Posted on 11/27/2021 3:58:54 AM PST by Kaslin
Earlier this month, news outlets all over the world reported breathlessly on new research which claimed to find that e-cigarette users were 15 percent more likely to have a stroke at young age than smokers. News sources as diverse as the Daily Mail in the UK, the South African Sunday Times, and all major U.S. TV stations picked up on it ensuring that a large portion of the global population were exposed to this bad news.
The problem is that this “research” was at best, highly misleading and, at worst, plain wrong.
First, this was not new published research as a casual reader might assume, but instead an unpublished conference presentation given a boost by the American Heart Association (AHA) which is explicitly opposed to reduced risk alternatives to smoking such as vaping.
As Jonathan Swift once wrote, “falsehood flies, and truth comes limping after it.” So while millions globally were being misled by the fear-peddling headlines, far fewer people would have read expert rebuttals which came soon after from the Science Media Centre.
Professor Peter Hajek of Queen Mary University commented that, “It is likely that e-cigarette users in this cohort were smokers who switched to vaping AFTER they suffered a stroke. Presenting this as if vaping caused these strokes is misleading and could put smokers off switching to vaping.” While Dr Leonie Brose of Kings College London added: “At least some of the strokes would therefore have occurred before e-cigarette use. The strokes then could not have been caused or made more likely by e-cigarette use. It may also be that people switched to e-cigarettes after a stroke to reduce the stroke risk from smoking which would explain the association between a past stroke and current e-cigarette use.”
Professor Paul Aveyard also observed that “This press release could equally and accurately be headed as ‘E-cigarette users six times less likely to have a stroke than traditional cigarette smokers’. As they point out, ‘Stroke was far more common among traditional cigarette smokers than e-cigarette users or people who used both, 6.75% compared to 1.09% and 3.72%, respectively.’”
The original news alert has now been removed and the abstract has been withdrawn from the American Heart Association conference and will not now even be presented. It is literally a non-story. But one which is now likely to be believed by a huge number of people worldwide.
It is impossible to know what damage this misinformation will have caused in deterring smokers from switching to safer nicotine products, but there will be a significant negative effect to public health as a result. As Swift went on to say, “when men come to be undeceived, it is too late; the jest is over, and the tale hath had its effect.”
Whether this particular barrage of misinformation is an example of deliberate media manipulation is difficult to judge. If it was, the AHA has done the right thing in removing it, albeit too late.
However, this is just the latest in a string of negative media stories about vaping which have plagued the debate in recent years, most of which have little or no basis in fact. Often the research itself is fatally biased with the researchers deciding on a pre-conceived narrative and then inventing or manipulating data to support it.
There are a large number of organizations so opposed to tobacco harm reduction – the substitution of safer nicotine products instead of smoking – that they are desperate to find harm in e-cigarettes. For many, without the harm of combustible cigarettes their careers are threatened. If vaping replaced smoking and did their job of reducing smoking with little or no cost to the taxpayer, they would receive no grants and have nothing to do.
It seems likely that in this instance the AHA is guilty only of promoting a weak hypothesis without prudently assessing the accuracy of its conclusions, but the media is also guilty of not double-checking facts before producing sensationalist headlines which can have a real and damaging effect on public health in many countries.
We should expect better from public health researchers and science journalists alike.
Thanks for posting.
From what I’ve seen, vaping is not politically correct/acceptable so the facts be damned.
Just imagine, if you could, if the various COVID “vaccines” were held to the same medical reporting standard that vaping was.
Oh, and did I forget to mention that the vaccines are mandatory for a lot of people, but vaping isn’t mandatory to anyone?
The invective and insanity directed against vaping were hard for me to understand, until I realized the tobacco companies and the government stand to lose billions in revenue if vaping were substituted for smoking.
Tobacco BAD. Marijuana GOOOD! What would you rather have your airline pilot smoke? A cigar or a joint?
As I write this, I’m sucking on a berry flavored vape. Yum.
I tried the best on the market and I always felt vapes were harsher to me than even the strongest cigarette.
Even though technically not smoke, it felt “off” and felt bad the next day. I stuck to natural/organic cigs and never had decline in lung function
Working in a high school.... What I see is the extreme personality problems that come from the addiction. Irritability, addictive behavior (including keeping their juul in their crotch and passing their crotch juul around to other kids).
But to be fair, without 2-3 cups in the morning, I’m not the friendliest either.
Having smoked pot for 40 years including 20 of great Mendocino stuff - started vaping about 4 years ago and it is much stronger and more concentrated. Am not surprised there will be new problems with e-cigs and vaping.
This report does not mean that vaping is now okay. It means this particular study is bad. I fail to see how filling one’s lungs with glycerol can do anything but harm them.
Smoking nicotine is bad because it introduces large quantities of nicotinic acid, an essential ingredient in the Krebs cellular energy cycle. Well guess what. Glycerol is just another essential ingredient in the Krebs cycle.
After a lifetime of trying to stop smoking, hypnosis multiple times, patches, cold turkey. I had mild breathing issues from smoking so I tried e-cigarettes eleven years ago. My breathing function is normal, I do not cough, I do not smell, they saved my life. About a year ago I started seeing another doctor and during a routine exam, he asked if I ever smoked to which I gave him my history but noted that I do vape. Expecting a smack down he said, “god bless you, they have been a life saver for many people”.
All my smoking related problems went away after I started vaping. My last check up showed my lungs are clear. I have been vaping for 8 years
I’m 58 years old. I’ve been vaping since 2013 (8 yrs). I have had zero issues. None.
People have been telling me for 8 years that vaping is going to kill me.
Disclosure: I build my own coils. I use a regulated Sigelei box mod.... the old one from 2014. I have 3 of them and they still work like a charm.
Almost the same here.
52 years old. I was a 30 year smoker until May 23 2009.
Build my coils on a MikesVapes ReBirth RTA using a GeekVape Aegis box mod. I also mix my own fluid.
Sadly, ever since the misinformation, stigma and extra taxes on vaping, I’ve seen a lot more people out and about smoking regular cigarettes.
My son switched from smoking to vaping about 12 years ago. Over time, he reduced the nicotine level to nearly zero then quit entirely about 5 years ago. Not sure that he could have stopped smoking tobacco were it not for vaping.
Back to the criminal FDA. They did a ‘study’ of e-cigs a decade ago. Created ‘smoking machines’ and tested a cigarette against several vaping devices. They didn’t find any trace of the 1000+ harmful chemicals given off by cigarettes from the vape devices, except for device cleaning chemicals. Most interesting is that the chemicals so toxic they are warned against on every pack of cigarettes, tar, was not mentioned at all in the FDA report. There is no tar produced from e-cigs. How did the FDA miss that?
The same results with me and I’ve been vaping for 8 years, too.
Regards to you, friend.
Good for you. Thanks for sharing that. I also started in 2013 and feel great.
Regards-
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.