Biased Doctor Dismisses Ecigs As Smoking Cessation Device

Follow the moneyWhile trolling the web this morning for articles related to electronic cigarettes, I happened to stumble onto an article on healthline.com written by Jonathan Foulds, MA, MAppSci, PhD. The article, titled “E-cigarettes deliver almost no nicotineconcludes that it is doubtful that e-cigarettes are a valid method of quitting smoking traditional tobacco cigarettes. Dr. Foulds bases this conclusion on a study performed by Professor Thomas Eissenberg of Virginia Commonwealth University. That study showed that e-cigarettes with a high (16mg) nicotine content only delivered about 10% of the nicotine that traditional cigarettes do to the bloodstream.

Dr. Foulds assessment did not take into consideration some of the flaws in the Eissenberg study – flaws that Eissenberg, himself, has now admitted to. One of the most significant flaws was the requirement that all participants be people who had never used an electronic cigarette before. As everyone who uses these things knows, there is a significant learning curve involved in using an electronic cigarette, so using nothing but absolute newbies for the study invalidates it from the outset.

The other major significant flaw in the study was that participants were instructed to take the same size puff off of the electronic cigarette as they would from a normal cigarette. They were also only permitted ten of these approximtely one second puffs. Even experienced e-cigarette users would not be able to derive a decent drag off of a one second puff – it takes a half second for the liquid to even begin vaporizing!

The purpose of this forum post is not to discuss the obvious flaws in the Eissenberg study, though. Instead, it is to instruct people to be very careful about which “health experts” they choose to trust. Usually, after a little digging, you can find out the true reasons some of these people, who profess to be looking out for your health, are really advising you the way they are. For instance, here is a video from the show, “The Doctors” promoting the benefits of an electronic cigarette. They clearly have no hidden agenda:

Dr. Foulds, however, may very well have a reason to denigrate ecigs. I decided to check out the backgraound of Dr. Jonathan Foulds and, fortunately, didn’t have to search very hard for information. Thankfully, his profile information is available on healthline.com. I also was grateful that I didn’t have to read very far to find what I was looking for. Dr. Foulds tells us in the second paragraph that he directs a program at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey that aims to reduce the harm to health from tobacco by helping smokers quit (http://www.tobaccoprogram.org/). From that link, I found myself only one link away from the money click!

At the top of the website, there is a tab called “Treatment” where I hovered my mouse and found the link to the “Tobacco Dependence Program.” Here, we discover that this noble sounding program just had its funding discontinued by the New Jersey Department of Health and Senior Services (no reason given) and that they are now being funded by CINJ, RWJMS, and SPH – all of which are funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

Robert Wood Johnson is, of course, the name shared by family members that are descendents of the president of one of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world - Johnson and Johnson. Johnson and Johnson has been spreading its money far and wide, desperately trying to stamp out e-cigs, which threaten the sales of its Nicoderm products. No stranger to spending whatever is necessary to promote its drugs, Johnson and Johnson is currently fighting a 2010 US Department of Justice lawsuit, alleging illegal kickbacks to Omincare – a company that dispenses Johnson & Johnson’s drugs to senior care facilities and nursing homes. The RWJF has contributed more than $446 million to various non-profit organizations that lobby in favor of smoking bans (see this link, this link and this link). Face it, if cigarettes are banned everywhere, people will have to either quit or find an alternative. Since Johnson and Johnson profits from its highly ineffective Nicoderm smoking cessation gum, an alternative to smoking can hardly be permitted!

Knowing where “authorities” on subjects get their money from is usually a very good indicator of their true intents. It is a shame that Dr. Foulds –  a man whose career (and income) is allegedly dedicated to helping people quit smoking –  has aligned his project with RWJF. Without the money generously provided by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the good doctor may be out of a job! It certainly makes one question his credibility in regards to ecigs now, doesn’t it?

E-Cig Express Quote of the Day: “In the last few years, the very idea of telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth is dredged up only as a final resort when the alternative options of deception, threat and bribery have all been exhausted.” – Michael Musto

 

About the author: Scott McKirahan has articles published on a wide variety of subjects, ranging from politics to sports, and is the owner of the e-cigexpress.com and electriccigarettestop.com websites.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

USA Today – Are Electric Cigs Green?

Scott McKirahan

More E-Cigarettes, Less Forest FiresThe headline in an article posted today on usatoday.com reads: “Electronic cigarettes pitched as eco-friendly.”

“At last,” I thought, “The mainstream media is finally going to say something positive about e-cigarettes!”

As usual, though, the article was a huge disappointment. Instead of a story outlining the obvious benefits to the environment that electronic cigarettes provide, the author provided a rehashing of the same old misinformation concerning cancer and electronic cigarettes.

The author did give a one line mention of the fact that Green Smoke, a Miami based e-cig company, was using the eco friendly nature of electric cigs as a selling point. Instead of elaborating on the benefits to the environment that electronic cigarettes do present, the author chose instead to sum them up as something that was carcinogenic. I’d name the reporter here but there is no byline. Apparently, even the author is so embarrassed by his/her lack of effort that they did not want their name even associated with this article.

Where is the part of the article that shows the environmental benefits? Things such as:

- No flame or burning embers means no forest fires from careless smoking
- No ashes or cigarette butts strewn about our highways, sidewalks, parks and beaches.
- No secondhand smoke
- No stinky smoke; no clothes that reek; no foul breath (definitely good for my personal environment)
- That much less waste at our landfills from cigarette packs and cigarette butts
- Less trees being destroyed to make the paper that tobacco cigarettes are rolled out of and that they are packaged in

Nope; there is none of that. Instead, the author concludes that the FDA found carcinogens in e-cigarettes and that they may be harmful. Nowhere does the author mention that only two manufacturer’s e-cigarettes were tested out of the hundreds out there. There is no mention of the fact that only some of the cartridges that they tested had a trace element of a carcinogen detected. Not once is it mentioned that the carcinogen found was the same one found in the FDA-approved patch and Nicotrol inhaler and that those approved products have more of the carcinogen in them than what was found in the electric cig cartridges. Nor is it mentioned at all that many things we eat every day – like tomatoes – have carcinogens in them.

Uncovering information like that would have actually taken ten minutes of research. Lazy people use lazy “facts” knowing that the majority of lazy America accepts them at face value.

The pharmaceutical and tobacco industry are counting on the stupid and lazy to accept articles like this as fact. They cannot allow a safer alternative to cut into their profits. The FDA cannot allow it either. This bloated, corrupt government agency counts on the money it receives from the pharmaceutical and tobacco industries for its survival. They, too, count on your stupidity. Your health and your survival are secondary to that, America.

So what is greener … electronic cigarettes or the “reporters” they use to write stories like this. Tough call!

E-Cig Express Blog Quote of the Day: “No drug, not even alcohol, causes the fundamental ills of society. If we’re looking for the source of our troubles, we shouldn’t test people for drugs, we should test them for stupidity, ignorance, greed and love of power. ” – P.J. O’Rourke

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , ,