Third Hand Smoke Fear Mongering

[Demarko]

Study Shows Thirdhand Smoke May Be Dangerous For Unborn Babies

While not directly related to eCigs, I've heard eCigs referred to as "third hand smoke" by people (ignorant ones, to be sure) and of course people will just panic even more... Pregnant women will see someone vaping and feint like goats.

Saw this on my local news, but they didn't have it on their website so I googled it. This has got to be the most... Nevermind.

 

[Zal42]

Oh, good lord.

Even secondhand smoke arguments are extremely dubious, but now they're going for third-hand? I notice that the article doesn't actually point to the study. Given that it's incredibly common for the press to misrepresent studies, I'd be very interested in what it actually said.

 

[jtpjc]

I posted a comment. Too much pseudo science:


Ah, here we go again.
“…thirdhand smoke MAY be especially dangerous…”
“…evidence to SUGGEST that it is, in fact, dangerous…” (evidence doesn’t suggest, it PROVES)
“…CAN lead to asthma and other respiratory ailments…”

 

[jtpjc]

I'm getting angry over here. Until now my definition of Stupid was "What politicians are." Now I have to extend that definition to "What politicians and American scientists are."

I better stop posting for today. Might get ugly.

 

[yohann976]

I propose that we either lock all our children and pregnant women in bubbles or kill off the dirty smokers. If there's even a remote possibility of a threat, I say we act now and think later!!!

 

[LadyWeeps]

It's just amazing that there is still a human race. Humans have survived wars, plagues and famines, but 3rd hand smoke is gonna get us all!

 

[Vocalek]

Thirdhand Smoke: A New Dimension to the Effects of... [Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol. 2011] - PubMed result

Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol. 2011 Apr 8. [Epub ahead of print]
Thirdhand Smoke: A New Dimension to the Effects of Cigarette Smoke on the Developing Lung.
Rehan VK, Sakurai R, Torday JS.
Source1Harbor UCLA Medical Center.

Abstract
Rationale: The underlying mechanisms and effector molecules involved in mediating in utero smoke exposure-induced effects on the developing lung are only beginning to be understood. However, the effects of the newly discovered category of smoke, i.e., thirdhand smoke (THS), on the developing lung are completely unknown. We hypothesized that in addition to nicotine, other components of THS would also affect lung development adversely. Methods: Fetal rat lung explants were exposed to nicotine, 1-(N-methyl-N-nitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridinyl)-4-butanal (NNA), or 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanone (NNK), the two main tobacco-specific N-nitrosamine constituents of THS, for 24h. Following which key markers for alveolar paracrine signaling [epithelial differentiation markers, surfactant phospholipid and protein synthesis and mesenchymal differentiation markers, PPARγ, fibronectin, and calponin], the BCL-2/Bax ratio, a marker of apoptosis, and the involvement of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChR)-α3 and -α7 in mediating NNA's and NNK's effects on the developing lung were determined. Main Results: Similar to the effects of nicotine, exposure of the developing lung to either NNK or NNA resulted in disrupted homeostatic signaling, indicated by the down-regulation of PPARγ, up-regulation of fibronectin and calponin protein levels, decreased BCL-2/Bax ratio, and the accompanying compensatory stimulation of surfactant phospholipid and protein synthesis. Furthermore, nAChR-α3 and -α7 had differential complex roles in mediating these effects. Conclusions: NNK and NNA exposure resulted in breakdown of alveolar epithelial-mesenchymal cross-talk, reflecting lipofibroblast-to-myofibroblast transdifferentiation, suggesting THS constituents as possible novel contributors to in utero smoke exposure-induced pulmonary damage. These data are particularly relevant for designing specific therapeutic strategies, and for formulating public health policies to minimize THS exposure.

Just what is this third-hand smoke; and how, pray-tell, is it likely to get into the developing lungs of the fetus? Would we have to follow the same procedure used by these researchers (vivisection)?

Letter: Third-hand smoking: indoor measurements of concentration and sizes of cigarette smoke particles after resuspension

In a previous study1 of ‘secondhand’ cigarette smoke, we showed that 75% of the particles added to indoor air were of ultrafine sizes and had a half-life in air of 18 minutes at 25°C. These particles after their deposition on household surfaces could be later put back in suspension and constitute a toxic ‘thirdhand’ smoke2 which has not, as yet, been documented through quantitative data. Consequently, we undertook direct measurements of the concentration and sizes of smoke particles after their deposition and resuspension in a closed room.A smoking device burned 10 cigarettes in 30 minutes in a non-ventilated furnished room that was then kept closed. On the next day, for particle resuspension, we mobilised the dust on furniture, clothes and surfaces by wiping and shaking and created even more turbulence with a ventilator.

[snip]

This showed that after cigarette smoking:

• the airborne particles were of ultrafine sizes.
• their concentration was divided by 100 in the first 4 hours and again by 100 in the following 24 hours. After resuspension, the concentration was multiplied by 100, going back to that observed 4 hours after smoking. This rise can only be attributed to particles smaller than 0,3 μm since other measurements made after resuspension manoeuvres without previous smoking only increased the concentration of particles over 0.3 μm of size.

These quantitative data support the hypothesis of a resuspension from the cigarette smoke surface contamination. However, this airborne contamination through resuspension remains much lower (100 times) than that of secondhand smoke. The rest of the aerosol mass initially produced by cigarettes could be firmly attached either to surfaces, leading to ingestion hazards and dermal transfer or to household dust and be inhaled with it.3 4

 

[Vocalek]

Reading this statement from that second article abstract gave me the idea that they previously conducted experiments that looked at reconstituting smoke from surface deposits.

These particles after their deposition on household surfaces could be later put back in suspension and constitute a toxic ‘thirdhand’ smoke2 which has not, as yet, been documented through quantitative data.

Yet, when I followed the footnote to the reference, this is what I found:

Beliefs about the health effects of "thirdhand" smoke and home smoking bans.
Winickoff JP, Friebely J, Tanski SE, Sherrod C, Matt GE, Hovell MF, McMillen RC.
SourceCenter for Child and Adolescent Health Policy, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA 02114, USA. jwinickoff@partners.org

Abstract
OBJECTIVE: There is no safe level of exposure to tobacco smoke. Thirdhand smoke is residual tobacco smoke contamination that remains after the cigarette is extinguished. Children are uniquely susceptible to thirdhand smoke exposure. The objective of this study was to assess health beliefs of adults regarding thirdhand smoke exposure of children and whether smokers and nonsmokers differ in those beliefs. We hypothesized that beliefs about thirdhand smoke would be associated with household smoking bans.

METHODS: Data were collected by a national random-digit-dial telephone survey from September to November 2005. The sample was weighted by race and gender within Census region on the basis of US Census data. The study questions assessed the level of agreement with statements that breathing air in a room today where people smoked yesterday can harm the health of children.

RESULTS: Of 2000 eligible respondents contacted, 1510 (87%) completed surveys, 1478 (97.9%) answered all questions pertinent to this analysis, and 273 (18.9%) were smokers. Overall, 95.4% of nonsmokers versus 84.1% of smokers agreed that secondhand smoke harms the health of children, and 65.2% of nonsmokers versus 43.3% of smokers agreed that thirdhand smoke harms children. Strict rules prohibiting smoking in the home were more prevalent among nonsmokers: 88.4% vs 26.7%. In multivariate logistic regression, after controlling for certain variables, belief that thirdhand smoke harms the health of children remained independently associated with rules prohibiting smoking in the home. Belief that secondhand smoke harms the health of children was not independently associated with rules prohibiting smoking in the home and car.

CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that beliefs about the health effects of thirdhand smoke are independently associated with home smoking bans. Emphasizing that thirdhand smoke harms the health of children may be an important element in encouraging home smoking bans.

Beliefs about the health effects of "thirdhand" sm... [Pediatrics. 2009] - PubMed result

So following the logic trail: Third-hand smoke exists because some people believe it does.

 

[CapableVapable]

I posted a comment. Too much pseudo science:


Ah, here we go again.
“…thirdhand smoke MAY be especially dangerous…”
“…evidence to SUGGEST that it is, in fact, dangerous…” (evidence doesn’t suggest, it PROVES)
“…CAN lead to asthma and other respiratory ailments…”

You don't understand science.

Science experiments set out to prove a null hypothesis. That's why the term "falsifiable" is so important to science, because that is what scientists do--they attempt to prove things wrong. When it can't be done, the study is published and we move a little closer to understanding the phenomenon.

That's not to say there isn't bad science out there, but a bigger problem is bad writers trying to encapsulate complicated studies for the masses.

 

[Vocalek]

I propose that we either lock all our children and pregnant women in bubbles or kill off the dirty smokers. If there's even a remote possibility of a threat, I say we act now and think later!!!

It's too late! They have already contaminated the world with 2nd hand smoke deposits that cannot be eradicated, no matter how much you clean. In fact, cleaning may trigger their development into 3rd hand smoke. Run everyone! *ggggaaaaaaaw*

 

[Papa Lazarou]

So following the logic trail: Third-hand smoke exists because some people believe it does.

Now I've heard it all

They phone people up at random and ask them about their "beliefs" regarding third hand smoke? As they are random numbers from the phone book it's reasonable to assume most if not all surveyed had never heard of third hand smoke (which has recently been discovered made up by anti smoking scientists zealots). Let alone have enough information to form any sort of educated opinion.

They might as well have asked them whether they believed the abominable snowman or the Loch Ness monster was harmful to children. It would have been just as useful and scientific as a study.

 

[JerryRM]

Third hand smoke drifts into the uterus, through the mother's navel. It's a proven fact !!!............................Bwahahahahahahahahahahaha.



I just made that up, but I think that the "third hand smoke" argument is just as silly.

 

[GMoney]

It is just more nonsense like second hand smoke.

The new world order - decide what your Objective is, conduct scientific trials, regardless of methodology or results state the conclusion that will allow you to achieve your Objective.

Second Hand smoke dangers are nonsense, but it allowed the government to ban smoking in Public places and Private places open to the public (and helped push through the crazy taxation)

Third hand smoke junk science will allow them to ban smoking in rental cars and apartments and then your car and your home.

 

[JerryRM]

When they are finished eradicating smoking, they will focus on junk food. I can see it all now, second hand and third hand junk food breath can kill you. Even mouthwash can't get rid of the deadly vapors.

 

[D103]

@ Jerry

Jerry, I read recently on Dr. Siegel's blog where a poster posted a link (sorry I didn't copy it down - afraid I'd get too mad) to a "new study" that is supposedly showing how just "seeing overweight people" can lead a person to over-eating. I was extremely disgusted at how fast these lunatics are going through the established paces. It will only get incredibly more insane and ultimately more abusive.

 

[jangofett]

Just wait until they learn about fourth-hand smoke! It'll be all over then!

 

[JerryRM]

D103, there is only one solution to that, the overweight people must be locked up, in a place (concentration camp?) where they won't harm the general public. Committees of nanny staters will be set up in every community, to determine who will be classified as overweight. It's all for the benefit of society as a whole (aka sheeple).

I hope I sound angry and disgusted, because I am.

 

[JerryRM]

Just wait until they learn about fourth-hand smoke! It'll be all over then!

I can't wait. Fourth hand smoke, you can drop dead, just catching a glimpse of a smoker. Lock the smokers and vapers up too, along with the overweight and junk food abusers. It's for the good of society (sheeple), of course.

 

[fuzznut]

Oh no, 3rd hand smoke! We must protect The Children® from this deadly malaise!

What's amazing is, homo sapiens have been making fires for heat and cooking, burning plant material and inhaling smoke for what, 50,000 years? And today people are frantic about 2-3-4-5th hand smoke? I would like to Metallica's first album.

 

[Noodoggy]

how do we know the ultrafine particles are smoke related? didnt see anything about that. one would be very surprised at what gets stirred up when you "mobilise" particles like the study said. lol