Studies say electric cigarettes are not what they seem
- Thread starter cookiebun
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Apparently the author didn't follow her own advice: "For more information, contact Elaine Keller".
That's all well and good.....no nicotine, no need for regulation. Let 'em keep thinking this way.
You're right, she didn't. I contacted her, though, after someone brought this to my attention. I was told that the station uses a service called Ivanhoe for this sort of thing. I have no idea how my name got connected to VCU, but I am hopefully waiting for a paycheck from them.
Here is a link to the source story
E-Cigarettes: Smoke & Mirrors? | Medical News and Health Information
At the bottom of the story there is this statement.
"If this story or any other Ivanhoe story has impacted your life or prompted you or someone you know to seek or change treatments, please let us know by contacting Marsha Hitchcock at mhitchcock@ivanhoe.com."
We need to use this contact information and see what they have to say.
E-Cigarettes: Smoke & Mirrors? | Medical News and Health Information
At the bottom of the story there is this statement.
"If this story or any other Ivanhoe story has impacted your life or prompted you or someone you know to seek or change treatments, please let us know by contacting Marsha Hitchcock at mhitchcock@ivanhoe.com."
We need to use this contact information and see what they have to say.
Isnt Tom Eissenberg that dude who recently had a study for vapers that were recruiting here? In VA?? I remember there were a couple of people who participated.
Here is the body of the email i sent in...
I am contacting you in regards to the story you recently published Titled "E-Cigarettes: Smoke & Mirrors"
E-Cigarettes: Smoke & Mirrors? | Medical News and Health Information
In my opinion your story is incomplete and contains completely wrong and inaccurate statements. You quoted Professor Tom Eissenberg with no indication of his information or background.
The statement "A pair of studies found while real cigarettes deliver nicotine, E-cigs do not -- despite claiming to do so." I patently false and misleading. The details of these studies need to be included in the story.
I urge you to do some independent research and fact checking on this story as this device has the possibility of saving millions of lives in the US and countless more across the world. Shoddy and uninformed reporting such as this is a great dis-service to the public and a shameful disgrace to your professional integrity.
I am contacting you in regards to the story you recently published Titled "E-Cigarettes: Smoke & Mirrors"
E-Cigarettes: Smoke & Mirrors? | Medical News and Health Information
In my opinion your story is incomplete and contains completely wrong and inaccurate statements. You quoted Professor Tom Eissenberg with no indication of his information or background.
The statement "A pair of studies found while real cigarettes deliver nicotine, E-cigs do not -- despite claiming to do so." I patently false and misleading. The details of these studies need to be included in the story.
I urge you to do some independent research and fact checking on this story as this device has the possibility of saving millions of lives in the US and countless more across the world. Shoddy and uninformed reporting such as this is a great dis-service to the public and a shameful disgrace to your professional integrity.
I had thought this study had been conducted ages ago - has Eissenburg completed a second study?
Also, you wonder what they complain about. They say the women stopped smoking with electronic cigarettes, then that the e-cigarette didn't have any nicotine in it - surely that would be a good thing (from an anti-smoker's point of view)?
Also, you wonder what they complain about. They say the women stopped smoking with electronic cigarettes, then that the e-cigarette didn't have any nicotine in it - surely that would be a good thing (from an anti-smoker's point of view)?
Just thinking - someone should give the Eissenburg some really strong e-liquid, make sure he vapes it and then watch his reaction 
Here is the thread where we discuss with Dr. Eissenburg the results of his first study...
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-cnn-com-today-eissenberg-study-feedback.html
And here is an update giving the prelimary results of his subsequent studies after following our advice...
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...nbergs-study-yep-e-cigs-deliver-nicotine.html
If you jump to the end of that last thread you will see the latest and greatest updates.
Last edited:
So I ask myself, who IS this Eissenberg fellow?
First, if history counts, it's worth knowing that, before becoming and anti-e-cig wonk, he was an anti-hookah-wonk.
And a number of people found his conclusions questionable, given his ties to the tobacco and pharmaceutical industries, or at least to monies originating in those industries. Declared and Non Declared Conflicts of Interest. The case of Thomas EISSENBERG, Wasim MAZIAK, Jack HENNINGFIELD
And then I wondered, so how does he KNOW that e-cigs don't deliver nicotine? E-cigarettes deliver almost no nicotine.
And I asked myself, is this true? If it's SO true, then why, after vaping at my computer all morning, do I sometimes feel faint, with a lightly accelerated heart rate and a headache. (All known symptoms of light nicotine overdose, not unlike what I felt 20 years ago when I smoked too many ciggies as a new smoker.)
Some thoughts on the study described in the link:
He didn't use ecig users, he used nicotine-starved smokers.
It took me a while to learn how to "smoke" my ecig. We all know you get practically no vapor if you just suck it like a cigarette. Perhaps he would have got different results by using volunteers who knew how to use the product? Or if he taught them? (Which he had no motive to do.) And frankly, when I was smoking, after a night without smoking, I'd have EATEN the damn ecig in an effort to speed it up. That is not how it's supposed to be used, but we have no reason to think that his "users" used the ecig as directed.
He only checked for 45 minutes.
Smoking cigarettes is a marvelously efficient nicotine delivery system. I've seen studies that indicate that the nicotine hits your brain in seconds, easily in less than hald a minute.
Any former smoker using an e-cig KNOWS that it's slower. You draw slower. You inhale slower. You don't just draw on the think for 3 minutes and put it out, as you do with a cigarette. YOu take a longer time, draw, wait, draw, wait...and it still takes longer to "fill your jones." Nobody is denying that e-cigs are slower.
And, from the right-up I sourced, this quote just confused me:
I don't know what "each brand on a separate occasion means." I also don't know what "smoke" means in this context, but it seems virtually unmeasured. How MUCH did they "smoke?" I know that, without any nicotine all night, by the time I got to the lab, I would be using my 510 for an hour before I felt "normalized." Did he count their drags? Somehow try to make it similar to the timeframe of the other smokers, who got 2 real cigs? (Maybe that would be six minutes? 10 at the outside?)
Conclusions I could support from this study:
E-cigs deliver very little nicotine when used for the first time by novices.
E-cigs need to be used according the instructions in order to be effective.
E-cigaretted do not deliver much nicotine in a short period of time.
or even
As a nicotine delivery device, e-cigarettes are slower and less efficient than traditional cigarettes.
I also wonder about:
Tom Eissenberg may have set this study up to prove his forgone conclusions
But the question of "When used by a habitual vaper, do E-cigarettes deliver nicotine in appreciable quantities?" is simply not answered by this study. There are too many flaws.
I'd like to propose a second study to Dr Eissenberg. I'm happy to volunteer as a test subject.
I will "nicotine fast" neither smoking nor vaping, for as long as he deems appropriate, and he can test the nicotine levels in my blood.
I will then use my PV, slowly and comfortably, over an entire day, having my blood tested regularly. (Say, every hour.) I'll stay in the lab all day, so they can see I'm not sneaking any other nicotine. I'm pretty sure that there WILL be nicotine in my blood. Possibly quite a lot, depending on the juice we choose.
If it's boring in the lab and I have nothing to do but vape, I can probably even arrange an exhibition of moderate nicotine overdose- complete with pallor, elevated heartrate, headache and nausea. I am willing to vomit, if that's what it takes to "prove" nausea, though I guess that if my blood is being tested, that won't be necessary.
Are you reading, Dr Eissenberg? This could really help sort out some information for you.
The thing is, we all know this. I am a nicotine addict, and have been since my teens. The effectiveness, or lack thereof, of the placebo effect in staving off nicotine withdrawal has been studied.
I know I am GETTING the nicotine because I can FEEL the nicotine.
Best,
Ande
First, if history counts, it's worth knowing that, before becoming and anti-e-cig wonk, he was an anti-hookah-wonk.
And a number of people found his conclusions questionable, given his ties to the tobacco and pharmaceutical industries, or at least to monies originating in those industries. Declared and Non Declared Conflicts of Interest. The case of Thomas EISSENBERG, Wasim MAZIAK, Jack HENNINGFIELD
And then I wondered, so how does he KNOW that e-cigs don't deliver nicotine? E-cigarettes deliver almost no nicotine.
And I asked myself, is this true? If it's SO true, then why, after vaping at my computer all morning, do I sometimes feel faint, with a lightly accelerated heart rate and a headache. (All known symptoms of light nicotine overdose, not unlike what I felt 20 years ago when I smoked too many ciggies as a new smoker.)
Some thoughts on the study described in the link:
He didn't use ecig users, he used nicotine-starved smokers.
It took me a while to learn how to "smoke" my ecig. We all know you get practically no vapor if you just suck it like a cigarette. Perhaps he would have got different results by using volunteers who knew how to use the product? Or if he taught them? (Which he had no motive to do.) And frankly, when I was smoking, after a night without smoking, I'd have EATEN the damn ecig in an effort to speed it up. That is not how it's supposed to be used, but we have no reason to think that his "users" used the ecig as directed.
He only checked for 45 minutes.
Smoking cigarettes is a marvelously efficient nicotine delivery system. I've seen studies that indicate that the nicotine hits your brain in seconds, easily in less than hald a minute.
Any former smoker using an e-cig KNOWS that it's slower. You draw slower. You inhale slower. You don't just draw on the think for 3 minutes and put it out, as you do with a cigarette. YOu take a longer time, draw, wait, draw, wait...and it still takes longer to "fill your jones." Nobody is denying that e-cigs are slower.
And, from the right-up I sourced, this quote just confused me:
I don't know what "each brand on a separate occasion means." I also don't know what "smoke" means in this context, but it seems virtually unmeasured. How MUCH did they "smoke?" I know that, without any nicotine all night, by the time I got to the lab, I would be using my 510 for an hour before I felt "normalized." Did he count their drags? Somehow try to make it similar to the timeframe of the other smokers, who got 2 real cigs? (Maybe that would be six minutes? 10 at the outside?)
Conclusions I could support from this study:
E-cigs deliver very little nicotine when used for the first time by novices.
E-cigs need to be used according the instructions in order to be effective.
E-cigaretted do not deliver much nicotine in a short period of time.
or even
As a nicotine delivery device, e-cigarettes are slower and less efficient than traditional cigarettes.
I also wonder about:
Tom Eissenberg may have set this study up to prove his forgone conclusions
But the question of "When used by a habitual vaper, do E-cigarettes deliver nicotine in appreciable quantities?" is simply not answered by this study. There are too many flaws.
I'd like to propose a second study to Dr Eissenberg. I'm happy to volunteer as a test subject.
I will "nicotine fast" neither smoking nor vaping, for as long as he deems appropriate, and he can test the nicotine levels in my blood.
I will then use my PV, slowly and comfortably, over an entire day, having my blood tested regularly. (Say, every hour.) I'll stay in the lab all day, so they can see I'm not sneaking any other nicotine. I'm pretty sure that there WILL be nicotine in my blood. Possibly quite a lot, depending on the juice we choose.
If it's boring in the lab and I have nothing to do but vape, I can probably even arrange an exhibition of moderate nicotine overdose- complete with pallor, elevated heartrate, headache and nausea. I am willing to vomit, if that's what it takes to "prove" nausea, though I guess that if my blood is being tested, that won't be necessary.
Are you reading, Dr Eissenberg? This could really help sort out some information for you.
The thing is, we all know this. I am a nicotine addict, and have been since my teens. The effectiveness, or lack thereof, of the placebo effect in staving off nicotine withdrawal has been studied.
I know I am GETTING the nicotine because I can FEEL the nicotine.
Best,
Ande
Okay, I should have kept following links before I posted. Perhpaps Dr Eissenberg was more aware than I gave him credit for of the limitations of the first study. My bad.
His second study seems rather more hopeful, I must say- but I'm still somewhat confused as to his motives and conclusions.
(goes off to shamefacedly read LONG thread in "medical research.")
Best,
Ande
His second study seems rather more hopeful, I must say- but I'm still somewhat confused as to his motives and conclusions.
(goes off to shamefacedly read LONG thread in "medical research.")
Best,
Ande
He had each subject take 10 puffs from which ever product they were assigned. I wrote to him right after his letter was published, pointing out the Dr. Murray Laugesen had published the fact that each puff of vapor delivers only about 10% of the nicotine in a puff of smoke. So to fairly compare the products, he would have needed to have the e-cigarette users take 10 puffs for every 1 puff from a lit cigarette.
I believe that he is still testing experienced vapers in much the way that you described, but you would have to go to Richmond VA to participate. That's quite a commute from Korea.
I believe that he is still testing experienced vapers in much the way that you described, but you would have to go to Richmond VA to participate. That's quite a commute from Korea.
Im my honest opinion, when i vape on my e-cig for about 3-4 nice and strong puffs, it feels like im receiving my nicotine buzz. My whole body relaxes as if cigarettes/cigars would. I've tried cigarettes and cigars (more on cigars) and they're disgusting, period.
More studies need to be done, depending on the nicotine amount in the e-juice, the mixture (pg & vg), and the type of atomizers.
Its a big ball game out there with several different types of models on the e-cigs.
More studies need to be done, depending on the nicotine amount in the e-juice, the mixture (pg & vg), and the type of atomizers.
Its a big ball game out there with several different types of models on the e-cigs.
Hmmm. So his initial study involved using an e-cigarette the way you'd use a conventional cigarette.
That wouldn't work! When I first started vaping, I sometimes had to really sit down with it and vape continuously for 10-15 minutes before the jonesing would go away....
Best,
Ande
That wouldn't work! When I first started vaping, I sometimes had to really sit down with it and vape continuously for 10-15 minutes before the jonesing would go away....
Best,
Ande
You have to be joking me. How many other stories are completely made up lies? Seems whenever I have first hand knowledge or information regarding any story in the media, more than half the time the reporter's get it wrong. This is no exception.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
