What a croc of sh1t
What next?
The irony is there is actually a depression thread on ecigssa.
“Because of the limitations of the data sets, it’s impossible to say that e-cigarettes caused any of the noted cardiovascular health effects—just that they were associated. In addition, notes Vindhyal, the study doesn’t differentiate people who were non-smokers and started using e-cigarettes from those who switched from regular cigarettes to e-cigarettes. “You can argue that these patients are previous smokers who switched,” he says, which would affect the risk for heart disease.”
Above is left out of the article. Sensasionlist headlining from Citizen, selecting certain passages only.
Also, he concedes that data was obtained from self reporting, so no control group. I.e participants had an health issue which is then easily blamed on vaping.
“He added that self-reported data is also subject to recall bias. The researchers were also unable to determine whether these outcomes may have occurred prior to using e-cigarettes. Further longitudinal data is needed.”
Above is left out of the article. Sensasionlist headlining from Citizen, selecting certain passages only.
Also, he concedes that data was obtained from self reporting, so no control group. I.e participants had an health issue which is then easily blamed on vaping.
“He added that self-reported data is also subject to recall bias. The researchers were also unable to determine whether these outcomes may have occurred prior to using e-cigarettes. Further longitudinal data is needed.”
Last edited:
What these studies do not keep in mind is that the greater majority of vapers are ex-smokers and therefore carry the risk of heart and lung problems. It takes up to 10 years to be completely clear of all the negative effects of smoking.
As for the depression part they are also looking at it wrong. People who are depressed have a tendency to smoke. Not the other way around. And vaping is thus used as an alternative. Why would anybody be depressed because they are vaping a strawberry cream or cinnamon doughnut juice? Unless its a really bad juice..
As for the depression part they are also looking at it wrong. People who are depressed have a tendency to smoke. Not the other way around. And vaping is thus used as an alternative. Why would anybody be depressed because they are vaping a strawberry cream or cinnamon doughnut juice? Unless its a really bad juice..
Ok so we can vape, no harm will come to us?
You sure about that Dr?
Thanks for that @Asterix
Would you mind sharing a link to the original study
Cant stand it when media houses pick parts of studies and leave out important pieces that tell the full story.
This is very interesting
Have taken a look at the articles and this is how I understand it:
So they used data from a few annual surveys to assess the association of non-smokers, smokers and vapers with various health issues.
Using the following link that @Asterix posted:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/03/190307103111.htm
They found that a smoker and vaper had elevated probabilities of having various health issues when compared to non-smokers. Here are the elevated probabilities they found
(I have to assume that they are comparing these risks to someone who has never smoked or vaped before. I.e. a never smoker, never vaper.)
For a smoker:
Heart attack - 165%
Coronary artery disease - 94%
Stroke - 78%
For a vaper
Heart attack - 56%
Coronary artery disease - 10%
Stroke - 30%
The way I understand the above is that a smoker would have a 165% more chance of getting a heart attack than a non smoker and a vaper would have a 56% more chance.
Looking at the above data, it seems that your chances of getting the above health conditions (versus a non smoker non vaper) are quite a bit lower with vaping than with smoking. One third for heart attacks, one ninth for coronary artery disease and a bit less than a third for stroke. Not bad.
However
By their own admission in the following article that @Asterix also posted:
https://www.popsci.com/vaping-risks-heart-disease#page-3
They admit that the probabilities for vaping may not be entirely vaping's fault because they did not get data on whether that person was a previous smoker or not.
If the vapers in the study were not smokers before (unlikely) then this data would show that vaping is nowhere near as safe as Public Health England says - i.e. 95% safer than smoking. Its more like 60-70% safer for heart attack and stroke.
But, what are the chances that the vapers in the study were not smokers before? I would say the vast majority - (my guess at least 90%) were previously smokers.
So the question is how much of those vaping probabilities quoted above come from vaping versus previous smoking?
I don't know the answer to that but since the risks are down for vaping, I would imagine that the risks of vaping alone (i.e. if you never smoked before) must be lower than what was reported for vaping in this study. I also think that the stats reported here for vaping are actually a blend of the smoking risks (which are weaning off as time goes by that you don't smoke) and whatever vaping risks are there.
It would be very helpful in these annual surveys if they could ascertain whether a vaper was previously a smoker AND also for how many years a person was vaping and not smoking.
Would love to see that data and the analysis thereof. My guess would be that the longer you have stopped smoking, the lower your risk probabilities would be as a vaper. And it would also be interesting to see what the risk factors are for those that only vape but have never smoked before.
Thanks for posting this @SmokeyJoe
Very interesting indeed
Have taken a look at the articles and this is how I understand it:
So they used data from a few annual surveys to assess the association of non-smokers, smokers and vapers with various health issues.
Using the following link that @Asterix posted:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/03/190307103111.htm
They found that a smoker and vaper had elevated probabilities of having various health issues when compared to non-smokers. Here are the elevated probabilities they found
(I have to assume that they are comparing these risks to someone who has never smoked or vaped before. I.e. a never smoker, never vaper.)
For a smoker:
Heart attack - 165%
Coronary artery disease - 94%
Stroke - 78%
For a vaper
Heart attack - 56%
Coronary artery disease - 10%
Stroke - 30%
The way I understand the above is that a smoker would have a 165% more chance of getting a heart attack than a non smoker and a vaper would have a 56% more chance.
Looking at the above data, it seems that your chances of getting the above health conditions (versus a non smoker non vaper) are quite a bit lower with vaping than with smoking. One third for heart attacks, one ninth for coronary artery disease and a bit less than a third for stroke. Not bad.
However
By their own admission in the following article that @Asterix also posted:
https://www.popsci.com/vaping-risks-heart-disease#page-3
They admit that the probabilities for vaping may not be entirely vaping's fault because they did not get data on whether that person was a previous smoker or not.
If the vapers in the study were not smokers before (unlikely) then this data would show that vaping is nowhere near as safe as Public Health England says - i.e. 95% safer than smoking. Its more like 60-70% safer for heart attack and stroke.
But, what are the chances that the vapers in the study were not smokers before? I would say the vast majority - (my guess at least 90%) were previously smokers.
So the question is how much of those vaping probabilities quoted above come from vaping versus previous smoking?
I don't know the answer to that but since the risks are down for vaping, I would imagine that the risks of vaping alone (i.e. if you never smoked before) must be lower than what was reported for vaping in this study. I also think that the stats reported here for vaping are actually a blend of the smoking risks (which are weaning off as time goes by that you don't smoke) and whatever vaping risks are there.
It would be very helpful in these annual surveys if they could ascertain whether a vaper was previously a smoker AND also for how many years a person was vaping and not smoking.
Would love to see that data and the analysis thereof. My guess would be that the longer you have stopped smoking, the lower your risk probabilities would be as a vaper. And it would also be interesting to see what the risk factors are for those that only vape but have never smoked before.
Thanks for posting this @SmokeyJoe
Very interesting indeed
Just another study without any clear cut facts. All this is going to do is raise the stigma associated with vaping. In retrospect this article will have direct influence on smoking deaths. Instead of praising the lives vaping has saved, this will instead cause current smokers not to switch to a healthier vaping alternative
Thank you for posting the thread @SmokeyJoe ummm all the tobacco companies are going to love this. I wonder who paid for the study?
In a recent study it was found that The Citizen was lethal to the brain cells of people who had previously read a newspaper that was not compiled and written by a bunch of complete idiots. The collective staff IQ of the staff of The Citizen was then measured with the result coming in at minus 16, which could have been worse as the Editor and the majority of the journalists were busy getting dronk in the nearest bar when the tests were taken.
Oooh please give us proof
Well excuse me, that states that after 15 years your risk of coronary heart disease is that of a non smoker?
You said you will be clear of all the negative effects of smoking. So what about the cancer risk? You think if you ever smoked and quit you will have the same risk of cancer than someone that never smoked?
Do you think dead cell in your lungs caused by smoking can be resurrected? Are you and @Vilaishima friends with pastor Lukau
Your seriously dont have to go look on page 256 678 on google, you can take any article on the first(most relevant) page when you google this
Life is lethal.
Not feeding the troll any more.
Yeah, nobody gets out alive.
There I AGREE totally ... must be a real shxtty juice!
So let me just understand, people are giving incorrect facts( or fake news as Donald duck would say), then if you question it and ask for proof, you a troll?
Driving is also lethal, if done wrong.
Similar threads
