E-Cigs : More New Youth Studies Confuse the Public
Monday, January 12, 2015 8:32:44 AM America/Los_Angeles
And the whirlwind of controversy continues. For those who keep up with ongoing avalanche of propaganda, vapers continue to ski past the melting fluff. What is particularly interesting is that though the same articles are circulating, people are starting to voice up. As many know, hangtag campaign #curbit was a miserable fail with hundreds of posts mocking (some quite witty) the outright ridiculousness portrayed by the campaign which has recently littered the media. Admittedly, the strangest part is the user generated comment-aspect of the controversy. It seems as though blocking the comment areas on large sources has been picking up. Again, the internet makes masking rebuttals as simple as a click (to disable an open comment box). Additionally, new reports cite that various groups are sifting through social media platforms like Twitter, Facebook and “various forums” (most vapers know what that refers to).
The press and politicians are lobbying to ban electronic cigarettes in any fashion possible, yet people are finally starting to wake up and smell the non-existent smell of vapor (or perhaps they are tired of dingy, polluted smoke stench). One thing that keeps propelling politicians is the notion that electronic cigarettes appeal to youth. Though this has already been countlessly negated, once again, let’s negate it.
Alcohol comes in flavors like bubblegum, birthday cake and whipped cream. Budweiser produces rasparitas. Malt liquor can be purchased in flavors like fruit punch. Cigarettes contain flavors like caramel and vanilla. Wine is flavored. There are cloves, flavored cigars and flavored tobacco for hookahs. All of this is legal and there is no scrutiny. Even aspirin and Ibuprofen (which can kill) can be purchased with candy-coating, oh and there are candy-inspired candles, perfumes…
Now that e-cigarettes are advertising to kids by incorporating flavors is the hot and popular debate, we see hundreds of new articles everyday spinning off of each other, many based all on these same studies, which seem to always be inaccurately presented to the public. Another new study has smeared the ecig image is a new study just released by Pediatrics.
According to Pediatric, this new study was conducted to analyze youth ecig statistics, though the study is far from random and unbiased. To begin, this study takes place in Hawaii, and Hawaii happens to be the king of e-cigarette and vaporizer sales, partially because of the high tobacco taxes. So what we have is a reputable source conducting a study to base US youth e-cigarette statistics in a state that per a capita has the greatest amount of e-cig sales. Did Pediatric pull Hawaii from a hat?
Next the study (which identifies itself as being random), is hardly random. First the state was chosen. Then the schools were chosen. Students from the study must have had parental consent (75% success rate), making the scientific population NOT random. This is elegantly intertwined in Pediatrics’ January Abstract. And now, the media is again having a frenzy.
Pediatric:
(Hawaii youth)
RESULTS: Prevalence for the categories was 17% (e-cigarettes only), 12% (dual use), 3% (cigarettes only), and 68% (nonusers). Dual users and cigarette-only users were highest on risk status (elevated on risk factors and lower on protective factors) compared with other groups. E-cigarette only users were higher on risk status than nonusers but lower than dual users. E-cigarette only users and dual users more often perceived e-cigarettes as healthier than cigarettes compared with nonusers.
CONCLUSIONS: This study reports a US adolescent sample with one of the largest prevalence rates of e-cigarette only use in the existing literature. Dual use also had a substantial prevalence. The fact that e-cigarette only users were intermediate in risk status between nonusers and dual users raises the possibility that e-cigarettes are recruiting medium-risk adolescents, who otherwise would be less susceptible to tobacco product use.
So, we have Pediatrics hopping plane to Hawaii, the vape capital, where tobacco is astronomically expensive, and the reports are that (and this is for a national youth survey, as in, the entire country); “17% (e-cigarettes only), 12% (dual use), 3% (cigarettes only), and 68% (nonusers).”
This would mean that 15%of those polled consumed cigarettes (including dual users) while 17% used only e-cigarettes. Studies suggest that many adolescents who use e-cigarettes, use them to wean their nicotine or as a substitute to cigarettes.
Cigarettes:
Students were asked to evaluate their smoking and e-cigarette usage. It was presented (according to the study) as: “0–6 scale with anchor points ‘I have never smoked a cigarette’ and ‘I smoke cigarettes every day’).
E-Cigarettes:
(Check one) (0–6 scale with anchor points ‘Never did this’ and ‘Usually smoke e-cigarettes every day’). A second item asked, “Was there a time in the past month when you smoked an e-cigarette? (check one)” (0–3 scale with anchor points ‘No’ and ‘Three or more times’).”
Questions were asked about electronic cigarettes that were not asked about cigarettes (according to the abstract). This refers to the third, 'Was there a time in the past month when you smoked an e-cigarette?' Now, when considering adolescences who have tried tobacco cigarettes a hand-full of times, who are then asked by adults to simply select between two extremes: every day and have tried them; the obvious answer is not going to be the latter, as a daily smoker is stigmatized much differently than a casual smoker, which could alter comparative results, as an intermediate question such as 'was there a time in the past month when you smoked an e-cigarette?' Is, in fact, an intermediate question, and, was not asked of cigarettes.
The study then goes on to anonymously interview participants in regards to their family’s income and level of education. This was then speculated with the intent to correlate rebellion and bad-home conditions which could perpetuate the evil drug known as nicotine (not cigarettes which contain 7000+ chemicals when combusted).
Still, in Hawaii where tobacco is extremely expensive, the usage of cigarettes was 15% (including dual use). The study sensationalizes e-cig use while also squeezing in:
“The prevalence of ever-use was 15% for cigarettes, 47% for alcohol, and 18% for marijuana.” This would mean that Hawaii (including dual users) is about average. What would these statistics be like in Kentucky? Or Alaska? Apparently, Hawaii is the perfect representation of American youth.
Regardless of this study which actually is positive (it affirms that smoking rates are going down), which should be the overall focus; smoking rates, not e-cigs. E-cigarettes have become the golden egg when it comes to freaking the public out.
It is also important to note that “lack of evidence” is used frequently throughout the study. With so many variables, it is easy to confuse and perpetuate the notion that e-cigarettes are not only marketed towards, but attract youth. The study examines various models. Here are two parts of the article (just to clarify how confusing this study might appear):
“One model suggests that youth who try e-cigarettes have more conventional and health-oriented values. Their choice of e-cigarettes would be motivated more by health concerns, so they would not find cigarettes or other substances (eg, marijuana) attractive and would not score high on known risk factors for adolescent substance use.”
Then:
“This conceptualization suggests that youth who use e-cigarettes will also use tobacco and alcohol and will score high on substance use risk factors. Although both formulations are plausible, there is little empirical evidence to support or reject either theory at this time.”
And:
“Such considerations have led to concerns that e-cigarettes may lead to a renormalization of cigarette smoking, with this being a particular concern for younger populations, who show a high degree of awareness of e-cigarettes.”
And what do they mean by "awareness"? Are they referring to adolescents knowing of their existence (they would probably know what they are unless living under a rock), or, are they referring to adolescents understanding how to read, using the popular interwebs and recalling science? The composition of E-Liquid is very simple to understand, and most older kids know what substances like propylene glycol are.
Step 2: Study is published.
Step 3: Media gets ahold of it and the study turns into THIS:
(Geek Infinite) “Recommending its pulling in youngsters who wouldn’t fundamentally be keen on routine smoking. E-cigarette users and dual smokers were also more likely that nonsmokers think e-cigarettes are healthier than normal cigarettes.”
(Science Times) “With the publicity that e-cigarettes are the safer alternative for the more health hazardous tobacco products, more people resort to e-cigarettes (also referred to as e-cigs) and the younger generation have been drawn to the "cooler and hipper" e-cigarettes with their attractive packaging and fruity taste. However, a recent study found that e-cigarette smoking increased the likelihood among youngsters to smoke the nicotine-rich cigarette… Meaning, students may have a more positive view of smoking overall because of e-cigarettes.”
(Kansas City) “’For years, kids were taught in school not to smoke,’” noted Tom Foster, who owns Fidel’s Cigar Shop in Westport. “’E-cigarettes have been promoted as a safe way to smoke. They started as disposable, but now they’re being marketed for long-term use. People are staying on these things.’” (A cigar shop which sells tobacco is in favor of e-cigarettes being more dangerous: shocker)
Then: “’It is still a drug, a highly addictive drug, more so than many of the other ones that are out there. We don’t know really what the harm is going to be in the future, which is concerning.’” What about alcohol (legal), heroin, meth, prescription pills (legal), cocaine and bath salts (legal)? What does “many other drugs” even refer to?
(Sci-tech Today) “In this view, e-cigarette use is merely a step on a path to "problem behavior" that the students were likely to follow anyway -- and indeed, of the 15% of students who had smoked regular cigarettes, 80% had used e-cigarettes as well.”
(Med Page Today)…teenagers may not realize e-cigarettes contain nicotine, which is an addictive substance. "One Surgeon General's report ... documented that, in several aspects, nicotine is more addictive than heroin.’"
Then the study correlates e-cigarette use with a Childs’ mother’s depression rates. ???
“Mothers were given a shortened form of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), which included a series of questions about their feelings (such as "I felt depressed" and "I felt hopeful about the future"). Respondents answered using four response categories ranging from "rarely to none of the time (<1 day)" to "most or all of the time (5-7 days)." Scores were calculated on a scale of 0 to 36, with mean scores of 3.98 to 4.81. The cutoff score for presence of depression was 12.”
So, let's get this straight: Cigarette consumption is at an all-time low, studies have found that e-cigarettes are often used by teens looking to kick the habit, or because they are “curious”, and Petiatrics decides to test this theory in Hawaii, where e-cigarettes are “intensely advertised” (this is used to discredit e-cigarette companies, when in all actuality, places like Hawaii have astronomical tobacco costs as well as limited regulation on advertisement, thus, these advertisements must be being put forth to attract children, because adults are not consumers).
E-Cigarette users, don’t get too upset. There are still huge sources which continue to negate the propaganda, such as Forbes, which has consistently stated data, as well as commentary in support of the new smokeless devices (which can also contain zero nicotine, you know, the crazy heroin-like drug).
(Forbes)“You might think these diverging trends would give pause to critics who worry that e-cigarettes are “reglamorizing” the old-fashioned, combustible kind. Yet opponents of vaping seem undeterred by reality’s failure to match their predictions. Longtime anti-smoking activist Stanton Glantz recently told USA Today “there’s no question that e-cigarettes are a gateway to smoking.”
“If e-cigarettes were “a gateway to smoking,” you would expect to see people try them first, then move on to traditional cigarettes. But according to a recent review in the journal Addiction, “Regular use of [e-cigarettes] by non-smokers is rare, and no migration from [e-cigarettes] to smoking has been documented.“
“This pattern suggests that e-cigarettes may be helping some adolescent cigarette smokers cut back or quit. Even when teenagers try e-cigarettes first, some of them might otherwise have smoked the conventional kind. The upshot in both cases would be the same: less smoking and less tobacco-related disease, something anti-smoking activists like Glantz ought to welcome.”
And, as of January 9th, ANOTHER news study (not cuducted in Hawaii) states THIS: (PR Newswire) "Nonsmoking teens show very low interest in using e-cigarettes, even when presented with a variety of flavors described as, for example, raspberry, bubble gum, gummy bear, and vanilla bean, according to a study published online in the journal Nicotine & Tobacco Research. Proponents of e-cigarettes have argued that, because e-cigarettes are much less hazardous than traditional combustible tobacco cigarettes, use of e-cigarettes by smokers could greatly reduce the health harms due to smoking. However, some have worried that e-cigarettes might attract teens who do not smoke, especially if e-cigarettes were offered in appealing flavors.
"Concerns about initiation of e-cigarette use by nonsmoking teens have focused on the expected and assumed appeal of flavors. It is important to replace assumptions with data. Our study shows that flavor descriptors, even those expected to appeal to youth, do not do so," said Saul Shiffman, PhD, of PinneyAssociates, and professor of psychology at the University of Pittsburgh. "This is reassuring because nonsmoking teens would gain no health benefit from using e-cigarettes, since they don't smoke. In contrast adult smokers could dramatically reduce health risks by switching from tobacco cigarette smoking to e-cigarette use.'"
In the end, everything is still being tested and studied, though many large sources demand that regulation speed up and that e-cigarettes/ vaporizers be deemed legal. Because the FDA wants long-term studies, smokers and vapers will be left in the mist pondering options. Yet, ponder is an understatement; with so much confusing information being presented in so many different ways, the public is left to their ‘own devices’ when choosing an option.
source: http://www.clearette.com/blog/ecig-youth-studies-confuse-public/
Monday, January 12, 2015 8:32:44 AM America/Los_Angeles
And the whirlwind of controversy continues. For those who keep up with ongoing avalanche of propaganda, vapers continue to ski past the melting fluff. What is particularly interesting is that though the same articles are circulating, people are starting to voice up. As many know, hangtag campaign #curbit was a miserable fail with hundreds of posts mocking (some quite witty) the outright ridiculousness portrayed by the campaign which has recently littered the media. Admittedly, the strangest part is the user generated comment-aspect of the controversy. It seems as though blocking the comment areas on large sources has been picking up. Again, the internet makes masking rebuttals as simple as a click (to disable an open comment box). Additionally, new reports cite that various groups are sifting through social media platforms like Twitter, Facebook and “various forums” (most vapers know what that refers to).
The press and politicians are lobbying to ban electronic cigarettes in any fashion possible, yet people are finally starting to wake up and smell the non-existent smell of vapor (or perhaps they are tired of dingy, polluted smoke stench). One thing that keeps propelling politicians is the notion that electronic cigarettes appeal to youth. Though this has already been countlessly negated, once again, let’s negate it.
Alcohol comes in flavors like bubblegum, birthday cake and whipped cream. Budweiser produces rasparitas. Malt liquor can be purchased in flavors like fruit punch. Cigarettes contain flavors like caramel and vanilla. Wine is flavored. There are cloves, flavored cigars and flavored tobacco for hookahs. All of this is legal and there is no scrutiny. Even aspirin and Ibuprofen (which can kill) can be purchased with candy-coating, oh and there are candy-inspired candles, perfumes…
Now that e-cigarettes are advertising to kids by incorporating flavors is the hot and popular debate, we see hundreds of new articles everyday spinning off of each other, many based all on these same studies, which seem to always be inaccurately presented to the public. Another new study has smeared the ecig image is a new study just released by Pediatrics.
According to Pediatric, this new study was conducted to analyze youth ecig statistics, though the study is far from random and unbiased. To begin, this study takes place in Hawaii, and Hawaii happens to be the king of e-cigarette and vaporizer sales, partially because of the high tobacco taxes. So what we have is a reputable source conducting a study to base US youth e-cigarette statistics in a state that per a capita has the greatest amount of e-cig sales. Did Pediatric pull Hawaii from a hat?
Next the study (which identifies itself as being random), is hardly random. First the state was chosen. Then the schools were chosen. Students from the study must have had parental consent (75% success rate), making the scientific population NOT random. This is elegantly intertwined in Pediatrics’ January Abstract. And now, the media is again having a frenzy.
Pediatric:
(Hawaii youth)
RESULTS: Prevalence for the categories was 17% (e-cigarettes only), 12% (dual use), 3% (cigarettes only), and 68% (nonusers). Dual users and cigarette-only users were highest on risk status (elevated on risk factors and lower on protective factors) compared with other groups. E-cigarette only users were higher on risk status than nonusers but lower than dual users. E-cigarette only users and dual users more often perceived e-cigarettes as healthier than cigarettes compared with nonusers.
CONCLUSIONS: This study reports a US adolescent sample with one of the largest prevalence rates of e-cigarette only use in the existing literature. Dual use also had a substantial prevalence. The fact that e-cigarette only users were intermediate in risk status between nonusers and dual users raises the possibility that e-cigarettes are recruiting medium-risk adolescents, who otherwise would be less susceptible to tobacco product use.
So, we have Pediatrics hopping plane to Hawaii, the vape capital, where tobacco is astronomically expensive, and the reports are that (and this is for a national youth survey, as in, the entire country); “17% (e-cigarettes only), 12% (dual use), 3% (cigarettes only), and 68% (nonusers).”
This would mean that 15%of those polled consumed cigarettes (including dual users) while 17% used only e-cigarettes. Studies suggest that many adolescents who use e-cigarettes, use them to wean their nicotine or as a substitute to cigarettes.
Cigarettes:
Students were asked to evaluate their smoking and e-cigarette usage. It was presented (according to the study) as: “0–6 scale with anchor points ‘I have never smoked a cigarette’ and ‘I smoke cigarettes every day’).
E-Cigarettes:
(Check one) (0–6 scale with anchor points ‘Never did this’ and ‘Usually smoke e-cigarettes every day’). A second item asked, “Was there a time in the past month when you smoked an e-cigarette? (check one)” (0–3 scale with anchor points ‘No’ and ‘Three or more times’).”
Questions were asked about electronic cigarettes that were not asked about cigarettes (according to the abstract). This refers to the third, 'Was there a time in the past month when you smoked an e-cigarette?' Now, when considering adolescences who have tried tobacco cigarettes a hand-full of times, who are then asked by adults to simply select between two extremes: every day and have tried them; the obvious answer is not going to be the latter, as a daily smoker is stigmatized much differently than a casual smoker, which could alter comparative results, as an intermediate question such as 'was there a time in the past month when you smoked an e-cigarette?' Is, in fact, an intermediate question, and, was not asked of cigarettes.
The study then goes on to anonymously interview participants in regards to their family’s income and level of education. This was then speculated with the intent to correlate rebellion and bad-home conditions which could perpetuate the evil drug known as nicotine (not cigarettes which contain 7000+ chemicals when combusted).
Still, in Hawaii where tobacco is extremely expensive, the usage of cigarettes was 15% (including dual use). The study sensationalizes e-cig use while also squeezing in:
“The prevalence of ever-use was 15% for cigarettes, 47% for alcohol, and 18% for marijuana.” This would mean that Hawaii (including dual users) is about average. What would these statistics be like in Kentucky? Or Alaska? Apparently, Hawaii is the perfect representation of American youth.
Regardless of this study which actually is positive (it affirms that smoking rates are going down), which should be the overall focus; smoking rates, not e-cigs. E-cigarettes have become the golden egg when it comes to freaking the public out.
It is also important to note that “lack of evidence” is used frequently throughout the study. With so many variables, it is easy to confuse and perpetuate the notion that e-cigarettes are not only marketed towards, but attract youth. The study examines various models. Here are two parts of the article (just to clarify how confusing this study might appear):
“One model suggests that youth who try e-cigarettes have more conventional and health-oriented values. Their choice of e-cigarettes would be motivated more by health concerns, so they would not find cigarettes or other substances (eg, marijuana) attractive and would not score high on known risk factors for adolescent substance use.”
Then:
“This conceptualization suggests that youth who use e-cigarettes will also use tobacco and alcohol and will score high on substance use risk factors. Although both formulations are plausible, there is little empirical evidence to support or reject either theory at this time.”
And:
“Such considerations have led to concerns that e-cigarettes may lead to a renormalization of cigarette smoking, with this being a particular concern for younger populations, who show a high degree of awareness of e-cigarettes.”
And what do they mean by "awareness"? Are they referring to adolescents knowing of their existence (they would probably know what they are unless living under a rock), or, are they referring to adolescents understanding how to read, using the popular interwebs and recalling science? The composition of E-Liquid is very simple to understand, and most older kids know what substances like propylene glycol are.
Step 2: Study is published.
Step 3: Media gets ahold of it and the study turns into THIS:
(Geek Infinite) “Recommending its pulling in youngsters who wouldn’t fundamentally be keen on routine smoking. E-cigarette users and dual smokers were also more likely that nonsmokers think e-cigarettes are healthier than normal cigarettes.”
(Science Times) “With the publicity that e-cigarettes are the safer alternative for the more health hazardous tobacco products, more people resort to e-cigarettes (also referred to as e-cigs) and the younger generation have been drawn to the "cooler and hipper" e-cigarettes with their attractive packaging and fruity taste. However, a recent study found that e-cigarette smoking increased the likelihood among youngsters to smoke the nicotine-rich cigarette… Meaning, students may have a more positive view of smoking overall because of e-cigarettes.”
(Kansas City) “’For years, kids were taught in school not to smoke,’” noted Tom Foster, who owns Fidel’s Cigar Shop in Westport. “’E-cigarettes have been promoted as a safe way to smoke. They started as disposable, but now they’re being marketed for long-term use. People are staying on these things.’” (A cigar shop which sells tobacco is in favor of e-cigarettes being more dangerous: shocker)
Then: “’It is still a drug, a highly addictive drug, more so than many of the other ones that are out there. We don’t know really what the harm is going to be in the future, which is concerning.’” What about alcohol (legal), heroin, meth, prescription pills (legal), cocaine and bath salts (legal)? What does “many other drugs” even refer to?
(Sci-tech Today) “In this view, e-cigarette use is merely a step on a path to "problem behavior" that the students were likely to follow anyway -- and indeed, of the 15% of students who had smoked regular cigarettes, 80% had used e-cigarettes as well.”
(Med Page Today)…teenagers may not realize e-cigarettes contain nicotine, which is an addictive substance. "One Surgeon General's report ... documented that, in several aspects, nicotine is more addictive than heroin.’"
Then the study correlates e-cigarette use with a Childs’ mother’s depression rates. ???
“Mothers were given a shortened form of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), which included a series of questions about their feelings (such as "I felt depressed" and "I felt hopeful about the future"). Respondents answered using four response categories ranging from "rarely to none of the time (<1 day)" to "most or all of the time (5-7 days)." Scores were calculated on a scale of 0 to 36, with mean scores of 3.98 to 4.81. The cutoff score for presence of depression was 12.”
So, let's get this straight: Cigarette consumption is at an all-time low, studies have found that e-cigarettes are often used by teens looking to kick the habit, or because they are “curious”, and Petiatrics decides to test this theory in Hawaii, where e-cigarettes are “intensely advertised” (this is used to discredit e-cigarette companies, when in all actuality, places like Hawaii have astronomical tobacco costs as well as limited regulation on advertisement, thus, these advertisements must be being put forth to attract children, because adults are not consumers).
E-Cigarette users, don’t get too upset. There are still huge sources which continue to negate the propaganda, such as Forbes, which has consistently stated data, as well as commentary in support of the new smokeless devices (which can also contain zero nicotine, you know, the crazy heroin-like drug).
(Forbes)“You might think these diverging trends would give pause to critics who worry that e-cigarettes are “reglamorizing” the old-fashioned, combustible kind. Yet opponents of vaping seem undeterred by reality’s failure to match their predictions. Longtime anti-smoking activist Stanton Glantz recently told USA Today “there’s no question that e-cigarettes are a gateway to smoking.”
“If e-cigarettes were “a gateway to smoking,” you would expect to see people try them first, then move on to traditional cigarettes. But according to a recent review in the journal Addiction, “Regular use of [e-cigarettes] by non-smokers is rare, and no migration from [e-cigarettes] to smoking has been documented.“
“This pattern suggests that e-cigarettes may be helping some adolescent cigarette smokers cut back or quit. Even when teenagers try e-cigarettes first, some of them might otherwise have smoked the conventional kind. The upshot in both cases would be the same: less smoking and less tobacco-related disease, something anti-smoking activists like Glantz ought to welcome.”
And, as of January 9th, ANOTHER news study (not cuducted in Hawaii) states THIS: (PR Newswire) "Nonsmoking teens show very low interest in using e-cigarettes, even when presented with a variety of flavors described as, for example, raspberry, bubble gum, gummy bear, and vanilla bean, according to a study published online in the journal Nicotine & Tobacco Research. Proponents of e-cigarettes have argued that, because e-cigarettes are much less hazardous than traditional combustible tobacco cigarettes, use of e-cigarettes by smokers could greatly reduce the health harms due to smoking. However, some have worried that e-cigarettes might attract teens who do not smoke, especially if e-cigarettes were offered in appealing flavors.
"Concerns about initiation of e-cigarette use by nonsmoking teens have focused on the expected and assumed appeal of flavors. It is important to replace assumptions with data. Our study shows that flavor descriptors, even those expected to appeal to youth, do not do so," said Saul Shiffman, PhD, of PinneyAssociates, and professor of psychology at the University of Pittsburgh. "This is reassuring because nonsmoking teens would gain no health benefit from using e-cigarettes, since they don't smoke. In contrast adult smokers could dramatically reduce health risks by switching from tobacco cigarette smoking to e-cigarette use.'"
In the end, everything is still being tested and studied, though many large sources demand that regulation speed up and that e-cigarettes/ vaporizers be deemed legal. Because the FDA wants long-term studies, smokers and vapers will be left in the mist pondering options. Yet, ponder is an understatement; with so much confusing information being presented in so many different ways, the public is left to their ‘own devices’ when choosing an option.
source: http://www.clearette.com/blog/ecig-youth-studies-confuse-public/
