Vaping and the immune system?

[Bill Godshall]

The article posted at the beginning of this thread was one of many that were manufactured during the past week by US government funded activist researchers and universities (almost certainly in collaboration with NIH) at the AAAS meeting (following are in chronological order).

Junk Science at AAAS

DHHS funded anti-vaping activists misrepresent inapplicable cell and mouse studies’ findings at AAAS conference as applying to humans to demonize products, confuse and scare public, and lobby for FDA Deeming and vaping bans
Session: New and Emerging Tobacco Products: Biomarkers of Exposure and Injury (2016 AAAS Annual Meeting (February 11-15, 2016))
Abstract: Pulmonary Effects of Exposure to Tobacco Smoke and New Tobacco Products (2016 AAAS Annual Meeting (February 11-15, 2016)) (Ilano Jaspers mucous)
Abstract: Reproductive and Developmental Effects of Exposure to Emerging Tobacco Products (2016 AAAS Annual Meeting (February 11-15, 2016)) (Judith Lelikoff mice)
Abstract: Cardiovascular Effects of Exposure to Tobacco Products and Harmful Constituents (2016 AAAS Annual Meeting (February 11-15, 2016)) (Daniel Conklin mice)

NIH funded Univ of North Carolina press release hypes anti-vaping activist Ilano Jaspers fear mongering talk at AAAS, touts inapplicable cell study findings to demonize vaping
Put That in Your E-Cigarette and Smoke It, or Should You?

Univ of Louisville press release hypes anti-vaping activist Daniel Conklin’s talk at AAAS, misrepresents inapplicable mouse vaping study to claim vaping may cause cardiovascular disease in humans
http://louisville.edu/medicine/news/more-evidence-found-on-potential-harmful-effects-of-e-cigarettes

Christopher Hassiotis issues press release hyping talks by Jaspers and Conklin at AAAS that misrepresented inapplicable cell and mouse vaping studies as applying to humans
Now - HowStuffWorks

Society for Science & the Public’s anti-vaping propagandist Janet Raloff deceitfully misrepresents findings of three inapplicable cell and mice studies (presented at AAAS) on vaping as applying to humans to further confuse and scare public about vaping.
Vaping linked to host of new health risks
Vaping may threaten brain, immunity and more

Note previous propaganda by Janet Raloff and published by Society for Science & the Public that also misrepresented findings of DHHS funded research findings to confuse, scare and lobby for FDA Deeming and vaping bans
Vaping can lead to teen smoking, new study finds
https://www.sciencenews.org/article/e-cigarettes-proving-be-danger-teens
https://student.societyforscience.org/article/vaping-may-harm-lungs
https://www.sciencenews.org/article/e-cigarettes-lower-immunity-flu-and-other-germs
https://www.sciencenews.org/article/e-cigarettes-may-inflame-lungs-much-cigarettes-do
https://www.sciencenews.org/article/health-risks-e-cigarettes-emerge
https://student.societyforscience.org/article/fda-announces-plans-regulate-e-cigarettes-and-more
https://student.societyforscience.org/article/vaping-may-threaten-brain-immunity-and-more
https://student.societyforscience.org/article/e-cigarette-makers-focus-teens
https://student.societyforscience.org/article/poisonings-linked-e-cigarettes
https://student.societyforscience.org/article/many-teens-try-alternatives-cigarettes

Yvette Brazier’s medicalnewstoday article hypes Ilano Jaspers’ false fear mongering claims about vaping at AAAS without any fact checking
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/306444.php

Note that Brazier wrote two previous press releases/articles hyping false and misleading fear mongering claims about vaping by VA funded Laura Crotty Alexander and by CDC http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/305829.php
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/304748.php

DW’s Brigitte Osterath repeats fear mongering claims by 3 anti-vaping activists at AAAS about their inapplicable cell and mouse studies without fact checking (Germany)
http://www.dw.com/en/e-cigarettes-may-harm-unborn-babies-immune-system-say-scientists/a-19044259

Independent’s Steve Connor touts Judith Lelikoff’s inapplicable mouse study presentation at AAAS without any fact checking to scare public about vaping (UK)
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...nant-puts-unborn-babies-at-risk-a6868276.html

Daily Mail’s Fiona McRae touts false fear mongering claims by Judith Lelikoff at AAAS, cites inapplicable mouse study to claim vaping by pregnant women could be worse than cigarette smoking for fetus (UK)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...evices-worse-baby-s-health-tobacco-smoke.html

Daily Mail runs second article touting false fear mongering claims by Judith Lelikoff at AAAS meeting without any fact checking (UK)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa...g-babies-brain-development-tobacco-smoke.html

 

[Cool_Breeze]

With...

...
Based on the author's publications, (s)he has studied over time similar topics after exposure to popular compounds (arsenic, smoking, aspirin, diesel, ozone, influenza, highway pollution...). Again, (s)he sounds like a serious investigator who has been building a career around this pattern. I'm looking forward to see a peer-reviewed publication on the abstract claim. ...

and other matters in mind, I'll continue to watch the science on this matter.

 

[Racehorse]

Are we to dismiss anything and everything that might cast doubt on some aspect of vaping as part of a conspiracy?

Not necessarily, I agree with CB on not just dismissing.

I have always felt that people who are threatened by information (true or not) aren't really truth seekers.

I don't get the practice of breaking links.

There's been quite a number of things I wanted to read, and research more fully, but the links were broken and I was unable to do so.

I would like to determine, for myself, if research is bonafide or not, but I can't do that if I can't access it.

Reminds me a little of book banning. Had to fight that fight with a few school libraries already.

 

[Lessifer]

I have always felt that people who are threatened by information (true or not) aren't really truth seekers.

I don't get the practice of breaking links.

There's been quite a number of things I wanted to read, and research more fully, but the links were broken and I was unable to do so.

I would like to determine, for myself, if research is bonafide or not, but I can't do that if I can't access it.

Reminds me a little of book banning. Had to fight that fight with a few school libraries already.

Links are broken so that the two sites are not associated in search engines. Nearly always you can "fix" a broken link by removing extraneous spaces. The link is not broken to hide the information, otherwise the link would not be posted at all.

Many times you can actually highlight a broken link and then right click, and at least with chrome, you can choose "google" the highlighted text, or if it recognizes that it is a link "go to" the highlighted link.

 

[OldBatty]

I have always felt that people who are threatened by information (true or not) aren't really truth seekers.

I don't get the practice of breaking links.

There's been quite a number of things I wanted to read, and research more fully, but the links were broken and I was unable to do so.

I would like to determine, for myself, if research is bonafide or not, but I can't do that if I can't access it.

Reminds me a little of book banning. Had to fight that fight with a few school libraries already.

Breaking links has to do with giving Google (or other search engine) page rank to articles we would rather not be seen by the uninformed public. ie almost everyone who is not 'us' or the ANTZ who are producing these junk studies to begin with.

As far as reading the broken links, cut & paste to your browser, backing out the spaces then pressing 'Enter' is usually all that required. Occasionally a link will have a filtered profanity which will appear as a series of dots corresponding to the filtered word. (this is more likely to happen to pro vaping articles) Just guess the word and replace the dots. Yes, it is a pain in the ... sometimes, but worth it for the cause!

Sigh, Lessifer beat me by four minutes. Dad burn touch typists!

 

[Nimaz]

The article posted at the beginning of this thread was one of many that were manufactured during the past week by US government funded activist researchers and universities (almost certainly in collaboration with NIH) at the AAAS meeting (following are in chronological order).

Junk Science at AAAS

DHHS funded anti-vaping activists misrepresent inapplicable cell and mouse studies’ findings at AAAS conference as applying to humans to demonize products, confuse and scare public, and lobby for FDA Deeming and vaping bans
Session: New and Emerging Tobacco Products: Biomarkers of Exposure and Injury (2016 AAAS Annual Meeting (February 11-15, 2016))
Abstract: Pulmonary Effects of Exposure to Tobacco Smoke and New Tobacco Products (2016 AAAS Annual Meeting (February 11-15, 2016)) (Ilano Jaspers mucous)
Abstract: Reproductive and Developmental Effects of Exposure to Emerging Tobacco Products (2016 AAAS Annual Meeting (February 11-15, 2016)) (Judith Lelikoff mice)
Abstract: Cardiovascular Effects of Exposure to Tobacco Products and Harmful Constituents (2016 AAAS Annual Meeting (February 11-15, 2016)) (Daniel Conklin mice)

NIH funded Univ of North Carolina press release hypes anti-vaping activist Ilano Jaspers fear mongering talk at AAAS, touts inapplicable cell study findings to demonize vaping
Put That in Your E-Cigarette and Smoke It, or Should You?

Univ of Louisville press release hypes anti-vaping activist Daniel Conklin’s talk at AAAS, misrepresents inapplicable mouse vaping study to claim vaping may cause cardiovascular disease in humans
More evidence found on potential harmful effects of e-cigarettes —

Christopher Hassiotis issues press release hyping talks by Jaspers and Conklin at AAAS that misrepresented inapplicable cell and mouse vaping studies as applying to humans
Now - HowStuffWorks

Society for Science & the Public’s anti-vaping propagandist Janet Raloff deceitfully misrepresents findings of three inapplicable cell and mice studies (presented at AAAS) on vaping as applying to humans to further confuse and scare public about vaping.
Vaping linked to host of new health risks
Vaping may threaten brain, immunity and more

Note previous propaganda by Janet Raloff and published by Society for Science & the Public that also misrepresented findings of DHHS funded research findings to confuse, scare and lobby for FDA Deeming and vaping bans
Vaping can lead to teen smoking, new study finds
E-cigarettes proving to be a danger to teens
Vaping may harm the lungs
E-cigarettes lower immunity to flu and other germs
E-cigarettes may inflame lungs as much as cigarettes do
Health risks of e-cigarettes emerge
FDA announces plans to regulate e-cigarettes and more
Vaping may threaten brain, immunity and more
E-cigarette makers focus on teens
Poisonings linked to e-cigarettes
https://student.societyforscience.org/article/many-teens-try-alternatives-cigarettes

Yvette Brazier’s medicalnewstoday article hypes Ilano Jaspers’ false fear mongering claims about vaping at AAAS without any fact checking
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/306444.php

Note that Brazier wrote two previous press releases/articles hyping false and misleading fear mongering claims about vaping by VA funded Laura Crotty Alexander and by CDC http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/305829.php
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/304748.php

DW’s Brigitte Osterath repeats fear mongering claims by 3 anti-vaping activists at AAAS about their inapplicable cell and mouse studies without fact checking (Germany)
http://www.dw.com/en/e-cigarettes-may-harm-unborn-babies-immune-system-say-scientists/a-19044259

Independent’s Steve Connor touts Judith Lelikoff’s inapplicable mouse study presentation at AAAS without any fact checking to scare public about vaping (UK)
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...nant-puts-unborn-babies-at-risk-a6868276.html

Daily Mail’s Fiona McRae touts false fear mongering claims by Judith Lelikoff at AAAS, cites inapplicable mouse study to claim vaping by pregnant women could be worse than cigarette smoking for fetus (UK)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...evices-worse-baby-s-health-tobacco-smoke.html

Daily Mail runs second article touting false fear mongering claims by Judith Lelikoff at AAAS meeting without any fact checking (UK)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa...g-babies-brain-development-tobacco-smoke.html

And today, accidentally watched a commercial on TV (I rarely watch TV) portraying a young lung tumor patient claiming that she got sick even after trying to stop/decrease smoking by vaping ... the add was for a stop smoking call number... this anti-vaping propaganda is taking full force in the US media! I feel powerless against these fake acts of science, as my wife who still smoke, was fully convinced by this message... I didn't even try to argue against it.

 

[Lessifer]

And today, accidentally watched a commercial on TV (I rarely watch TV) portraying a young lung tumor patient claiming that she got sick even after trying to stop/decrease smoking by vaping ... the add was for a stop smoking call number... this anti-vaping propaganda is taking full force in the US media! I feel powerless against these fake acts of science, as my wife who still smoke, was fully convinced by this message... I didn't even try to argue against it.

Yes, we have long since passed the point where these things can be seen as poorly reported articles. Public health, through the media, is in full assault mode. It is sad, but IMO completely justified, that our first reaction now has to be skepticism.

 

[Kent C]

And today, accidentally watched a commercial on TV (I rarely watch TV) portraying a young lung tumor patient claiming that she got sick even after trying to stop/decrease smoking by vaping ... the add was for a stop smoking call number... this anti-vaping propaganda is taking full force in the US media! I feel powerless against these fake acts of science, as my wife who still smoke, was fully convinced by this message... I didn't even try to argue against it.

They could say the same of people quitting using patches, gum or Chantix. Decades of smoking can take its toll for certain individuals depending on genetics or other compounding factors. BUT.... all will still be counted in the 'smoking related deaths' hoax statistic.

 

[Nimaz]

They could say the same of people quitting using patches, gum or Chantix. Decades of smoking can take its toll for certain individuals depending on genetics or other compounding factors. BUT.... all will still be counted in the 'smoking related deaths' hoax statistic.

Of course, it's obvious to me! I'm not even sure that it is a real patient in the add... and even common sense seems powerless in deconstructing the lies... There are so many that are constantly blowing... It feels almost unreal, like stuck in a frightening , time-looped nightmare and the worse is this is going on with many other critical issues these days... For instance, I've been looking closely at what's happening to solar energy in my all-time sunny state. The special interests are completely destroying it, chasing away the industry, thereby keeping us dependent on fossil energy... Some people fight back, but we are loosing even on this battle... I think this is just one of these days for me... Tomorrow is another day.

 

[Kent C]

Of course, it's obvious to me! I'm not even sure that it is a real patient in the add...

Understood - wasn't addressing you in particular, just the story and isn't it odd that when we post that we've been off ecigs for years, feel better, etc., it's "anecdotal", but when they write a story about some unnamed person, it's "significant" or it "shows a trend"

 

[MacTechVpr]

It's ironic isn't it that government has done such an effective job of managing mankind's outward existence that they now feel adequate to regulate and micro-manage the internal aspects of the human organism? Now soon consciousness itself. Tell them to please stay off of my lawn. Pests and parasites annoy me.

Good luck all.

 

[skoony]

@MacTechVpr When going to Ford New Products training in Dearborn MI we had some
interesting discussions with the senior engineers and technicians. One of the most
interesting was the direction that Ford Motor Corp and the industry in general along
with other industries were heading was a new paradigm of doing business. The
concept was called 7/24/365. Basically it's a move to transform the marketplace
from those who purchase and own things to those that are actually leasing (renting)
things. From first time buyer to when you need your fathers Buick. Sure you may
get a new car every 3-5 years but, you have to pay a lifetime for the privilege.
For this they get it all. From initial purchase and all the repair and parts in between.
Look at what's going on between independent car repair shops and the major
car manufacturers as the big boys are more and more introducing proprietary
systems in their cars to make them uniquely their own. The heavy use of
microprocessor technology is not necessarily for making better more long lasting
and safer parts. It allows them the differentiation needed to keep the parts
in house. Back 15 years Ford was seriously considering upping the voltage
from 12 to 48 volts to handle the increased buss loads required for all the
new electronic parts they were adding. Gains in efficiency have apparently
stopped this from happening.
All this actually sounds good for the consumer. I am not really sure if it's a
good or bad thing. I see similar concepts being used that are virtually the same.
Look at the cell phone upgrade programs. Look at software in general.
Evidently government was the inspiration of this concept via its taxation
policies. If you are spending money, government is usually getting a cut
one way or another. Think you own your house and land? Stop paying
taxes. The continual daily,monthly or,yearly revenue stream from everyone
for a lifetime is the Golden Goose that is being pursued.
Government isn't the only ones wanting to micromanage your life
and money.

Regards
Mike

 

[Nimaz]

Understood - wasn't addressing you in particular, just the story and isn't it odd that when we post that we've been off ecigs for years, feel better, etc., it's "anecdotal", but when they write a story about some unnamed person, it's "significant" or it "shows a trend"

I didn't take that personally... but I rather get frustrated to observe how effective these approaches are on the general public. In the mean time, I'm not quite sure that it's advisable to advertise vaping as a smoking cessation tool because it would fall into other type of legislation. Look at what happened recently in Sweden. A little bit of good news from Sweden

I spent some time investigating further the authors in the links posted above by Bill. The contents are pretty empty results wise. Claiming 600 "immune genes" decrease has no meaning, firstly because the terminology is generic (there is maybe 100 of thousands genes that can fall into that category), secondly because despite these relatively high numbers, no gene and not even a gene pattern is mentioned. I looked at 3 authors, nothing on 1 of them and 2 who have been in the field for about 30+ years now (I let you guess the names). Nothing very impressive regarding their overall publications (from my standpoint), however they all have substantial funding from the NIH (or the NIEHS, National Institute of Environmental Health and Sciences) . At least one of their main project (if not the only key project (RO1 grants), I let you guess the name again) address the effects of exposure to popular compounds (ozone, cigarette smoke, diesel, air pollution...) on specific aspects of our health (airways immunity for instance). These grants raise about $500k +/- per fiscal year for about 5 years for the lab. The institution can receive up to 100% of that value from the NIH. So the total money collected is up to ~$1M per FY, granted for 5 years until application for renewal... The principal investigator can gain up to $200K+/year in salary (professor level) paid by the institution. The investigator survival in the field depends on gaining and keeping these grants. Their primary goal is to renew their grant money or to gain new grants at the half-million dollar for their lab per FY scale and keep their paychecks and the competition is merciless. The popular topic of E-cig is a great opportunity for them to pursue their financial goal...

Edit (I erased the names, info available to public at Query Form - NIH RePORTER - NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Results ) - the $ amounts apply to the fiscal year indicated - the links provide access to the project description (I don't see need to break them, but pls let me know if you think I should)

5 R21 ES024030 02
NOVEL TREATMENTS OF ACROLEIN-INDUCED CARDIOTOXICITY , UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE 2014 NIEHS
OD
$375,000

5 P20 GM103492 08
5004 CORE D - ANIMAL MODELS AND PHENOTYPING CORE UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE 2015 NIGMS

$148,241

5 P50 HL120163 03
8148 CORE B: TOBACCO PRODUCT EVALUATION AND EXPOSURE CORE AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION 2015 NHLBI

$569,521

1 R01 HL122676 01A1
CARDIOVASCULAR TOXICITY OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND CONSTITUENTS UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE 2015 NHLBI
OD
$748,154

and
(these are shared grants)
5 R01 ES013611 09
DIESEL-INDUCED ALTERATIONS OF INFLUENZA INFECTIVITY UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL 2014 NIEHS
NIEHS
$754,993

5 R21 ES024666 02
OZONE, LIPID-PROTEIN ADDUCTS, AND BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL 2016 NIEHS
NIEHS
$192,500

Note that in the 2 last links the investigator doesn't have funding on tobacco related products... I speculate that the 600 genes story aims at gaining a new grant on that topic, e-cig been a juicy opportunity in terms of novelty and relevance (both e-cig and cig are in the abstract). Money won't be granted for published results, but preliminary results are material for the grant application. So I'm not expecting any paper to be published on that story anytime soon or at least before the grant is given... if they ever get it.

 

[MacTechVpr]

@MacTechVpr When going to Ford New Products training in Dearborn MI we had some
interesting discussions with the senior engineers and technicians. One of the most
interesting was the direction that Ford Motor Corp and the industry in general along
with other industries were heading was a new paradigm of doing business. The
concept was called 7/24/365. Basically it's a move to transform the marketplace
from those who purchase and own things to those that are actually leasing (renting)
things. From first time buyer to when you need your fathers Buick. Sure you may
get a new car every 3-5 years but, you have to pay a lifetime for the privilege.
For this they get it all. From initial purchase and all the repair and parts in between.
Look at what's going on between independent car repair shops and the major
car manufacturers as the big boys are more and more introducing proprietary
systems in their cars to make them uniquely their own. The heavy use of
microprocessor technology is not necessarily for making better more long lasting
and safer parts. It allows them the differentiation needed to keep the parts
in house. Back 15 years Ford was seriously considering upping the voltage
from 12 to 48 volts to handle the increased buss loads required for all the
new electronic parts they were adding. Gains in efficiency have apparently
stopped this from happening.
All this actually sounds good for the consumer. I am not really sure if it's a
good or bad thing. I see similar concepts being used that are virtually the same.
Look at the cell phone upgrade programs. Look at software in general.
Evidently government was the inspiration of this concept via its taxation
policies. If you are spending money, government is usually getting a cut
one way or another. Think you own your house and land? Stop paying
taxes. The continual daily,monthly or,yearly revenue stream from everyone
for a lifetime is the Golden Goose that is being pursued.
Government isn't the only ones wanting to micromanage your life
and money.

Regards
Mike

You said a mouthful. I suspect you and I could write a book on property, capitalism, proprietary standards and closed systems. My view is that capitalism does not create conundrums. Greed and crony capitalism do. And it's the rule of force whether imposed by government, institution or their collusion that is evidence for the preceding. Effective collaboration and voluntary exchange of property lifts us all and we've had abundant proof of the advantage of such over the abusive and confiscatory monopoly of money, property and power in abundance throughout the last century.

Good luck M.



One of the methods used by statists to destroy capitalism consists in establishing controls that tie a given industry hand and foot, making it unable to solve its problems, then declaring that freedom has failed and stronger controls are necessary … [J]ust pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted and you create a nation of law-breakers — and then you cash in on guilt.[my emphasis] —Ayn Rand | From the Wisdom of our Founders

 

[MacTechVpr]

Nicotine addicts are Neandertals.

That would be the US government.

Good luck.

p.s. I lost all my respect for Ars Technica for regurgitating this article. They just went in the TRIPE bookmark folder.

 

[Racehorse]

One of the reasons people developed more colds and uppper respiratory symptoms when smoking (in addition to what combustible smoke does) is that they opened a pack of cigs, and "reached in" with fingers to pull out the cigarette.

In the box, they are "filter up". That part goes into your mouth.

So the additional "hand to mouth" scenario, which according to my internist, is the #1 way to catch a virus, cold, flu, etc. is highly operative in smokers who don't wash their hands *carefully* before pulling out a cig.

I never did that, and when I got a pack I washed my hands, then turned ALL the cigs filter down, so I never touched the part where my lips were going to share those "hand germs".

I never got sick very often, about once every 6 years. Since I started vaping I have actually gotten colds and 2 virus/flus.

I don't think either has much to do with vaping or smoking, just that I have spent a LOT more time in crowded venues over the last 2 years than before.

 

[Racehorse]

I'm sure it has been Posted before.

But could someone Post a Link to the Actual Study?

I don't know about the study from THIS topic, but Big Ego posted this one last Wednesday (no replies) about a UC Davis study, as well as a UNC Chapel Hill study:

More Immune Suppression Studies

But also do not contain the studies, only the abstract/article.


The OP of the topic we are presently in only posted the ARS Technical "article" about the study, not the study itself.
E-cigs shut down hundreds of immune system genes—regular cigs don’t

 

[Racehorse]

While researching immune system for a friend this year, it turns out that people who garden and have animals have better immune systems.

There is something in the "dirt" and dog kisses, you know, you are exposed to bacteria/germs that way, as opposed to people who live these super clean lifestyles in apartments using chlorox wipes, etc. on everything. .

 

[Nimaz]

I don't know about the study from THIS topic, but Big Ego posted this one last Wednesday (no replies) about a UC Davis study, as well as a UNC Chapel Hill study:

More Immune Suppression Studies

But also do not contain the studies, only the abstract/article.


The OP of the topic we are presently in only posted the ARS Technical "article" about the study, not the study itself.
E-cigs shut down hundreds of immune system genes—regular cigs don’t

That's the same thing we've been debating about... no concern that's just an empty claim that doesn't deserve any comment... too late for that though.

 

[Kent C]

I misplaced my crepe hanging post.