study : Flavoring Chemicals in E-Cigarettes: Diacetyl, 2,3-Pentanedione......

[Tache]

prompted me to actually make an account here

Interesting. I actually created my account here (two and a half years ago) to discuss Dr Polosa's study on early e-cig use and smoking cessation rates. It was one of the few out at the time and, although the rates were lower than I expected from my "accidental" quitting and empirical observation of (ex)smokers around me, it showed a significantly higher quit rate than traditional smoking cessation products.

So I've always thought of Polosa as being "on the side of the angels". Without having read this current study or the full text of Dr Farsalinos' critique, the thought that occurs to me is: Have we as vapers become hyper-critical of everything or have we actually gotten to a place where we are evaluating all studies in a truly objective manner?

 

[bigdancehawk]

It took me a while but I did some real digging about this.

Environ Health Perspect; DOI:10.1289/ehp.1510185


Flavoring Chemicals in E-Cigarettes: Diacetyl, 2,3-Pentanedione, and Acetoin in a Sample of 51 Products, Including Fruit-, Candy-, and Cocktail-Flavored E-Cigarettes
I found this:
"Conflict of interest statement: Riccardo Polosa is a Professor of Medicine and is supported by the University of Catania, Italy. He has received lecture fees and research funding from GlaxoSmithKline and Pfizer, manufacturers of stop smoking medications. "

My opinion is
GlaxoSmithKline and Pfizer are poised to lose billions due to this technology rendering their drugs unnecessary.

Nailed it.

 

[LaraC]

It took me a while but I did some real digging about this.

Environ Health Perspect; DOI:10.1289/ehp.1510185


Flavoring Chemicals in E-Cigarettes: Diacetyl, 2,3-Pentanedione, and Acetoin in a Sample of 51 Products, Including Fruit-, Candy-, and Cocktail-Flavored E-Cigarettes
I found this:
"Conflict of interest statement: Riccardo Polosa is a Professor of Medicine and is supported by the University of Catania, Italy. He has received lecture fees and research funding from GlaxoSmithKline and Pfizer, manufacturers of stop smoking medications. "

My opinion is
GlaxoSmithKline and Pfizer are poised to lose billions due to this technology rendering their drugs unnecessary.

I don't doubt that the source of research funding can have an effect on how some researchers go about their work.

However, I don't think Dr. Riccardo Polosa had anything to do with that study...Environ Health Perspect; DOI:10.1289/ehp.1510185 .
http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/wp-content/uploads/advpub/2015/12/ehp.1510185.acco.pdf
Dr. Polosa wasn't listed as one of the authors. So, I'm not sure why the mention of him in connection with that particular study?

As far as I've seen, Dr. Polosa is a good scientist who recognizes the benefits of electronic cigarettes. He speaks out in favor of them.

I don't think GSK or Pfizer have any influence over how Dr. Polosa does research or how he presents results.
Receiving funding or fees at one time from those companies does not mean he slants his research or compromises his scientific integrity.

 

[Kent C]

As far as I've seen, Dr. Polosa is a good scientist who recognizes the benefits of electronic cigarettes. He speaks out in favor of them.

You're exactly right. Almost all THR advocates are going to have some connection with Pharma or other groups now against ecigs from their "TC" (albeit THR) connections. Here's Polosa from a quick search from an interview....

E Cigarette Interview with Professor Riccardo Polosa

"Paul: The results are quite positive and agree with what seems to be occurring in the real world. Not only are almost all vapers former smokers but many report not actively trying to quit until they tried e-cigarettes. Any thoughts on that?

Riccardo (Polosa): The status quo in smoking cessation presents smokers with just two unpleasant alternatives: quit or die. But, there is a third choice for smokers: switching to the e-cig. The use of e-cig allows smokers to introduce nicotine from a much safer source than a lit cigarette and to keep the gestures associated with smoking. Switching to the e-cig may increase smokers’ confidence in making a more important change in their lifestyle – quitting"

Paul: You have been working in the area of nicotine dependence for some time. What prompted you to investigate e-cigarettes?

Riccardo: For many years several experts in tobacco control and nicotine dependence have been hoping to see a gadget that could deliver nicotine in a safe manner and substitute the behavioral/sensori-motor need for the tobacco cigarette. The e-cigarette has the potential of being such a gadget, because it can give to smokers what they want thanks to the combined effect of hand-to-mouth motion and nicotine. And it is much safer than a lit cigarette. Working in the area of nicotine dependence for many years has convinced me that we, as health professionals, should also take care of the smokers who are unable or unwilling to quit. To this end, the e-cig is an opportunity not to be missed. The urge to better understand the potential of their role in the smoker`s life prompted us to set up a trial to investigate the e-cig.

Paul: Do you see vaping as the best current answer to nicotine dependence of just another alternative?

Riccardo: I think that e-cig is a good solution to reduce the use of traditional cigarettes and their associated risk. Other valid options for tackling nicotine dependence in smokers exist, but it is still a personal choice how to introduce nicotine in his/her body. Each individual smoker should find a best way to reduce or eliminate his or her own smoking. In theory, at least for westernized cultures, vaping is a far better option than smoking. And it could save millions of lives.

 

[Mazinny]

FWIW Dr. Polosa is one of the earliest advocates of electronic cigarettes as a tool in tobacco harm reduction and authored many studies on the respiratory function of e-cig users as compared to smokers. I am not certain what his exact position is on diketones in e-cigarettes though. If i remember correctly he believes the risks may be exaggerated but nevertheless he doesn't favor their use as part of flavors used in e-liquids, or at least that was my interpretation from a post by @SmokeyJoe earlier this year in a different thread.

Here's another statement :

“Compared to combustible cigarettes, e-vapor products are at least 96% less harmful and may substantially reduce individual risk and population harm. Future research will better define and further reduce residual risks from EC use to as low as possible by establishing appropriate quality control and standards. Although large longitudinal studies are warranted to elucidate whether ECs are a less harmful alternative to tobacco cigarettes and whether significant health benefits can be expected in smokers who switch from tobacco to ECs, the emerging evidence that EC use can reverse harm from tobacco smoking should be taken into consideration by regulatory authorities seeking to adopt proportional measures for the e-vapor category.”

 

[MacTechVpr]

Thanks all for the elucidating background on Riccardo P. Isn't it at least instructive that he happens to be one of those that discloses potential conflicts of interest. Most do not.

Good luck all.