UK: E-Cigarettes "...can cause more harm than smoking."
- Thread starter PoliticallyIncorrect
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
That apology is from the LAST ridiculous story the Daily Mail did on e-cigarettes in January. The Daily mail did change the online title for it's more recent story, but it isn't much better:
E-cigarettes contain chemicals that make some 'as harmful as normal tobacco'
This is still not true as there was no evidence in the testing that showed they were "as harmful as normal tobacco." First of all, it's wrong to say all tobacco is harmful, so if they are comparing it to snus, then it's true - e-cigarettes are probably "as harmful" as snus, which isn't harmful at all. But they are deceitfully implying that all tobacco is "harmful."
If it means that the test showed that some e-cigarettes were "as harmful" as normal SMOKING tobacco, then it's still a lie. Just because some of the highest levels detected of formaldehyde and acrolein exceed some of the lowest levels detected in cigarette smoke doesn't mean that e-cigarettes are just as harmful as smoking. If e-cigarettes run 0.1 to 4.4 micrograms of acrolein (according to the French test for 15 "puffs") and cigarettes run 2.4 to 220 micrograms (for 1 cigarette according to the CDC), there is no way they know if 4.4 micrograms (the high end of e-cigs that exceeds the low end of cigarettes) is even a health hazard. Acreolin may not even be a health hazard until you reach 200 micrograms - which would be 50 times higher than what they found in e-cigarettes.
And we know that formaldehyde found in previous e-cig tests has already been shown to have been created outside of the e-cigarette vapor by human breath (the French test used room air to refresh the testing system, which would obviously contain formaldehyde.)
CASAA published this commentary on Wednesday for exactly that purpose - feel free to share from this link:
CASAA: French e-cigarette study, media misrepresent facts
*******************************************
French e-cigarette study, media misrepresent facts
An article published Monday in The Daily Mail announced "E-cigarettes are as harmful as cigarettes and could cause cancer, claims study." The article stated that a French consumer magazine, 60 Millions Consommateurs (60 Million Consumers), had branded the devices as 'far from the harmless gadgets they're sold as by manufacturers'. Soon, news outlets from all over the world were reporting that "E-cigarettes may be carcinogenic" and "E-cigarettes as harmful as cigarettes."
According to the 60 Millions Consommateurs, which is published by the National Consumers' Institute (a government-funded organization somewhat similar to Consumer Reports in the U.S.), their researchers tested 10 e-cigarettes. This "report" comes after the French government announced in May this year its intent to ban electronic cigarette use in public places, which has outraged French e-cigarette consumers and sellers.
After the news broke, Clive Bates, former head of ASH-UK and a tobacco harm reduction advocate, announced on his blog that he had issued a complaint about the Daily Mail article to the Press Complaints Commission .
"There are many flaws in the Mail article, mostly shoddy health journalism and lack of balance or proportion, and life is too short to go into them all," Bates wrote in a post titled "Lazy, stupid, wrong – the Mail can’t stop itself."
The web version of the article has since been re-titled "E-cigarettes contain chemicals that make some 'as harmful as normal tobacco'."
On Tuesday, the magazine posted another article with a few more details about its test results, which allowed experts to partially evaluate the findings.
MSN.com reported an interview with Drexel University Professor Igor Burstyn, who told them he is skeptical of the study. The article was titled "Rumor: E-cigarettes are as harmful as the real things," and it concluded that the rumor was "unconfirmed" and that "the bulk of research says they're much safer."
According to the MSN article:
Dr. Burstyn recently published the largest, most comprehensive assessment of research on E-cigarette safety released thus far. (Peering through the mist: What does the chemistry of contaminants in electronic cigarettes tell us about health risks?) That meant looking at dozens of studies done all over the world involving more than 9,000 subjects. His conclusion: “Current data do not indicate that exposures to vapors from contaminants in electronic cigarettes warrant a concern.” A conclusion supported by other health researchers in Palgrave Macmillan, a journal of public health policy.
After reviewing all available information, the Scientific Director for The Consumer Advocates for Smoke-free Alternatives, Dr. Carl V Phillips, surmised that "it is almost certain that they used faulty methods, overheating in particular, because that is what produces high levels of acrolein. In previous studies, high levels of formaldehyde have been identified as lab errors, not output from the e-cigarettes. As for the metals, Burstyn has already explained that without knowing what molecular form they were in, the information is useless."
"This is why real scientific publications include a methods section," he continued. "We basically have no idea what they did, though it is pretty clear their methods were faulty to the point of this being almost completely junk. The 'almost' refers to the fact that perhaps high levels of acetaldehyde are created by certain flavorings. But, again, since we have no idea what they tested or how, we can make no sense of what was reported."
Dr. Phillips concluded, "this is more of a marketing con than a scientific study."
"The same chemicals were tested in 12 brands of e-cigarettes in a study by Goniewicz and coworkers that was published earlier this year," added Dr. Konstantinos Farsalinos, a researcher at Onassis Cardiac Surgery Center in Athens-Greece, in a commentary on Ecigarette-Research.com. "So, nothing new was tested in the French study. More importantly, the results of the French study are almost identical to those of Goniewicz."
"I cannot explain why worldwide media refer to this study as if it is the most important discovery about e-cigarettes," he wrote.
In the MSN article, Burstyn said his professional research has even informed his personal life, as he told them that he's worked hard to convince his wife to quit traditional cigarettes in favor of the newer e-versions. "Smoking a regular cigarette is like running on the highway in flip-flops," he said. "E-cigs is taking a taxi."
Has anyone found this study online or anywhere else, formally published, methodology disclosed and submitted for peer review? I've worn my fingers down looking, but found only rehashings of The Daily Mail piece, in which a "new method" of measuring was reportedly used.
If their "new method" was "lying," I've got a news flash for them: it's been done before. More than once.
If their "new method" was "lying," I've got a news flash for them: it's been done before. More than once.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
