#Onassis Cardiac Surgery Center

[cascadiavape]

Proper regulation of e-cigs seen to prevent sickness, deaths

Proper regulation of e-cigs seen to prevent sickness, deaths

(Philippine Daily Inquirer)

Appropriate regulation of electronic cigarettes or “vapes” can help prevent serious sickness and the premature death of millions of cigarette smokers in the Philippines, according to a leading expert on tobacco harm reduction and e-cigarettes.

Dr. Konstantinos E. Farsalinos, research fellow at the Onassis Cardiac Surgery Center and University of Patras in Greece, urged…

[licensetovape]

Is Vaping Bad for You?

If you are thinking about switching to vaping as a way of quitting cigarettes, you are probably wondering about the safety of using a vapor device due to some negative posts on media sites.

Everyone, especially the new vapers, asks “is vaping bad for you?” and “is vaping bad for your lungs?” Well, we're going to answer these questions here to end some of the misconceptions about vaping being as bad as smoking. To answer these questions, we’ll look at the effects of smoking and vaping together.

How Does Smoking Affect the Heart, Lungs, and Blood Pressure?

It is already well known that smoking cigarettes contributes to lung cancer, heart disease, and a host of other respiratory conditions. Your lungs have tiny, hair-like receptors called cilia which help clean the lungs and keep germs out. When you smoke, you damage the cilia, rendering them lifeless and unable to do the job. The result is an increase in mucus production (phlegm), frequent infections (bronchitis, pneumonia), shortness of breath (pulmonary hypertension), and smoker’s cough.

The reason smokers develop conditions like COPD, (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease) emphysema and shortness of breath are because when you inhale smoke, even though you exhale it, small amounts of smoke and matter from the cigarette deposit into the lungs.

Smoke is heavier than air or vapor so some of it stays in the lower half of the lungs and attaches to the tissue. This, combined with reduced lung function (from long-term smoking), leads to infections and that feeling of not be able to take a full breath (shortness of breath, or breathlessness).

Blood pressure and heart rate increases and stays at an elevated rate for approximately 15 minutes after smoking a cigarette. So, it is safe to say that a person who is a heavy smoker may also have an increased risk of high blood pressure now and in the future.

Note: Blood pressure and heart rate are back to normal levels within 2 hours of the last cigarette smoked. This process goes on all day long depending on how much the individual smokes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4oFQ3w3Znk

Does Vaping Affect the Heart, Lungs and Blood Pressure?

There is no change in blood pressure before or after vaping.

Vaping does not increase heart rate.

There is no change in lung function from vaping. In fact, many vapers report that they breathe better since quitting cigarettes and starting vaping.

Studies done since 2015 on the effects of vaping only make the headlines if they have something negative to say.

One prominent cardiac surgeon, Dr. Konstantinos Farsalinos of the Onassis Cardiac Surgery Center in Greece, has published several papers on how the effects of vaping are minimal compared to smoking cigarettes.

This segment from Vape Team Media highlights a study performed by Dr. Farsalinos and Dr. Giorgio Romagna in 2013 on the effects of vapor on myocardial (heart) cells. Please watch all the way through as they show the process of their evaluation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clGmu7jeSuY

Dr. Riccardo Polosa, researcher and director of the Institute for Internal Medicine & Clinical Immunology at the University of Catania, Italy was interviewed for a segment on Regulatorwatch.com. He has performed studies on vapers who have never smoked (to eliminate errors in results from prior smoking habits) and very clearly states that his results indicated no harm to the heart or lungs from vaping. His interview can be seen here, please watch all the way to the end for his statements.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2hcp6EEC4TM

While we cannot say that vaping is 100% safe, we can say that vaping produces fewer chemicals than traditional cigarettes and test results show no effect on the heart, lungs, and blood pressure, unlike smoking cigarettes.

Aside from exploding batteries, vaping has never been shown to be the cause of health problems or death. No one has ever died from vaping, but people die every day from conditions caused by smoking.

So the answer to the question, “Is vaping bad for you?” (is it bad for your lungs?) is no. There is no scientific evidence to show that it is harmful to the lungs.

The reports in the media generate fear to deter people away from vaping because smoking and tobacco generate revenue. If people quit smoking, then states lose money and government loses financial backing.

An interesting point made by Dr. Polosa in the interview above, is that if his study had shown any evidence of harm to the heart or lungs he would be famous. Why? Because negativity and scare tactics make headlines. If he would have found any negative evidence, the media would have been all over it like it is with everything vaping-related. But since he found nothing harmful in vaping, hardly anyone noticed. License to Vape provides you some of the best information and tips on vaping to help you make the switch from smoking to vaping.

Anti-vaping proponents profess concerned over what harm e-cigarettes could pose to the public in the future. What is more harmful to the public is all the negative and misleading information posted on the Internet about e-cigarettes every day. Let’s continue the fight to get the truth out there. Support vaping and the vaping community.

The following post Is Vaping Bad for You? was originally seen on License to Vape Website

[rocketfuelvapes]

Dr. Konstantinos Farsalinos is a widely-known, outspoken advocate for e-cigarette research. He is a research fellow at the Onassis Cardiac Surgery Center in Athens. To date he has published nearly 40 studies and articles in international peer-reviewed scientific journals covering topics of smoking, tobacco harm reduction, and vaping.

[ruthsulivan]

New Report By Renowned Tobacco Control Expert Is Making Waves

Dr. Konstantinos Farsalinos is well known in the vaping community as a champion for common sense evidence which supports e-cigarettes

The battle over the future of vaping is ongoing in many places, but it’s finally reaching a boiling point after years of debate. As such, both sides are digging in with their perspective and evidence, ready for a fight. Critics continue to claim, without real evidence, that e-cigarettes are specifically targeting teens and luring them into a life of smoking. Supporters of the vaping industry, on the other hand, are continuing to build their case for the harm reduction and smoking cessation value of vaporizers. Luckily, renowned tobacco control expert, Dr. Konstantinos Farsalinos recently published a new report which once again improves the legitimacy of the vaping industry.

He’s become very well known over the last few years among the health and vaping communities, with a string of repeatable studies attempting to replicate misleading reports on the utility of e-cigarettes. As such, when a new paper claiming to prove vaping is extremely dangerous is published, the community looks to Dr. Farsalinos to indicate if they used a proper methodology or instead altered variables to skew their results. However, this new report instead took a look at how and why people choose to quit smoking, and how vaping impacts these choices.

The New Study

This latest report from Dr. Farsalinos was funded by the Onassis Cardiac Surgery Center in Athens, Greece, as well as the National School of Public Health. Joining Dr. Farsalinos was a few researchers from other Universities, including Dr. Georgios Siakas of the University of Macedonia and Dr. Konstantinos Poulas of the University of Patras. The team wanted to examine any association between vaping and the amount of time needed to quit smoking. To do this, they gathered over 2500 participants who were either current or former smokers. After asking each person a series of detailed questions, they began to notice some significant patterns.

The first thing that jumps out to you about their results was that a full 40% of participants who quit smoking since 2014 either still do, or did vape while actively trying to stop smoking. Other findings included that 62% of vapers are former smokers, while about 36% dual use vaporizers and cigarettes. But bolstering claims vaping doesn’t attract non-smokers was that only 0.2% of current vapers had never been a smoker. Dr. Farsalinos even referenced reports which concluded smokers who pick up vaping are about 11 times more likely to quit smoking than those who don’t.

The Power Of E-Cigarettes

Helping these latest findings further is all the evidence we have which suggests vaping is a very valuable harm reduction and smoking cessation tool. Since Public Health England first reported back in 2015 that vaping is at least 95% safer than vaping, more and more research is published which also finds e-cigarettes are dramatically safer. Even as recently as last month we got reports vapor contains approximately 93% fewer toxicants than cigarette smoke. But if that doesn’t paint a strong enough picture for you, consider studies which found the excess lifetime cancer risk of a vaper is around 57,000 times lower than a demographically similar smoker.

On top of all that harm reduction value, we also have other reports which support e-cigarettes as a viable smoking cessation tool. In fact, a report published by the University of Louisville concluded not only is vaping an effective quit aid, but it’s actually more likely to foster success than anything else we have, including prescription drugs. Finally, we now know the so-called teenage vaping “epidemic” has been hugely overblown. A study of over 60,000 students found that only between 0.1% and 0.5% of non-smoking teens are ever picking up vaporizers habitually. Dr. Farsalinos’ latest findings fall right in this range, with only 0.2% of non-smokers currently vaping.

Implications

More research like this is precisely what we need to continue building the case for vaping. Public perception remains one of the most significant problems facing the industry, with polls finding only around 13% of adults understand the value. As such, we must continue to support and spread research like this to those in our lives who may be unaware. If more smokers knew how much better their lives could be with such a simple switch, we could rid the world of smoking in no time. Until then, it’s on us to spread this information to all the smokers, and non-smokers, in our lives. Until more of the general populations understands what’s at stake, it will remain incredibly hard for vaping to ever reach its full potential.

What do you think about Dr. Farsalinos’ latest study? Are you surprised how few people understand the value of vaping? How should we be working to spread this information to those around us? Let us know what you think in the comments, and don’t forget to check back here or join our Facebook and Twitter communities for more news and articles.

The post New Report By Renowned Tobacco Control Expert Is Making Waves appeared first on ChurnMag.

[kymozment]

Is Vaping Bad for You?

If you are thinking about switching to vaping as a way of quitting cigarettes, you are probably wondering about the safety of using a vapor device due to some negative posts on media sites.

Everyone, especially the new vapers, asks “is vaping bad for you?” and “is vaping bad for your lungs?” Well, we're going to answer these questions here to end some of the misconceptions about vaping being as bad as smoking. To answer these questions, we’ll look at the effects of smoking and vaping together.

How Does Smoking Affect the Heart, Lungs, and Blood Pressure?

It is already well known that smoking cigarettes contributes to lung cancer, heart disease, and a host of other respiratory conditions. Your lungs have tiny, hair-like receptors called cilia which help clean the lungs and keep germs out. When you smoke, you damage the cilia, rendering them lifeless and unable to do the job. The result is an increase in mucus production (phlegm), frequent infections (bronchitis, pneumonia), shortness of breath (pulmonary hypertension), and smoker’s cough.

The reason smokers develop conditions like COPD, (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease) emphysema and shortness of breath are because when you inhale smoke, even though you exhale it, small amounts of smoke and matter from the cigarette deposit into the lungs.

Smoke is heavier than air or vapor so some of it stays in the lower half of the lungs and attaches to the tissue. This, combined with reduced lung function (from long-term smoking), leads to infections and that feeling of not be able to take a full breath (shortness of breath, or breathlessness).

Blood pressure and heart rate increases and stays at an elevated rate for approximately 15 minutes after smoking a cigarette. So, it is safe to say that a person who is a heavy smoker may also have an increased risk of high blood pressure now and in the future.

Note: Blood pressure and heart rate are back to normal levels within 2 hours of the last cigarette smoked. This process goes on all day long depending on how much the individual smokes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4oFQ3w3Znk

Does Vaping Affect the Heart, Lungs and Blood Pressure?

There is no change in blood pressure before or after vaping.

Vaping does not increase heart rate.

There is no change in lung function from vaping. In fact, many vapers report that they breathe better since quitting cigarettes and starting vaping.

Studies done since 2015 on the effects of vaping only make the headlines if they have something negative to say.

One prominent cardiac surgeon, Dr. Konstantinos Farsalinos of the Onassis Cardiac Surgery Center in Greece, has published several papers on how the effects of vaping are minimal compared to smoking cigarettes.

This segment from Vape Team Media highlights a study performed by Dr. Farsalinos and Dr. Giorgio Romagna in 2013 on the effects of vapor on myocardial (heart) cells. Please watch all the way through as they show the process of their evaluation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clGmu7jeSuY

Dr. Riccardo Polosa, researcher and director of the Institute for Internal Medicine & Clinical Immunology at the University of Catania, Italy was interviewed for a segment on Regulatorwatch.com. He has performed studies on vapers who have never smoked (to eliminate errors in results from prior smoking habits) and very clearly states that his results indicated no harm to the heart or lungs from vaping. His interview can be seen here, please watch all the way to the end for his statements.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2hcp6EEC4TM

While we cannot say that vaping is 100% safe, we can say that vaping produces fewer chemicals than traditional cigarettes and test results show no effect on the heart, lungs, and blood pressure, unlike smoking cigarettes.

Aside from exploding batteries, vaping has never been shown to be the cause of health problems or death. No one has ever died from vaping, but people die every day from conditions caused by smoking.

So the answer to the question, “Is vaping bad for you?” (is it bad for your lungs?) is no. There is no scientific evidence to show that it is harmful to the lungs.

The reports in the media generate fear to deter people away from vaping because smoking and tobacco generate revenue. If people quit smoking, then states lose money and government loses financial backing.

An interesting point made by Dr. Polosa in the interview above, is that if his study had shown any evidence of harm to the heart or lungs he would be famous. Why? Because negativity and scare tactics make headlines. If he would have found any negative evidence, the media would have been all over it like it is with everything vaping-related. But since he found nothing harmful in vaping, hardly anyone noticed. License to Vape provides you some of the best information and tips on vaping to help you make the switch from smoking to vaping.

Anti-vaping proponents profess concerned over what harm e-cigarettes could pose to the public in the future. What is more harmful to the public is all the negative and misleading information posted on the Internet about e-cigarettes every day. Let’s continue the fight to get the truth out there. Support vaping and the vaping community.

The following post Is Vaping Bad for You? was originally seen on License to Vape Website

via License To Vape : Best Vaping & Electronic Cigarette Buying Guide - Feed https://www.licensetovape.com/guide/beginner/is-vaping-bad-for-you/

via License To Vape - Blog http://license2vape.weebly.com/blog/is-vaping-bad-for-you syndicated from http://www.licensetovape.com/

[cashcounts]

What is Vapor? A Look Into The Mist

Ask any group of vapers about their equipment, and they’ll likely give you an exhaustive breakdown of mods, tanks, coils, and rare, expensive cotton that wicks faster than lightning. Ask them about their liquids, and they’ll explain the nuances of PG, VG, extracts and nicotine purity.

Now, ask them about what it is they’re blowing out of their faces, and you’ll probably get a lot of blank stares.

That’s not because they don’t care. But there seems to be a major knowledge gap about what goes into the body during a vape, and what comes out when we exhale. It’s misunderstood, and kind of ignored.

Let’s tackle the subject.

The obligatory ingredients section

No discussion of vapor can happen without diving into the ingredients of the product you’re vaping. E-liquid is, after all, the substance that vaporizes to make those luscious clouds, so it’s best we give a refresher for those who may have forgotten.

We’ve discussed the primary ingredients in e-liquid — propylene glycol (PG) and vegetable glycerin (VG) — at length on these pages. So, if you’re tired of this topic, feel free to scroll down – we won’t be hurt.

Propylene glycol

Even if you’ve never vaped a single puff, chances are you’ve been exposed to and ingested propylene glycol. That’s because it’s an organic compound used in food products, personal care products, fog machines, and even FDA-approved albuterol nebulizers … in case you were wondering about its safety.

It’s odorless and flavorless, so it doesn’t add or detract from e-liquid flavorings itself. But it does serve as an excipient — a delivery system, if you will — for both e-liquid flavorings and nicotine.

PG is also a known humectant – a substance that absorbs moisture around it – which accounts for its ability to create vapor from inhaling it. But it also can dry your mouth and throat if used excessively. If you feel these symptoms, we recommend a glass of water and taking a break from chain vaping.

Vegetable glycerin

Also known as glycerol, or just glycerin, vegetable glycerin is a plant-derived, sweet base-ingredient of e-liquids. It’s also considered a humectant, and a sugar alcohol (explaining the sweetness). Because VG is notably thicker than PG, it produces much more vapor than PG-based e-liquids alone. The tradeoff with VG-heavy liquids is a considerable loss of throat hit when compared to its thinner, less viscous brother.

While VG certainly vaporizes well, it’s also known for clogging small or poorly wicked coils, leading to nasty burnt hits. Check your decks often if you vape heavy VG e-liquids.

Nicotine and flavorings

Nicotine is usually a worthy discussion topic in vaping, but it really has no effect on vapor production. Likewise, flavorings – chemical-based or 100% organic – also have little, if any effect on the vapor itself.

Those beautiful clouds of aerosol. Wait, vapor…right?

Without getting all “Bill Nye” and talking like a scientist, the e-liquid ingredients above are deposited into a chamber, such as a tank, cartomizer, or dripping atomizer, where they coat a wick and are heated. At a temperature of anywhere between 212-600°F, depending on the device, and the preferences of the user, the e-liquid begins to “vaporize,” producing the simulated “smoke” vital to the vaping experience.

While this multi-billion-dollar industry is known around the world as vaping – and we call the exhaled product vapor – the truth is, it’s not necessarily vapor. It’s actually aerosol. Liquid aerosol, to be precise.

In the scientific sense, vapor is created when liquid transforms into a gas, and dissipates invisibly because it’s so widespread, such as when water evaporates into the atmosphere. You see, the air we breathe – even on the driest, hottest days, contains a certain amount of water gas in it, no matter how undetectable it may be.

The term aerosol, on the other hand, refers to a suspension of liquids and solids in the air, bonding together before breaking apart and dissipating. So, that fog you see lingering on a humid morning is actually a large collection of microscopic liquid water droplets turned into an aerosol, and not actual gas.

Relax, we’re not changing our name to Aerosolizing360…I hope.

If it’s a particularly humid day, the fog may last longer, because the collections of droplets are bonding to one another, thickening the “cloud” it creates.

Just like the warmth of the sun changes the state of water droplets, aerosolizing them, the heat from your coil rapidly does the same to e-liquids, creating the vapor (no more air quotes) we know and love. Different ratios of PG and VG (or distilled water, if you thin out your juices for certain atomizers) react differently to the heat, producing varying quantities of exhaled vapor.

Because PG is less viscous, it aerosolizes at lower temperatures, but also produces smaller vapor clouds. As such, those who enjoy mouth-to-lung vaping, more akin to cigarette smoking, will likely get very satisfying results from thinner liquids at relatively low wattages, with modest, wispier vapor.

On the other hand, a volume vaper using 100% VG e-liquid at 150 watts will speed up the aerosolizing tenfold, creating a rapid reaction that results in thick, room-filling clouds. Though it doesn’t sound nearly as cool, those guys are exhaling condensed liquid particles bonded to one another. Relax, we’re not changing our name to Aerosolizing360…I hope.

What happens to those ingredients when heated?

Like most vapers, you’re probably a little concerned about the chemical reactions that occur when aerosolizing e-liquid. After all, most vape shops aren’t run by scientists, nor are most e-liquid manufacturers. Can any of them properly explain the exact chemical makeup of Unicorn Milk after applying 50 watts of power for a few seconds? Not likely.

In turn, a simple Google search on the subject results in some of the most terrifying headlines and links you’ve seen since the Kardashians launched another reality show. Toxicants! Formaldehyde! Thankfully, most of these scare reports have been debunked.

The truth is, heating e-liquid does create chemical changes in the properties of juice. And yes – some trace amounts of these substances are found in the resulting vapor. But, thankfully, we have medical professionals like Dr. Konstantinos Farsalinos to help us weed through the nonsense and give vapers honest facts about this practice, as well as the reality of these chemicals existing in many things we’re exposed to each day.

Though “vapor” may not actually be vapor, you don’t need to know that to enjoy vaping

Dr. Farsalinos is a cardiologist, a research fellow at the Onassis Cardiac Surgery Center in Athens, Greece, and at the Department of Pharmacy, University of Patras, Greece. Examples of his work include the first study on the cytotoxic effects of e-cigarette vapor on cultured cells and the immediate effects of e-cigarette use on cardiac function and coronary circulation.

Though Dr. Farsalinos’ accomplishments are far too long to list here, one notable moment occurred when he successfully discounted the infamous “formaldehyde letter” published in the New England Journal of Medicine. That letter described an experiment in which scientists from Portland State University used a smoking machine to overheat cheap plastic clearomizers, which produced formaldehyde. The story exploded in the press.

But Dr. Farsalinos showed how the PSU researchers had to create “dry puff conditions” — the dreaded dry hit — in order to produce the carcinogenic substance. Vapers would never intentionally produce dry hits; we all know that it’s something to be avoided like grim death — which is exactly what it tastes like.

Say goodbye to aerosol and hello to vapor

Vapor is fun. It’s tasty. It’s satisfying. And it’s a primary reason we carry these mods, pens and e-cigs around with us each day.

Though “vapor” may not actually be vapor, you don’t need to know that to enjoy vaping. But whether you’re a scientist or not, it’s always good to know what you take into your body, and what comes out. What is that? Vapor. We promise to never call it aerosol again.

[prodamp-blog]

Are E-Cigarettes Safe For Your Heart?

While e cigarettes have become more and more popular these days, there are still questions about the safety of these nicotine devices.  Since they are so new, and no long-term testing has been conducted on their repeated use, the jury is still out on whether e cigarettes can be defined as safe.  But considering there are only four ingredients in e cigarettes , and there is no tar and tobacco like you find in regular cigarettes and no carcinogens, one can definitely call e cigarettes safer than their traditional counterparts.

Since you aren’t inhaling that thick, black smoke like in traditional cigarettes, and instead only inhaling a water vapor, you could say that electronic cigarettes are less damaging to the lungs than regular smokes.  But what about the effect of e cigarettes on the heart?

I recently stumbled across an article that set out to answer that question. Konstantinos Farsalinos, MD, a researched at the Onassis Cardiac Surgery Center in Athens, Greece, has this to say about e cigarettes :

“Considering the hazards associated with cigarette smoking, currently available data suggest that electronic cigarettes are far less harmful, and substituting tobacco with electronic cigarettes may be beneficial to health.”

It is acknowledged that the sample size was small and the exposure time was too brief for this to be deemed a definitive study on the effects of e cigarettes, but the positive news is better than nothing.

In this study, they monitored the heart function of twenty daily smokers before and after they smoked one tobacco cigarette, and then compared those results to that of twenty-two e cigarette users before and after they used an e cigs for seven minutes.  All participants were in good health and ranged in age from 25 to 45 years old.

What they found was that heart functioning worsened in the individuals that smoked a traditional cigarette, increasing their blood pressure and their heart rate.  Only a slight increase in blood pressure was found in the e cigarette users.

For More Details on this :http://prodamp.dk

ProDamp

Railroad 28C 9460 Brovst Denmark

22 44 45 62

prodamp@prodamp.dk

http://prodamp.dk

[artistsinspireartists]

Teodosio Sectio's recycled hearts

Teodosio Sectio’s recycled hearts

My name is Teodosio Sectio Aurea and I am a professional shadow artist. I would like to inform you about my new personal exhibition that will take place within the next month at the Onassis Cardiac Surgery Center. The human heart is the main theme of this unique event, during which sculptures of geometric and mechanical hearts will be presented. Since all exhibits are constructed exclusively out…

[justecigandvape]

New Post has been published on http://www.justecigandvape.com/study-reveals-that-electronic-cigarette-doesnt-impair-cardiac-function/

Study Reveals that Electronic Cigarette Doesn’t Impair Cardiac Function

  Electronic cigarettes were invented in China in 2003, and since then they are sold all over the world and have been used by millions of people around the world.

This kind of cigarettes has the advantage of not having thousands of other chemicals as the traditional cigarettes. So, smokers all over the world are replacing the normal cigarettes for electronic cigarettes.

Smoking normal cigarettes is the most preventable risk factor for heart and lung diseases, and is expected to cause 1 billion deaths during the 21st century. Wouldn’t be great if this kind of numbers could diminish? According to a 2012 Greek study, in contrast to these normal cigarettes, the electronic cigarettes have no adverse effects on cardiac function. So, it is possible to reduce the number of this deaths. Konstantinos Farsalinos, a doctor that is one of the researchers at the Onassis Cardiac Surgery Center in Athens, reveals that although electronic cigarettes aren’t a totally healthy habit and its long-term effects need to be studied, they are a safer alternative to conventional cigarettes. He also said, at the annual congress of the European Society of Cardiology in Munich, that “Given the extreme risks associated with smoking cigarettes, the data currently available suggests that electronic cigarettes are much less harmful, and replacing tobacco with electronic cigarettes can be beneficial to health.”.

40% of deaths in smokers are due to coronary artery disease. Since heart disease is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in smokers, this Greek research team decided to perform the first clinical study of the acute effects of electronic cigarettes on cardiac function. They also have decided to compare their results with the acute effects of normal cigarettes on cardiac function since electronic cigarettes are considered to be an alternative healthier habit. Therefore, in this Greek study, was observed the cardiac function of 20 young smokers, before and after smoking normal tobacco. The cardiac function of 22 electronic cigarettes was observed too, to compare the data between the 2 differences.  This cardiac function was examined using cardiac ultrasound (echocardiography) and hemodynamic measurements (blood pressure and heart rate). And the results were that those who used exclusively the electronic cigarettes only had a slight increase in blood pressure while the tobacco smokers had a significant cardiac dysfunction.

According to Reuters, this was the first clinical study designed worldwide, focused on the cardiac effects of electronic cigarettes. Another Greek study, presented earlier, also concluded that electronic cigarettes have little impact on lung function.

This study just proves what the general population already thinks about the electronic cigarettes: electronic cigarettes are a much healthier option than normal tobacco. But is great to have scientific proves that confirm this fact, instead of being based in common sense.

So, if your family has a medical history of cardiac diseases and you smoke normal tobacco, you should really considerer changing to electronic cigarettes. But even if your family doesn’t have this kind of medical history electronic cigarettes are a better option that should be considered.

[ruthsulivan]

Dr. Farsalinos Once Again Rebukes Poor Research Design Of An Anti-Vaping Study

The renowned tobacco control expert recently called a study connecting vaping with COPD pure “science fiction”

One of the biggest fights for vaping, on its long journey for public acceptance, has been fighting against misinformation. Whether it’s from lobbyists or the media, the general public has been fed masses of misinformation about these harm reduction products. Rumors and conspiracy theories have abounded from e-liquids being laced with formaldehyde and antifreeze, to false statistics about vaping increasing risk of COPD and a condition called wet lung. The claims are outrageous and have no scientific evidence behind them.

The damage each of these rumors does to the reputation of vaping is very detrimental, and in turn is damaging to vaping as a smoking cessation and harm reduction tool. Dr. Konstantinos Farsalinos, of the Onassis Cardiac Surgery Center in Greece, is well versed in this topic, having done almost a decade of research on the true effects of vaping and e-cigarettes. He is once again standing up against false claims, hoping to slow the spread of misinformation that could do further damage to vaping’s reputation.

The ATS Study

The study that Farsalinos is speaking out against was published on the American Thoracic Society’s website. The report, entitled  E-Cigarette Use Is Associated with Emphysema, Chronic Bronchitis and COPD, aimed to connect COPD with vaping. The researchers worked with the analyzed medical history of 17 participants, including how they came to be diagnosed with COPD and when they became e-cigarette users. As the title suggests, the researchers heavily implied the use of e-cigarettes was the cause or at the very least a significant contributor to the diagnosis of the patients.

That’s where Dr. Farsalinos’ came in. He’s gained a respected reputation in the vaping community over the last ten years by conducting replication studies on potentially misleading research. His results, along with many other notable and peer-reviewed scientists, is that vaping is substantially safer than smoking. In fact, a now famous study by the UK’s Public Health England concluded that vaping is at least 95% safer than smoking.

Farsalinos’ Objections

One of the most significant examples of misleading research from this study brought forward by Farsalinos was that of a 64-year-old retired naval mechanic. According to the researchers, he smoked between three and four packs of cigarettes every day from the time he was 16 years old. To be clear, that is between 60 and 80 cigarettes a day, every day, for almost 50 years.

In 2001 this gentleman was diagnosed with COPD but he did not quit smoking. In 2011 he was diagnosed with laryngeal cancer. He continued to smoke during the cancer treatments, though he did cut back to 3 cigarettes a day. However, once the treatments were over, he returned to his three packs a day habit. In 2013, 12 years after the COPD diagnosis and two years after cancer, he attempted to switch to a 2nd generation e-cigarette but found no success with it. The patient’s health continued to decline, and he was put on oxygen therapy. It was at this time that the gentleman found success quitting smoking by switching to a 3rd generation e-cigarette. From that point on the patient’s health improved a great deal.

“The above,” said Dr. Farsalinos, “is a real case of a smoker who developed serious medical conditions BEFORE he initiated e-cigarette use” Somehow the authors of this study still implied throughout the article there is a link between the illnesses and the use of e-cigarettes. “People who smoke and develop smoking-related disease at some point become desperate and try e-cigarettes as an aid to quit smoking.” says Farsalinos, but this does not constitute “proof of a ‘link’ between e-cigarettes and disease.”

Farsalinos points to one sentence, buried in the study, which appears to roll back the original claims: “Due to the fact that the data is cross-sectional, it is unknown whether E-cigs could contribute to COPD development, or if people who have COPD are more likely to use E-cigs (possibly as a harm reduction method).” This sentence appears to contradict much of the ATS study’s findings. The statistics clearly show that the switch to vaping and e-cigarettes helps with several severe symptoms related to COPD. But rather than share this information, which is supported by a plethora of other studies, these particular authors chose to bury it.

Implications

Improved public perception of vaping and e-cigarettes is crucial, especially when so many countries are currently working out how to treat these products legally. Dr. Farsalinos is an excellent ally in that fight, bringing to light the biased nature of many anti-vaping studies. Shining the light on biased and unsupported information will ultimately help vaping become more accepted as a harm reduction and cessation tool. After all, research shows that not only is vaping at least 95% safer than smoking, but it’s actually the best smoking cessation tool we currently have at our disposal, even beating out prescription drugs. So if we as a society truly value the end of the smoking epidemic, we need to be supporting vaping, not using poor research design to make it look dangerous.

Is Dr. Farsalinos doing good work by calling into question poorly constructed research? Why do you think some are trying to hurt the image of vaping? How can we support vaping as a harm reduction and smoking cessation tool? Let us know what you think in the comments, and don’t forget to check back here or join our Facebook and Twitter communities for more news and articles.

The post Dr. Farsalinos Once Again Rebukes Poor Research Design Of An Anti-Vaping Study appeared first on ChurnMag.

[cashcounts]

Are Vapers At Risk From Hazardous Metals?

A group of researchers from Johns Hopkins and other universities are getting a lot of attention with a study that claims to show dangerous levels of various metals in e-cigarette vapor.

The press release was in newsrooms before the study had even been published, and the researchers were on the phone with reporters before the ink on the press release was dry. And the story is still spreading. Unfortunately, most reporters simply repeat the authors’ version of what the results mean, and don’t bother seeking out experts who might challenge the paper’s conclusions. And they definitely need challenging.

“Toxic metals linked with brain damage are ‘leaking from e-cigarettes into vapour’, experts have found,” said The Mirror. “Oh good, e-cigarette vapor contains toxic metals, too,” shouted the sarcastic Mashable banner. And those weren’t even the worst headlines.

Do the headlines match the study’s findings? And, for that matter, do the researchers’ own conclusions even describe the findings of the research?

What did they find? And what did they say they found?

The authors were aware of previous studies that measured metals in closed system, cigalike-style products, and wanted to instead test for metals in vape tanks, which are the most common products used by regular vapers. So they asked the vapers they had recruited to participate in the study to bring their own vape gear and refill e-liquid to the interview.

They then tested the e-liquid in the refill bottles and the tanks that had been exposed to the metal atomizer coils for 15 different metals. They also tested the vapor itself.

“Of the metals significantly present in the aerosols, lead, chromium, nickel and manganese were the ones of most concern, as all are toxic when inhaled,” says the Johns Hopkins press release. “The median lead concentration in the aerosols, for example, was about 15 μg/kg, or more than 25 times greater than the median level in the refill dispensers. Almost 50 percent of aerosol samples had lead concentrations higher than health-based limits defined by the Environmental Protection Agency. Similarly, median aerosol concentrations of nickel, chromium and manganese approached or exceeded safe limits.”

Pretty frightening, right? There’s just one problem: the researchers judged the results by EPA limits, which measure safe concentrations in the air we breathe all day long. But vapers don’t breathe vapor constantly all day long. Environmental standards are the wrong way to measure something that is only inhaled occasionally.

Unfortunately, vaping researchers willing to twist their results to shape regulations are all too common.

Dr. Konstantinos Farsalinos, a medical doctor and research fellow at the Onassis Cardiac Surgery Center in Athens, Greece, caught the error (or deception) right away. Dr. Farsalinos has made a career of doing fair research on vapor products, and he’s done more than anyone to call out other scientists with lower standards.

In a Facebook post, Farsalinos quickly deflated the conclusions of the Johns Hopkins study.

“The ‘significant amount’ of metals the authors reported they found were measured in μg/kg,” wrote Farsalinos. “In fact they are so low that for some cases (chromium and lead) I calculated that you need to vape more than 100 ml per day in order to exceed the FDA limits for daily intake from [inhaled] medications. The authors once again confuse themselves and everyone else by using environmental safety limits related to exposure with every single breath, and apply them to vaping. However, humans take more than 17,000 (thousand) breaths per day but only 400-600 puffs per day from an e-cigarette.”

In other words, the Johns Hopkins researchers found nothing unusual — nothing that should alarm vapers or regulators — but they translated their results into terms that would create maximum panic.

And, sadly, vapers helped them do it.

Why would vapers help with this study?

How did they find vapers willing to help with their research? Simple. They “recruited 58 participants using tank-style devices through vaping conventions and flyers posted in e-cigarette shops.” Why would vape shops help any American vaping researcher, knowing that their grants are usually based on the understanding that they will produce evidence the FDA can use to regulate vapes? That’s a good question.

The researchers asked vapers to bring in their own devices to be tested, and all but two of them did. Those two were excluded from the results. All of the participating vapers gave consent to Johns Hopkins.

We previously covered another group of Johns Hopkins researchers who recruited vapers to help participate in a study. They found subjects in much the same way, but went a step further and also advertised on Reddit. That article contained several good suggestions for vapers considering participation in any vaping study, like checking the researchers’ previous statements about vaping, searching for the grant proposal to see what they expect the study to show, and asking who is funding their research.

Every time researchers like these cry wolf, they make vapers less likely to trust future research that may raise truly serious risks.

Unfortunately, vaping researchers willing to twist their results to shape regulations are all too common. The results seem clearly misinterpreted to create fear, and it’s difficult to believe that the authors didn’t do that deliberately. Naturally, the press release was available before the study was even published, and the authors eagerly participated in the gleefully scary coverage.

The authors misrepresented their results to imply that the vapers’ exposure to dangerous metals was more dangerous than it actually was. And they decided that assuring sensational press coverage by exaggerating their results was more important than offering honest information.

The truth of the study is that there are metals in e-liquid vapor — just not in high enough concentrations to be especially concerning. But vapers should be aware of it, and it’s probably something manufacturers should try to reduce as much as possible. That’s the story here.

But it’s not the story the Johns Hopkins scientists wanted to tell. They wanted a scary story, so they took their data and made the results seem worse than they really were with reporting tricks. They’re not interested in trying to solve a real problem. Every time researchers like these cry wolf, they make vapers less likely to trust future research that might actually raise serious risks.