FDA May Pull Flavored E-Cigarettes To Fight Youth Vaping "Epidemic"

[Swordsmyth]

Cigarette stocks dropped (then rebounded), after a Bloomberg report that the Food and Drug Administration is threatening to pull flavored electronic cigarettes like Juul off the market if the tobacco industry doesn’t do more to combat growing use of the products by children and teens.
Citing FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, Bloomberg notes that the FDA will soon release data that show a “substantial increase” in youth vaping this year compared with 2017.
"I have grown increasingly concerned around what we see as rising youth use in these products, and I’m disappointed in the actions the companies have taken to try to address this," Gottlieb told Bloomberg in an interview.

The FDA told five major e-cigarette manufacturers Wednesday to come up with ways to address youth use in 60 days or the agency could require them to stop selling flavored products that appeal to children. The products being targeted are: Juul, Altria Group Inc.’s MarkTen, Fontem Ventures BV’s blu, British American Tobacco Plc’s Vuse and Logic.
Additionally, to gain clearance to return to the market, the tobacco companies would have to prove that the benefits to adults who use e-cigarettes to stop smoking outweigh the risks associated with youth vaping, Bloomberg adds.
“I certainly am in possession of evidence that warrants that,” Gottlieb said, adding that the problem has reached "epidemic proportion" although he declined to disclose the evidence.

More at: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-09-12/fda-may-pull-e-cigarettes-fight-youth-vaping-epidemic

[Grandmastersexsay]

I don't know what they expect them to do. You can buy directly from Juul which requires a credit card, which requires you to be old enough to purchase ecigarettes, or you can buy through a retailer, who is responsible for age verification.

This isn't about the children. This about big tabacco taking a big hit in the wallet.

[Swordsmyth]

The FDA conducted a surprise inspection on the headquarters of the Juul e-cigarette company, collecting more than one-thousand pages of documentation from the company according to a Tuesday report (https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/409502-fda-conducts-surprise-inspection-of-e-cigarette-maker-juul-as-part-of).
“As part of FDA’s ongoing efforts to prevent youth use of tobacco products, particularly e-cigarettes, last week the agency conducted an unannounced on-site inspection of e-cigarette manufacturer JUUL Labs’ corporate headquarters,” the FDA reportedly said in a statement.
The agency took thousands of documents from the vaporizer manufacturer according to The Hill.


“Across this category, we are committed to taking all necessary actions, such as inspections and advancing new policies, to prevent a new generation of kids from becoming addicted to tobacco products,” the FDA said.
The surprise inspection was reportedly conducted to “determine compliance with laws and regulations.”

More at: https://bigleaguepolitics.com/fda-takes-1000s-of-documents-from-juul-e-cig-maker-in-surprise-inspection/

[Grandmastersexsay]

I'm guessing this is happening because of big tabacco lobiests. Juul tastes almost as good as a real cigarette without the health problems and bad smell. A lot of people are switching.

[Zippyjuan]

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/tobacco-companies-taking-over-the-e-cigarette-industry_us_58b48e02e4b0658fc20f98d0


Tobacco Companies Taking Over the E-Cigarette Industry

For decades, cigarettes cornered the market on nicotine.

People who decided to take up smoking chose the cigarette over any other nicotine delivery system available, including pipes and chewing tobacco.

This trend held true for generations of smokers, but in the past 10 years the cigarette industry has seen a small but significant sea change.

Electronic cigarettes are catching fire with an entirely new generation of smokers.

And tobacco companies have taken notice.

“It’s the most disruptive change in the tobacco market,” Jeff Drope, PhD, vice president of economic and health policy research for the American Cancer Society (ACS), told Healthline. “There is no parallel.”

A smoking hot market
Electronic nicotine delivery systems are not new.

The devices have been around in some form or another for nearly 30 years.

This current iteration of e-cigarettes made its way to the United States market by way of China.

However, the recent explosion of e-cigarette popularity caught the attention of tobacco companies a few years ago.

What was once a market populated by small independent manufacturers has given way to Big Tobacco.

And this move has anti-smoking organizations concerned.

“This is part of an ongoing strategy in the Big Tobacco playbook,” Erika Sward, assistant vice president of national advocacy for the American Lung Association (ALA), told Healthline.

The popular brand VUSE, is owned by R.J. Reynolds Vapor Company, a subsidiary of the tobacco giant Reynolds America.

British American Tobacco (BAT), the largest tobacco company in the Europe, launched Vype around four years ago.

Altria (formerly Phillip Morris) owns MarkTen.

Lorillard paid $135 million for Blu, but when R.J. Reynolds bought that tobacco company in 2015, its e-cigarette brand was sold to Imperial Tobacco, a company in the United Kingdom.

Today, global e-cigarette sales amount to around $5 billion a year.

That compares to the $92 million cigarette market, but the e-cigarette industry is expected to grow 24 percent per year through 2018.

“Big Tobacco is now dominating in dollars in sales,” Drope said.



More at link.

Soda companies responded to losing sales to caffinated drinks like Red Bull in a similar manner- by buying them up.

[Zippyjuan]

https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/3/17529442/juul-vapes-nicotine-electronic-cigarettes-addiction-funding


. Each JuulPod e-liquid cartridges contains as much nicotine as a pack of cigarettes, the company says — and it’s in a form that’s just as easy to inhale as cigarettes.


They found that the Juul ‘Fruit Medley’ and ‘Creme Brulee’ flavored liquids had the highest nicotine content,

Nicotine is what addicts you to the product.

[dannno]

https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/3/17529442/juul-vapes-nicotine-electronic-cigarettes-addiction-funding


Nicotine is what addicts you to the product.



Nicotine: It may have a good sidePublished: March, 2014
It gets people hooked on cigarettes, but researchers hope that nicotine and related compounds will have therapeutic uses.

https://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletter_article/Nicotine_It_may_have_a_good_side




The idea is that as long as you aren't smoking it, nicotine has quite a few health benefits. Although it hasn't been around long, vaping has not been shown to have any real negative consequences.

[Swordsmyth]

https://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletter_article/Nicotine_It_may_have_a_good_side



[/FONT][/COLOR]
The idea is that as long as you aren't smoking it, nicotine has quite a few health benefits. Although it hasn't been around long, vaping has not been shown to have any real negative consequences.
It is almost a B vitamin, I don't believe it is good for you but there is no reason for government to freak out over it.

[dannno]

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/tobacco-companies-taking-over-the-e-cigarette-industry_us_58b48e02e4b0658fc20f98d0



More at link.

Soda companies responded to losing sales to caffinated drinks like Red Bull in a similar manner- by buying them up.

They are trying to regulate the smaller vaping companies out of business by requiring them to do expensive tests on all of their products - including each individual flavor.

There used to be hundreds of companies making their own eliquids. There are still a lot out there, I'm not sure where the regulations are currently because my brand of choice is still going on as usual but if they would quit it with the regulations there would be plenty of competition outside of big tobacco.

[Zippyjuan]

https://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletter_article/Nicotine_It_may_have_a_good_side



[/FONT][/COLOR]
The idea is that as long as you aren't smoking it, nicotine has quite a few health benefits. Although it hasn't been around long, vaping has not been shown to have any real negative consequences.

Really? Or is that just their marketing program making those claims?


Yet nicotine is more than addictive. It can actually harm the lungs, a new study finds.

Researchers tested the effects of nicotine on lung tissue growing in a lab dish. Those lung cells were exposed to nicotine alone, in cigarette smoke and in e-cigarette vapors. Follow-up tests exposed lab animals to these same substances.

Nicotine caused inflammation in lung tissue. It also reduced that tissue’s ability to serve as a barrier to foreign substances, the researchers found. Irina Petrache is a doctor and lung specialist at Indiana University in Indianapolis. She headed the research team. Her group showed for the first time that nicotine, whatever its source, can harm lung tissue. So in this respect, her team now concludes, vaping would be no better for the lungs than cigarette smoking.

But even an e-cigarette liquid having no nicotine disrupted the barrier function of lung cells, the team found. They don’t know why. But this is unexpected and disturbing, Petrache’s team says. The scientists suspect it may have to do with solvents and other potentially toxic materials. These chemicals are present in the flavored liquids that are inhaled through e-cigarettes.

Petrache and her colleagues shared their new findings May 26 in the American Journal of Physiology — Lung Cellular and Molecular Physiology.

More evidence of harm

Scientists also have collected evidence of e-cigarette lung impacts from a small number of people. One study of 25 people, for instance, found that smoking cigarettes and vaping had the same short-term effects on the lungs. Both created signs of inflammation and lung damage. Scientists reported the findings in the July 1, 2014 issue of Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology.

More at link.


Far more tests of vaping have taken place in animals or dishes of cells. These studies add to the growing body of evidence of harm that e-cigarettes and their flavorings may cause.

Recently, scientists at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill exposed human lung cells to 13 e-cigarette flavorings. Exposures lasted either 30 minutes or a full day. Five of the flavorings — hot cinnamon candies, banana pudding, kola, vanilla and menthol tobacco — affected the cells. Sometimes the treated cells no longer could replicate (reproduce) at normal rates. At high doses, these flavorings even killed the cells.


At the same meeting last year, Laura Crotty Alexander showed vaping can make it harder for the body to kill germs. Crotty Alexander is a lung specialist and scientist. She works with the Veterans Administration San Diego Healthcare System.

Crotty Alexander studied Staphylococcus aureus bacteria. Unchecked, these germs can cause pneumonia. In bad cases, they can kill. Luckily, the human body makes a material that normally can kill these bacteria.

In the lab, she exposed the bacteria to e-cigarette vapors. The idea was to create conditions like ones the germs might find in the lungs of someone who vaped. The germs responded by covering themselves with a heavier biofilm coating than normal. This gave them an extra-thick layer of protection.

Crotty Alexander then allowed mice to breathe in air containing these vaping-exposed germs. By the next day, the mice had three times as many of these germs in their lungs as did mice that had been exposed to normal Staph bacteria. Clearly, mice did not do well at fighting off the germs exposed to e-cigarette vapors.

“E-cigarettes are definitely not benign,” or harmless, Crotty Alexander concluded.

Inflamed lungs with an impaired barrier might help explain why there had been more germs inhabiting the lungs. If true, that also might explain related data that emerged earlier this year.

In that study, mice inhaled e-cigarette vapors for two weeks. Their lungs showed signs of inflammation. Later, these animals were exposed either to Staphylococcus or to flu virus. Mice with inflamed lungs were less able to fight off infection than were mice that had not vaped. Some vaping mice even died from the flu. All nonvaping mice survived.

[jkr]

Yeah PG can go... no one's going to miss it.

this is not a freedom issue

[dannno]

Really? Or is that just their marketing program making those claims?



More at link.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2135271/

This is one of the main ingredients of vaping liquid:


It has been found that propylene glycol vapor dispersed into the air of an enclosed space produces a marked and rapid bactericidal effect on microorganisms introduced into such an atmosphere in droplet form. Concentrations of 1 gm. of propylene glycol vapor in two to four million cc. of air produced immediate and complete sterilization of air into which pneumococci, streptococci, staphylococci, H. influenzae, and other microorganisms as well as influenza virus had been sprayed.

Some hospitals used to pump PG into the air to help reduce infections.

Ever been to a concert? They use PG for the fog machines.

E-cigs have been found in multiple studies, including govt. studies in the UK to be about 98% safer than cigarettes.

I've been smoking herb and nicotine for decades, I haven't had either a cough or a lung infection in almost 15 years.. and then it was just a cough. I also have asthma, but it is not impacted by either herb or e-cigs. It was impacted by cigarette smoking, which is why I did not smoke very many cigs ever.. but I liked to have one when I was out drinking sometimes.

[Zippyjuan]

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2135271/

This is one of the main ingredients of vaping liquid:



Some hospitals used to pump PG into the air to help reduce infections.

Ever been to a concert? They use PG for the fog machines.

E-cigs have been found in multiple studies, including govt. studies in the UK to be about 98% safer than cigarettes.

I've been smoking herb and nicotine for decades, I haven't had either a cough or a lung infection in almost 15 years.. and then it was just a cough. I also have asthma, but it is not impacted by either herb or e-cigs. It was impacted by cigarette smoking, which is why I did not smoke very many cigs ever.. but I liked to have one when I was out drinking sometimes.

The lung damage caused by the vaping made the lungs more susceptible to infection.

Are you trying to convince me? Or to justify using it to yourself? "Somewhat healthier" does not necessarily mean harmless or safe. (yes, nothing is without risk).

https://www.businessinsider.com/vaping-e-cigs-heart-attack-risk-2018-8


Vaping every day could double your risk of a heart attack, new research suggests


Smoking kills. No other habit has been so strongly tied to death.

In addition to inhaling burned tobacco and tar, smokers breathe in toxic metals like cadmium and beryllium, as well as metallic elements like nickel and chromium — all of which accumulate naturally in the leaves of the tobacco plant.

It's no surprise, then, that much of the available evidence suggests that vaping, which involves puffing on vaporized liquid nicotine instead of inhaling burned tobacco, is at least somewhat healthier. But vaping is linked with its own set of health risks, a spate of new research is beginning to reveal. Those risks include inhaling toxic metals like lead, becoming addicted to nicotine, and now, potentially doubling one's risk of a heart attack.

That latest finding comes from a large study out of the University of California, San Francisco. The study suggests that people who vape every day may face twice the risk of a heart attack compared with people who neither vape nor smoke at all. The research also suggests that daily conventional cigarette smokers face three times the risk of a heart attack, while people who both vape and smoke (so-called "dual users") face nearly five times the risk.

[jkr]

On a long enough time scale...

[Zippyjuan]

On a long enough time scale...

"I'll quit before I get harmed by it."

[homahr]

I like THC cartridges myself. Don't care for nicotine.

[Swordsmyth]

The lung damage caused by the vaping made the lungs more susceptible to infection.

Are you trying to convince me? Or to justify using it to yourself? "Somewhat healthier" does not necessarily mean harmless or safe. (yes, nothing is without risk).

https://www.businessinsider.com/vaping-e-cigs-heart-attack-risk-2018-8

What is the rate being tripled? If it was one in a billion and now is three in a billion is that significant?

What is their impact on "good" bacteria in the gut?

...

[Zippyjuan]

...

OK.

https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/sgr/50th-anniversary/pdfs/fs_smoking_CVD_508.pdf


Smoking is a major cause of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and causes approximately one of every four deaths from CVD, according to the 2014 Surgeon General’s Report on smoking and health. CVD is the single largest cause of death in the United States, killing more than 800,000 people a year. More than 16 million Americans have heart disease. Almost 8 million have had a heart attack and 7 million have had a stroke.

That would be about two million smoking related heart attacks a year. And how many smokers?

https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/adult_data/cig_smoking/index.htm


This means an estimated 37.8 million adults in the United States currently smoke cigarettes.

If two million had a heart attack, that is about one on 19 chance of a heart attack from smoking per year. Since just vaping has about half the risk, you "only" have a one in 40 chance of a heart attack.

[Swordsmyth]

OK.

https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/sgr/50th-anniversary/pdfs/fs_smoking_CVD_508.pdf



That would be about two million smoking related heart attacks a year.

I don't smoke anything but how do regular cigarettes that contain tar and many other nasty things have anything to do with vaping?

[oyarde]

Thanks FDA , I feek safer now knowing the nicotine addict kids are going to switch to Newports now that they can no longer buy juicy fruit flavored vape. We should make this day a national holiday . Big Bloated Unconstitutional Govt Retard Day .

[homahr]

eff the youf

[oyarde]

I don't smoke anything but how do regular cigarettes that contain tar and many other nasty things have anything to do with vaping?

I smoked a pack or more a day of full flavor type cigarettes for 35 years probably at least . I no longer smoke anything , I can tell you certainly that that tar collecting in there is not good for your lung capacity .

[homahr]

I smoked a pack or more a day of full flavor type cigarettes for 35 years probably at least . I no longer smoke anything , I can tell you certainly that that tar collecting in there is not good for your lung capacity .

Have you ever tried vaping? or hookah?

[nikcers]

They should ban flavored alcohol next. Hope no one figures out you can mix it with other things that have flavor.

[oyarde]

Have you ever tried vaping? or hookah?

Yes , but I never smoked tobacco in a hookah . I actually feel pretty good now as a non smoker . I am comfortable with it . I can take that five dollars a day and invest it in ammo .

[oyarde]

They should ban flavored alcohol next. Hope no one figures out you can mix it with other things that have flavor.

LOL .There is always dust on the bottles of the flavored vodka I noticed when I stopped at the liquor store nightly on my way home before I retired .

[homahr]

Yes , but I never smoked tobacco in a hookah . I actually feel pretty good now as a non smoker . I am comfortable with it . I can take that five dollars a day and invest it in ammo .

did you actually smoke weed in a hookah? i feel that would waste weed, no?

Good strategy regarding investing in ammo instead of cigs.

[oyarde]

did you actually smoke weed in a hookah? i feel that would waste weed, no?

Good strategy regarding investing in ammo instead of cigs.

Hash

[homahr]

Hash

that sounds harsh.

[oyarde]

that sounds harsh.

It was quite good at the time I thought .

[dannno]

The lung damage caused by the vaping made the lungs more susceptible to infection.

Are you trying to convince me? Or to justify using it to yourself? "Somewhat healthier" does not necessarily mean harmless or safe. (yes, nothing is without risk).

https://www.businessinsider.com/vaping-e-cigs-heart-attack-risk-2018-8

There is no "lung damage" from vaping, what I'm showing you is that your studies are bullshit and probably paid for by big tobacco.. People already know smoking commercial tobacco is harmful, so there is no harm in putting studies out showing it is harmful because people choose to smoke them anyway..

But there is a new product on the market and a lot of independent retailers which is a threat to big tobacco.. So they put out BS studies that make vaping look unhealthy so they can regulate the shit out of it and make sure they maintain control of the nicotine industry.

Nicotine patches don't increase the rate of cardiovascular disease so it doesn't make much sense that vaping should either:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9784902

Your study claimed that people who supplemented vaping in and also smoked cigs had even higher rate of cardiovascular disease than people who smoked cigarettes all day.. Sorry but that's retarded, and it sounds like something paid for by big tobacco.. "If you smoke cigarettes, make sure and don't vape!! It could be worse!!"

When I smoked cigs, it was a handful a year toward the end. After they added the chemical that made the cigs not burn as long, I would usually just end up feeling sick. Now I vape in the morning a little, I don't take it with me to work and never have any cravings while I'm away from home. But it is nice and relaxing to have a little in the evenings..

[Zippyjuan]

There is no "lung damage" from vaping, what I'm showing you is that your studies are bull$#@! and probably paid for by big tobacco.. People already know smoking commercial tobacco is harmful, so there is no harm in putting studies out showing it is harmful because people choose to smoke them anyway..

But there is a new product on the market and a lot of independent retailers which is a threat to big tobacco.. So they put out BS studies that make vaping look unhealthy so they can regulate the $#@! out of it and make sure they maintain control of the nicotine industry.

Nicotine patches don't increase the rate of cardiovascular disease so it doesn't make much sense that vaping should either:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9784902

Your study claimed that people who supplemented vaping in and also smoked cigs had even higher rate of cardiovascular disease than people who smoked cigarettes all day.. Sorry but that's retarded, and it sounds like something paid for by big tobacco.. "If you smoke cigarettes, make sure and don't vape!! It could be worse!!"

When I smoked cigs, it was a handful a year toward the end. After they added the chemical that made the cigs not burn as long, I would usually just end up feeling sick. Now I vape in the morning a little, I don't take it with me to work and never have any cravings while I'm away from home. But it is nice and relaxing to have a little in the evenings..

You aren't inhaling patches into your lungs. Plus the study only looked at people using them for two weeks. That isn't long enough.


The study was conducted in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized fashion over a 2-week period.

But if you want to vape- go ahead. Just be informed and not just by the sellers.

[dannno]

You aren't inhaling patches into your lungs. Plus the study only looked at people using them for two weeks. That isn't long enough.



But if you want to vape- go ahead. Just be informed and not just by the sellers.

You're saying I should use the information paid for by big tobacco as opposed to more neutral studies?

Note the related article below about Americans having a lot more bad information about vaping than Brits, apparently because big tobacco doesn't have such a big stranglehold there.



https://www.vapes.com/blogs/news/study-shows-vaping-improves-cardio-functions-one-cigarette-produces-instant-adverse-effects


When a group of scientists from the Onassis Cardiac Surgery Center in Kallithéa, Greece, discovered the enormous amounts of bad information circulating online and in mainstream media, they decided to take action. By conducting a series of high-quality studies complete with peer reviewed statistics, the Greek team hopes to better educate the global community on the many health benefits of vaping as a tobacco harm reduction tool. Overview of the myocardial vaping study

The scientific team led by world-class cardiologist Dr. Konstantinos E Farsalinos began by soliciting the help of 81 volunteers consisting of both smokers and vapers. Dual usage was strictly forbidden. In fact, to prove that their research was on the up-and-up, several of the original control group were rejected from the study after it was discovered that they had relapsed temporarily back into smoking.


Throughout the course of the project, various cardiovascular functions of each participant were carefully monitored and evaluated, including:

IVRT corrected to heart rate (IVRTc)
Isovolumetric relaxation time (IVRT)
Left ventricle (LV) Diameter
Left ventricle (LV) Mass Index
Myocardial performance index
Diastolic Blood Pressure
Systolic Blood Pressure
Standing Blood Pressure
Standing Heart Rate
Triglyceride Levels
Glucose Levels
Cholesterol levels


Of the original 81 participants, 36 smokers completed the trial.

32 Men
4 Women
36 was the average age


Of the original 81 participants, 40 vapers completed the trial.

36 Men
4 Women
35 was the average age


All vapers were also former smokers and non-dual users.
All vapers were provided the same e-liquid comprised of 7ml nicotine saturation.
On a regularly scheduled basis, smokers were asked to smoke a single cigarette in an air-controlled laboratory where all related myocardial functions were measured.
Meanwhile, the vaping group was asked to vape the 7ml nicotine e-liquid n a separate, air-controlled environment for a period of seven minutes.

The findings were then compared and documented in a report entitled, Acute effects of using an electronic nicotine-delivery device (electronic cigarette) on myocardial function: comparison with the effects of regular cigarettes. After an extensive peer review, the findings were then published in the online journal BMC Cardiovascular Disorders (http://bmccardiovascdisord.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2261-14-78).

Related Article: Only 5% of Brits think vaping is as bad as smoking compared to 33% of Americans
(https://www.vapes.com/blogs/news/only-5-of-brits-think-vaping-is-as-bad-as-smoking-compared-to-33-of-americans)
What the scientists discovered is that the vaping group experienced relatively no changes in any of the associated cardiovascular functions. Comparatively, each member of the smoking group exhibited dramatic and nearly instantaneous adverse effects in most categories even after smoking just one cigarette.
"This is the first study to examine the acute effects of electronic cigarette use on myocardial function. No adverse effects on LV [left ventricular] myocardial function were observed after using electronic cigarette with nicotine-containing liquid for 7 minutes. On the contrary, significant changes in diastolic function parameters were found after smoking 1 tobacco cigarette."

"This study provides the first clinical evidence that electronic cigarettes have less acute adverse effects on myocardial function when compared to tobacco cigarettes."

The Farsalinos study has been highly praised among the medical and vaping communities worldwide. However, because the researchers are from outside of the United States, American public health agencies like the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) are somewhat slow to endorse the study’s findings. In fact, both the FDA and the CDC have yet to publicly endorse the 2015 research compiled by the UK Royal College of Physicians (https://www.rcplondon.ac.uk/projects/outputs/nicotine-without-smoke-tobacco-harm-reduction-0) which indicates that vaping is 95 percent less harmful than smoking.

[Zippyjuan]

You're saying I should use the information paid for by big tobacco as opposed to more neutral studies?

Note the related article below about Americans having a lot more bad information about vaping than Brits, apparently because big tobacco doesn't have such a big stranglehold there.

Another very short study. They looked at the effects of a single usage. Nothing long term about it. Not even a full day. https://bmccardiovascdisord.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2261-14-78#Sec2


No adverse effects on LV myocardial function were observed after using electronic cigarette with nicotine-containing liquid for 7 minutes. On the contrary, significant changes in diastolic function parameters were found after smoking 1 tobacco cigarette.


In the conclusion:


Although acute smoking inhalation caused a delay in LV myocardial relaxation in smokers, electronic cigarette use was found to have no such immediate effects in daily users of the device. This short-term beneficial profile of electronic cigarette compared to smoking, although not conclusive about its overall health-effects as a tobacco harm reduction product, provides the first evidence about the cardiovascular effects of this device.

As for sponsorship bias:


Competing interests

After this study was completed, the authors have performed studies using funds provided to the institution by e-cigarette companies.

[dannno]

Another very short study. They looked at the effects of a single usage. https://bmccardiovascdisord.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2261-14-78#Sec2




Not true:


In fact, to prove that their research was on the up-and-up, several of the original control group were rejected from the study after it was discovered that they had relapsed temporarily back into smoking.

They couldn't go 7 minutes without smoking a cig in a controlled setting??

[Zippyjuan]

Not true:



They couldn't go 7 minutes without smoking a cig in a controlled setting??

https://bmccardiovascdisord.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2261-14-78#Sec2

They took baseline measurements and then told the participant to smoke- either one cigarette or seven minutes on an e-cig. Then the tests were repeated. Then they were done. No further follow-up. The cardiograms they looked at only considered three beats. A terrible study which really doesn't show much of anything useful.



Study protocol

Participants presented to the echocardiographic laboratory after fasting and refraining from alcohol and caffeine consumption for 4 hours; they were also asked to refrain from smoking and electronic cigarette use for 4 hours before the study.

Participants were allowed to rest for 5 minutes before initiating the echocardiographic examination. A baseline echocardiographic examination was performed in smokers, who were then transferred to a room next to the echocardiography laboratory and smoked 1 tobacco cigarette. For electronic cigarette users, after the baseline echocardiogram they were asked to use the electronic cigarette device ad lib for 7 minutes in another room which was not used by smokers, to avoid environmental exposure to smoke. Subsequently, all participants returned to the echocardiography laboratory and, after 5 minutes of rest, a second echocardiogram was performed in both groups.

Heart rate and BP were measured before and during each echocardiographic examination. The Brinkman index was calculated (product of number of cigarettes smoked daily and years of smoking) according to participants’ self-report. Echocardiograms were performed using a commercially available system (Vivid 7, GE Vingmed, Horten, Norway). Studies were digitally recorded on hard disk for offline analysis using dedicated software (Echopac, GE Medical Systems, Horten, Norway) by a single, blinded to the protocol, experienced echocardiographer. Reported values represent the average of 3 consecutive beats.



Some limitations apply to this study. A small sample size was studied, and examination focused only on immediate effects. The results do not indicate that electronic cigarettes are absolutely safe for the cardiovascular system. Other parameters known to be adversely affected by acute smoking, such as coronary microvascular and endothelial function or vascular distensibility, were not examined.


Studies on long-term effects are necessary; however, more time of use is needed before any such studies are published since electronic cigarettes were introduced to the market in recent years and there is a substantial delay between smoking initiation and development of clinically-evident disease. We asked subjects to use the electronic cigarette for 7 minutes.

And don't forget this part:


Competing interests

After this study was completed, the authors have performed studies using funds provided to the institution by e-cigarette companies.

[dannno]

https://bmccardiovascdisord.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2261-14-78#Sec2

They took baseline measurements and then told the participant to smoke- either one cigarette or seven minutes on an e-cig. Then the tests were repeated. Then they were done. No further follow-up. The cardiograms they looked at only considered three beats. A terrible study which really doesn't show much of anything useful.









And don't forget this part:

http://blog.mtbakervapor.com/vaping-causes-heart-attacks-misleading-study/



Vaping Causes Heart Attacks? | A Misleading Study


August 30, 2018
By Caroline Sparks (http://blog.mtbakervapor.com/author/carolinesparks/) Advocacy (http://blog.mtbakervapor.com/category/advocacy/)

Maybe you’ve seen the headlines the past couple of days all claiming that vaping can “double your risk of heart attacks”. A new study from notorious anti-smoking advocate Stanton Glantz, says it has proof of this. But why does this study claim vaping causes heart attacks? And where is this data coming from?

Firstly, every time you see a study claiming something like vaping causes heart attacks, take it with a grain of salt and do some digging to get another perspective. We are living in a time when the vaping community is being vilified and made out to be in the same category as big tobacco, which is just ridiculous. In fact, we are fighting against big tobacco and trying to get people to QUIT SMOKING (https://www.mtbakervapor.com/?utm_source=blog&utm_medium=blog&utm_term=blog_0830) and improve their health.

The Details of The Study Claiming Vaping Causes Heart Attacks

This study is a result of data collected by Prof. Glantz and three students. Glantz is a career anti-smoking crusader (and anti-vaping). He is based at UCSF and runs the Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education. In other words, he is inherently biased. And if that isn’t enough to convince you of his bias, his center is funded by the FDA (surprise, surprise).


The study in question (https://www.ajpmonline.org/article/S0749-3797(18)31871-3/fulltext), is the result of surveying participants during the 2014 and 2016 National Health Interview Survey. They were asked if they used e-cigarettes and if they had a heart attack. However, saying that using e-cigarettes increases the risk of heart attacks is incredibly deceptive using this data. This is for a few reasons. Firstly, smokers who switch over to vaping still have the damage done to their body from smoking. No mention was made in the study of how long they smoked, how long they had been switched, if they were still doing both, or if they started smoking again. Not to mention, the question didn’t specify if the heart attack happened before or after they started vaping. Perhaps the heart attack was a catalyst for switching (https://www.mtbakervapor.com/?utm_source=blog&utm_medium=blog&utm_term=blog_0830) and it’s impossible to say vaping causes heart attacks.


These extremely deceptive studies, which aren’t the first done by Glantz (http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2017/02/secondhand_smoke_isn_t_as_bad_as_we_thought.html), are extremely damaging and can actually end up killing people who need vaping to get healthy and off of cigarettes. It’s important as members of the vaping community, to dig up the truth and tell those who are misinformed the truth about the propaganda being spread from big pharma and the FDA.

[Zippyjuan]

So a lady pushing vaping says she doesn't like a study but doesn't present studies disproving it. And you criticize me about source bias (and they posted a study by people paid by the vaping industry). She is even trying to sell vaping products. http://blog.mtbakervapor.com/author/carolinesparks/


Caroline Sparks

Writer, Vaper, Advocate Have an idea? Comment below!

Are you still trying to convince yourself?

[r3volution 3.0]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FkbdbRjMX2Y

[ThePaleoLibertarian]

So a lady pushing vaping says she doesn't like a study but doesn't present studies disproving it. And you criticize me about source bias (and they posted a study by people paid by the vaping industry). She is even trying to sell vaping products. http://blog.mtbakervapor.com/author/carolinesparks/



Are you still trying to convince yourself?
You don't have to present a counter-example to criticize a study. If the methodology is flawed (which it appears to be), that's all that's necessary to point out.

Also, if somebody is an advocate, they could have come by it honestly. If someone pens an article criticizing the justice system, does the fact that they're a CJ reform advocate call their arguments into question? Not unless the argument is flawed.