twitter: @rolygate

Scientific Research At The SRNT Conference

Special THR Update on Scientific Research



Two new large 2103/14 US surveys (presented at SRNT conference) find:
- 15 to 21 million US adults regularly used e-cigs,
- 3.2 - 4.3 million e-cig users no longer regularly smoke cigarettes,
- about 90% of regular e-cig users were/are ever regular cigarette smokers, and
- e-cigs have served as a 'gateway' away from cigarettes for exponentially more people than have regularly used e-cigs prior to regular use of cigarettes.

2013/14 survey (NTBM n=30,136) finds 8.7% of US adults (i.e. 21.1 million) reported ever regular use of e-cigs (i.e. >9 days in any month), among whom 89.0% (i.e. 18.7 million) reported ever regular cigarette smoking, among whom 97.1% (i.e. 18.2 million) reported regular e-cig use after regular cigarette smoking, among whom 23.7% (i.e. 4.3 million) reported no longer regularly smoking cigarettes. Finds ever regular cigarette smokers were 17.2 times more likely to transition to ever regular e-cig use than ever regular e-cigs users were to transition to regular cigarette use, which accounted for
just 1.3% (i.e. .2 million) of those who reported ever regular use of cigarettes and e-cigs. (POS4-146, page 333) 2013 US Census of 242.5 million adults was used for estimates.

2013/14 survey (TTM n=11,173) finds 6.1% of US adults (i.e. 14.8 million) self-identified as current regular e-cigarette users, among whom 91.1% (i.e. 13.5 million) reported ever regular use of cigarettes, among whom 97.1% (i.e. 13.1 million) reported regular use of e-cigs after regular use of cigarettes, among whom 24.5% (i.e. 3.2 million) reported no longer regularly smoking cigarettes. Finds smokers were 13.5 times more likely to transition to current regular e-cig use than current regular e-cig users were to transition to regular cigarette use, which accounted for just 1.7% (i.e. 0.2 million) of those who reported ever regular cigarette use and current e-cig use. (POS4-146, page 333) 2013 US Census of 242.5 million adults was used for estimates.

Study of college student use of OTP finds many participants were confused by questions asked in surveys (e.g. BRFSS and PATHS) due to their lack of clarity regarding product content, particularly regarding nicotine vs no nicotine hookah and e-cigs, and marijuana vs tobacco use with cigars, RYO, hookah and e-cigs, indicating that past OTP survey findings inaccurately classified non use of tobacco/nicotine as tobacco use. Authors suggest wording changes in OTP surveys to improve accuracy. (POS4-127, page 326)

2014 CDC survey of 13,304 US adults finds 'past 30 day' use of an e-cig by 21.5% of current smokers, 5.2% of former smokers, and 1.6% of never smokers. But CDC authors ignored those e-cig usage differences (i.e. smokers are exponentially more likely than never smokers to vape), and instead concluded that less relevant and reliable subjective differences in 'main reasons for vaping' (as multiple answers could be checked off) between young adults (18-25) and those over 25 should be emphasized for 'public health prevention efforts' (i.e. preventing vaping). (PA13-1, page 47)

2014 survey of adult Oklahomans living in households with children finds past month use of an e-cig reported by 31% of daily smokers, 28% of occasional smokers, 14% of former smokers, and just 1% of nonsmokers (POS4-47, page 298)

2013 Oklahoma BRFSS data on smokers who tried quitting in past year and former smokers who quit in past year finds 36.7% used e-cigs, 3.2% used nicotine patch and .3% used telephone quitline. (POS4-143, page 332)

Study of smokers 7 months after they called the Oklahoma Tobacco Helpline finds that 33% used e-cigs (including 24% in past 30 days), 27% used self-help materials, 23% sought help from a health professional, and just 2% bought additional NRT (after being given some NRT by the helpline when they called) (POS3-37, page 237)

Study of 31 female smokers with cervical dysplasia offered blu e-cigs, nicotine gum or lozenges for smoking cessation and/or reducing cigarette consumption finds 28 chose to use blu e-cigs. After 12 weeks, 8 of the 28 e-cig users (29%) had remained cigarette free for at least past week, 4 (14%) had reduced cigarette consumption by at least 75%, and 7 (25%) had reduced cigarette consumption by at least 50%. (POS4-106, page 318)

Study of 22 daily smokers with schizophrenia or bi-polar disorder (who weren't trying to quit smoking) who were given 2nd generation NJOY e-cigs finds mean cigarette consumption declined from 192 to 67 cigarettes per week (after four weeks), with two smokers quitting smoking by switching to vaping. (PA1-6, page 65)

Study of 40 smokers intending to quit who were given Green Smoke e-cigs finds 16 were cigarette abstinent after 4 weeks, 17 were dual users of e-cigs and cigarettes, and 7 resumed exclusive cigarette smoking. (POS1-112, page 149)

Study of first time e-cig buyers finds 'lung function, assessed by spirometry, improved significantly from baseline despite the majority of users continuing to smoke cigarettes.'
(PA13-3, page 48)

Study finds vapers retain 96% of nicotine they inhale from an e-cig, confirming that 3rd hand vapor (i.e. exhaled by vapers) contains negligible nonhazardous levels of nicotine, but FDA/NCI/NIDA funded authors conclude (despite no evidence) that e-cigs may be as addictive as cigarettes. (POS3-73, page 250)

Study finds nicotine supports learning and memory

2014 study finds 58% of US smokers who never vaped would try using an e-cig if offered one by a friend, 70% believed e-cigs would be helpful for quitting smoking, and 86% believed e-cigs should NOT be banned (POS3-92, page 256)

FDA funded study utilizing 14 focus groups of 116 vapers (that segmented exclusive vapers vs dual users despite FDA insisting there's no evidence e-cigs help smokers quit) finds participants across the focus groups expressed many positive attitudes towards e-cigs, with a consensus correctly believing e-cigs were less hazardous than cigarettes. (POS3-39, page 238)

Survey of 79 pregnant and postpartum women in New Haven, CT finds that only 23% correctly perceived maternal vaping as less hazardous than cigarette smoking for fetus and breastfeeding neonates, indicating the War on Vaping is preventing pregnant and breastfeeding women from reducing cigarette consumption. (POS4-63, page 303)

Survey of college students in upstate NY finds, among those who never used an e-cig, that ever cigarette smokers were 9.4 times more likely than never smokers to be 'susceptible' to (i.e. expressed an interest in) future e-cig use, and that 79% of ever smokers had already used an e-cig. (POS3-115, page 264)

PV / e-liquid vs cigalike e-cigs

Survey of 3,708 smokers and 2,852 former smokers in US finds former smokers more likely than smokers to use tank system e-cigs (PV/e-liquid), finds smokers who tried to quit smoking in past year were more likely (than smokers who didn't try to quit) to use tank systems, and finds tank system e-cigs were used by more of those who quit smoking (than by those who still smoke). (POS4-55, page 300)

Survey of 4,421 vapers finds 64% began vaping with a 1st generation e-cig (i.e. cigalike) and subsequently switched to 2nd or 3rd generation vaporizers, and that 76% had currently used 2nd or 3rd generation vaporizers; 95% of users of 2nd or 3rd generation vaporizers rated having a variety of flavor choices as important, and 99% rated having a longer battery life as important. (POS4-119, page 323)

UK study finds daily 'tank' users (PV/e-liquid) were 2.6 times more likely to quit smoking than smokers who didn't use e-cigs, non daily tank users and daily 'cigalike' had similar rates of quitting smoking, and non daily cigalike users were less likely to quit smoking than smokers who didn't use e-cigs. (POS3-15, page 229)

Study finds 2nd generation e-cigs more effective than 1st generation e-cigs for reducing
nicotine withdrawal symptoms (POS2-25, page 183)

Study of 100 vape shop customers finds 63% had completely quit smoking, 91% enjoyed vaping more than smoking, 80% preferred non-tobacco e-cig flavors, 85% preferred buying at vape shops because of 'access to staff who can troubleshoot EC problems.'
(PA1-4, page 65)

Impact of e-cig prohibition

Study finds e-liquid containing nicotine sold by many brick and mortar retailers in Canada, and sold/shipped by all online retailers to Canadians (despite Health Canada's assertion since 2008 that it's unlawful to sell nicotine containing e-cigs in Canada).
(POS3-43, page 239)

Survey of New Zealanders finds 31% of smokers had used an e-cig (despite an e-cig ban in NZ), 37% had used nicotine patches and 34% had used nicotine gum; finds 56% of daily smokers support repealing e-cig sales ban (POS4-36, page 294).

Anti THR propaganda / policy advocacy disguised as scientific research

NIDA funded extremists advocate increasing state tax rates for very low risk OTP and e-cigs to reduce so-called 'tax avoidance' for cigarettes. (PA3-1, page 61)

FDA/NCI funded 2104 survey of 814 US residents aged 13-25 finds cigarette smokers (but not nonsmokers) had positive perceptions of and intentions to use e-cigs; but authors recommend targeting smokers with anti e-cig propaganda. (POS4-67, page 304)

Federally funded activists study and advocate 'e-cigarette prevention messages' that would protect cigarette markets and threaten public health. (POS3-35, page 236)

NIDA funded extremists study, advocate more false fear mongering messages about e-cigs to prevent cigarette smokers from switching to vaping. (POS4-148, page 333)

Federally funded activists cite study finding many teen e-cig users prefer flavored e-cigs as justification for FDA banning e-cig flavorings, claim doing so may be an effective prevention strategy (but fail to admit that doing so could prevent smokers from switching to vaping, and could encourage vapers to switch back to cigarettes) (POS-129, page 269)

Survey finds teens correctly perceive e-cigs to be far less hazardous and addictive than cigarettes, but FDA/NCI funded authors deceitfully conclude that their 'findings suggest that adolescents may initiate use with e-cigarettes' (simply because they know the truth about e-cigs and cigarettes). (POS3-20, page 232)

FDA/NCI funded focus groups with 13-25 year old OTP users studied their knowledge and beliefs about 10 different HPHCs found in various OTPs, prompting authors to recommend discouraging OTP use with campaigns capitalizing on perceived negative views of HPHCs in OTP (regardless of product risks/benefits) (POS4-125, page 325)

FDA creates web page on Harmful and Potentially Harmrul Constituents to further protect cigarettes (as required by the FSPTCA) by deceiving the public about the negligible health risks of smokeless tobacco products (and e-cigarettes if FDA imposes the 'deeming' reg/ban) while claiming its purpose is to ensure the public isn't misled.
If FDA truly desired to inform the public about risks of different tobacco products, the agency wouldn't have grossly misrepresented the risks of vaping (while denying any benefits for smokers) since 2009, wouldn't have imposed costly MRTP barriers that prevent manufacturers from informing smokers that smokeless tobacco is less hazardous than cigarettes, and would have supported Reynolds' Citizens Petition to inform smokeless tobacco consumers that smokless tobacco is less hazardous than cigarettes.

2012/13 NCI push-poll (called HINTS survey) asked US adults if they think some cigarettes are less harmful than others, then falsely claimed e-cigs are cigarettes, then asked participants if they believed e-cigs are as harmful as cigarettes, then reported 39% think e-cigs are less harmful than cigarettes (while 38% inaccurately believed e-cigs are just as or more harmful than cigarettes). Also found just 9% know that smokeless tobacco is less harmful than cigarettes, and just 34% knew that occasional smoking is less hazardous than daily smoking. (page 9)

Mike Siegel: Campaign of deception about e-cigarettes has completely undermined public's appreciation of the severe hazards of smoking

NCI and CA DPH funded activists (who apparently believe e-cigs and blunt cigars are just as hazardous as cigarettes) study adolescents' perceptions of risk for e-cigs and blunts, then conclude 'This information is of critical importance for creating warning messages and interventions to prevent or stop use of these products among adolescents' even if/when doing so protects cigarette markets. (POS4-142, page 331)

CDC/FDA focus groups find women 18-40 years perceive NRT as ineffective for smoking cessation, while e-cigs were viewed favorably for smoking cessation and as less hazardous alternatives to cigarettes, which authors conclude 'could undermine cessation'
(POS4-110, page 320)

After survey finds vapers primarily vape to quit smoking and improve their health, FDA/NIH/NIDA funded activists cite findings as justification for FDA 'developing and refining MRTP regulation,' which (if FDA imposes deeming reg/ban) would ban e-cig manufacturers from truthfully claiming e-cigs are less hazardous than cigarettes. (POS3-25, page 233)

After survey finds adults with positive perceptions of e-cig advertisements and interpersonal discussions about e-cigs were less concerned about breathing 2nd hand vapor and more likely to know 2nd vapor is less hazardous than 2nd hand smoke; NIH funded activists claim findings may justify regulating e-cig advertising and exaggerating the risks of 2nd hand vapor. (P1-7, page 66)

NIH/NIDA funded activists advocate 'imposing marketing restrictions on snus and e-cigarettes as attractive alternatives' to cigarettes and 'developing counter-marketing interventions' because young adults correctly perceive these products as less hazardous than cigarettes, and because their marketing may urge smokers to switch to e-cigs or snus (while claiming concern, despite no evidence, that e-cig and snus marketing may 'undermine smoking prevention' and 'renormalize smoking'). (POS3-42, page 239)

NCI funded study of smoking cessation quitline counselors (who are hired/paid to hawk FDA approved drugs as the only effective way to quit smoking) finds that 97% were instructed by their employer to tell smokers that e-cigs aren't approved by the FDA, 89% support vaping bans/restrictions, 87% believe e-cig advertising should be regulated like cigarette advertising, 87% believed e-cigs should be taxed like cigarettes, and 67% don't believe e-cigs can help smokers quit. (POS3-64, page 246)

CDC staff urge FDA to mandate large picture warnings for smokeless tobacco products after study finds exposure to currently mandated text warnings (with false and misleading fear mongering claims) wasn't associated with harm perception, regret for starting tobacco use, past quit attempts or intent to quit tobacco use (POS2-128, page 218).

CDC study finds 3.5% of US cigarette smokers who tried quitting in past year switched to smokeless tobacco as cessation aid, finds smokers <25 years were almost twice as likely as those 25-40, and nearly three times as likely as those >40 to switch to smokeless to quit smoking. But authors conclude that enhanced efforts are needed to inform smokers to use only FDA approved drugs for smoking cessation. (POS3-79, page 25)

Study by FDA/NCI/NIDA funded activists (who have repeatedly urged FDA to mandate nicotine reductions in cigarettes) finds >60% of smokers participating in clinical trial using very low nicotine cigarettes had higher plasma cotinine levels (than what the tested cigarettes emit), indicating they were also smoking traditional cigarettes (on the sly) and tainting past clinical trials that didn't monitor plasma cotinine. (POS3-143, page 274).

UW receives FDA/NCI grant to study (i.e. keep misleading the public about) e-cigarettes

SRNT conference

Big Pharma and FDA/NCI funded SRNT conference held in Philadelphia Feb 25-28

FDA hosted pre-conference workshop at SRNT conference with many THR opponents (and no THR advocates) to promote FDA funded research opportunities; hosted session 'Continuum of Risk: Pros and Cons in Tobacco Regulation' with six government funded regulatory proponents who have opposed THR products and policies to reduce smoking

Mike Siegel: SRNT annual meeting brought to you by Pfizer (also exposes John Hughes' massive financial conflicts of interest)

- Bill Godshall