silica (wick): Epidemiological studies do not support the hypothesis that amorphous silicas have any relevant potential to induce fibrosis in workers with high occupational exposure to these substances,
Source:Health hazards due to the inhalation of amorpho... [Arch Toxicol. 2002] - PubMed - NCBI

Of 22 elements identified, 12 were present in concentrations higher than the minimum risk level. Really? How did they figure this out. There are no MRL's for metals in liquid to be vaporized and inhaled. (ask me how I know)

Many of the elements identified in EC aerosol are known to cause respiratory distress true in high concentrations and disease. B.S.

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.
I think I've covered this... wait, Bystanders????? The concentrations possible are so low... now I'm mad!!!

What a bunch of....

 

[jlew]

While there are probably several hundred postings on ECF that mention a minor adverse health effect they experienced from an e-cigarette,
there are several million postings on ECF (i.e. virtually all other postings on ECF) by folks who experienced positive health outcomes from using e-cigarettes (as that's the only reason they visited or posted on ECF).

In other words, <1% of postings on ECF mention an adverse health outcome from using an e-cigarette.

Then all of the "Crap" that So and So has collected needs a full rebuttal by the members of
ECF... whom in my opinion, have been violated by someone "Collecting" information and using
it 1)Without permission from the posters to do so for legal/medical/etc purposes -- and/or --
for Misrepresenting the so called collected information and twisting it out of context.

The ones who have most "authority" to do so should contact this Prue(d) (lol) and let
it be known that the members of ECF do not appreciate her lies and "Fear Mongering"
in association with the "use" of our posts and that all efforts should be (ethically)
made to include in any report - the FACTS about the majority of Positives which far
outweigh any negatives this person "found".

CASAA should "Break Bad" all over this one because all it is going to do is hurt the
e-cigarette cause even further because it is a "Professional" who is creating this
"Stir" and people will believe a "professional"! with degrees in the field over a bunch
of online forum posters. It will only fuel the FDA's position and cause the "demon
regs" to come upon us even faster.