Science Daily: Some Smokers Successfully Switch to Electronic Cigarettes

[kristin]

ScienceDaily (Sep. 14, 2011) — While electronic cigarettes may be a long-term alternative to the real thing for some smokers, Penn State College of Medicine researchers suggest medical providers should continue to encourage more traditional smoking cessation methods.

The researchers investigated this growing phenomenon through a survey of 104 long-term e-cigarette users. E-cigs typically consist of a cigarette-shaped device with a battery, a heating element and a cartridge containing propylene glycol and nicotine. Users puff on the mouthpiece to activate a circuit that heats the atomizer and produces a vapor. The users then inhale.

"If some smokers have difficulty overcoming both nicotine dependence and long-term habit change, then surely one solution is to help them avoid most of the health risks with only a minimal alteration in their nicotine-seeking habit," said Jonathan Foulds, Ph.D., professor of public health sciences and psychiatry. "This implies a nicotine replacement device that looks like a cigarette and delivers nicotine like a cigarette, but does not deliver the tar and carbon monoxide that cause the vast majority of smoking-caused disease."

The study found that 78 percent of long-term users were no longer using tobacco and planned on using their e-cig instead. Interestingly, only 8 percent were using the most widely marketed style of cigarette-shaped e-cigs. Most had learned that these do not deliver adequate nicotine and had used online forums and personal experience to find out which types of e-cigs deliver a satisfying effect capable of keeping them off real cigarettes, the researchers reported in a recent issue of the International Journal of Clinical Practice.

"These products initially seemed to be something of a gimmick and likely to be banned by the FDA," said Foulds. "However, they are continuing to be popular and at least some smokers appear to find them helpful. However, we just don't have enough information on their long-term safety and effectiveness for clinicians to recommend them.

"Until that research has been carried out, I would advise smokers to use proven treatments. The treatments that have been proven to work include counseling (e.g. available for free via 1-800-QUIT NOW), nicotine replacement, bupropion or varenicline.

Read Full Story

 

[kristin]

I love how 78% translates to "some smokers" for e-cigarettes when 3-7% is considered "effective" for NRT!

Also, how Foulds recommends smokers use products with 93%+ FAILURE RATE instead of e-cigarettes, which his own study says kept 78% from smoking!

What is HE smoking that this logic makes sense??

 

[crashinbrn]

some hundred years ago the earth was flat, and the center of the universe too.

the greatest scientists were prosecuted because they stated otherwise.

he doesnt want to change his opinion, even though the science says otherwise.

can't see the forest because of the trees.

 

[Vocalek]

Galileo

"Nevertheless, it moves."

 

[kristin]

I see Dr. Rodu's has similar take on this on his blog:

Foulds and colleagues acknowledge that “the health risks from smoking are large and are known with certainty. Comparatively, the health risks from e-cig use are likely much smaller (if any) and temporarily switching to e-cigs will likely yield a large health benefit.” However, they inexplicably conclude that “current smokers who are interested in quitting smoking should be strongly directed towards evidence-based treatments (counseling, and approved medicines like nicotine replacement, bupropion or varenicline), rather than to e-cigs.”

Foulds and colleagues write that “we do not know enough about e-cigs to recommend them to patients.” Still, they must know that the “evidence” for evidence-based treatments is not compelling. Nicotine medicines have a 93% failure rate (here), and bupropion and varenicline are fraught with potentially serious side effects (here).

Tobacco Truth: Insights From E-cigarette Users

 

[Uma]

They are covering their butts by not referring them to smokers, but at least they are finally admitting that they are a really great alternative for those who've gone through all the other quit smoking tips to no avail. I'm rather liking this article. Great find Kristin!

 

[Uma]

And this part is a classic example of how the contradicting propaganda fanatics work:

Quote:
An additional problem with e-cigarettes, Foulds said, is that there appears to be poor quality control. Some sold as "high nicotine" appear to deliver very little nicotine, and there are concerns about the quality of the labeling and instructions.

"I am particularly concerned that a child may be poisoned by drinking the flavored liquid designed for e-cigarettes," Foulds said. "These types of products have the potential to help smokers to quit, but right now tighter quality control and regulation is needed."
Unquote

mmmmm, no nic in the high nic liquid, yet there's high nic juice to harm a kid. Maybe the speaker should example a taste of our flavored juice with nic in it before worrying about someone being stupid enough to drink the stuff. ewww! but then again, I've heard stories of children drinking clorox...

 

[kristin]

Great find Kristin!

Thanks, but it was actually posted by Karen C on the We Are CASAA facebook page: We Are CASAA | Facebook

A lot of great info to be found there and on the CASAA Facebook page.

 

[Uma]

Good find, Karen C!

 

[kristin]

And this part is a classic example of how the contradicting propaganda fanatics work:

Quote:
An additional problem with e-cigarettes, Foulds said, is that there appears to be poor quality control. Some sold as "high nicotine" appear to deliver very little nicotine, and there are concerns about the quality of the labeling and instructions.

"I am particularly concerned that a child may be poisoned by drinking the flavored liquid designed for e-cigarettes," Foulds said. "These types of products have the potential to help smokers to quit, but right now tighter quality control and regulation is needed."
Unquote

mmmmm, no nic in the high nic liquid, yet there's high nic juice to harm a kid. Maybe the speaker should example a taste of our flavored juice with nic in it before worrying about someone being stupid enough to drink the stuff. ewww! but then again, I've heard stories of children drinking clorox...

Yep - it completely ignores the fact that households are filled with dozens of potentially poisonous products and assumes we are all bad parents who wouldn't take safety precautions with small children!

Note that there was/is no uproar about tasty nicotine gums or lozenges (because they are poisonous to children) and those products taste much, much better than e-liquid, because they are meant to sit directly in the mouth.

The mini lozenges come in 4mg strength and the packages are very easy to open. A kid could easily eat dozens from the 81ct package - definitely enough to be fatal. One swig of e-liquid and the kids would be wiping their tongue on the rug because it tastes so bad!

 

[Vocalek]

The odds of a child being fatally poisoned by either e-liquid or from pharmaceutical nicotine products are pretty low. The body has a natural defense mechanism against oral poisoning by nicotine. It's called vomiting.

 

[pianoguy]

I love how 78% translates to "some smokers" for e-cigarettes when 3-7% is considered "effective" for NRT!

Also, how Foulds recommends smokers use products with 93%+ FAILURE RATE instead of e-cigarettes, which his own study says kept 78% from smoking!

What is HE smoking that this logic makes sense??

 

[Vocalek]

At least the headline on the Science Daily story was not as negative as this one, link posted on Facebook by VapingMandyCat

More Proof Required About the Safety of E-cigarettes in Helping Smokers Quit | MedIndia

I left this comment:

Editor: Would you care to explain why you decided to put a negative spin in the headline? This is not a story about the dangers of using e-cigarettes. It's a story about an astonishing 78% success rate. What other product or stop smoking method comes anywhere close to that? Counselling alone has a success rate of 2%. The highest success rate seen with an FDA-approved medication is 17% when combined with counselling. And that 17% success rate is bought at the price of suicides, murders, and seizures. How do you figure that these are "better treatments" when no such problems have been reported with use of e-cigarettes and the success rate is at least 4.5 times higher? The authors of the study gave absolutely no explanation for why they believe that it will be healthier for smokers to continue puffing on cancer sticks while all this absolute proof of safety of e-cigarettes is gathered.

 

[Baldr]

Interviews of more than 100 people who regularly used e-cigarettes revealed that nearly 78% said they had not used tobacco for a month.

This does not correlate to a 78% success rate. These were people who were already using e-cigs. Obviously, if you take people who are already using them, you're going to have a high success rate, because people that tried them and got nowhere wouldn't have continued using them. They wouldn't be part of the study.

Overall, though, it is a good story. It's too bad they are trying to spin it into a bad thing.