The Dangers of Misinformation on Vaping -…

106 points


Posted: Nov 27, 2021 12:01 AM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their very own and don’t essentially characterize the views of

Earlier this month, information retailers everywhere in the world reported breathlessly on new analysis which claimed to seek out that e-cigarette customers had been 15 p.c extra prone to have a stroke at younger age than people who smoke. Information sources as various because the Each day Mail within the UK, the South African Sunday Occasions, and all main U.S. TV stations picked up on it guaranteeing that a big portion of the worldwide inhabitants had been uncovered to this dangerous information.

The issue is that this “research” was at finest, extremely deceptive and, at worst, plain mistaken.

First, this was not new printed analysis as an off-the-cuff reader would possibly assume, however as an alternative an unpublished convention presentation given a lift by the American Coronary heart Affiliation (AHA) which is explicitly against decreased threat options to smoking equivalent to vaping.

As Jonathan Swift as soon as wrote, “falsehood flies, and truth comes limping after it.” So whereas tens of millions globally had been being misled by the fear-peddling headlines, far fewer folks would have learn professional rebuttals which got here quickly after from the Science Media Centre.

Professor Peter Hajek of Queen Mary College commented that, “It is likely that e-cigarette users in this cohort were smokers who switched to vaping AFTER they suffered a stroke. Presenting this as if vaping caused these strokes is misleading and could put smokers off switching to vaping.” Whereas Dr Leonie Brose of Kings School London added: “At least some of the strokes would therefore have occurred before e-cigarette use. The strokes then could not have been caused or made more likely by e-cigarette use. It may also be that people switched to e-cigarettes after a stroke to reduce the stroke risk from smoking which would explain the association between a past stroke and current e-cigarette use.”

Professor Paul Aveyard additionally noticed that “This press release could equally and accurately be headed as ‘E-cigarette users six times less likely to have a stroke than traditional cigarette smokers’. As they point out, ‘Stroke was far more common among traditional cigarette smokers than e-cigarette users or people who used both, 6.75% compared to 1.09% and 3.72%, respectively.’”

The unique information alert has now been eliminated and the summary has been withdrawn  from the American Coronary heart Affiliation convention and won’t now even be offered. It’s actually a non-story. However one which is now prone to be believed by an enormous variety of folks worldwide.

It’s inconceivable to know what harm this misinformation can have prompted in deterring people who smoke from switching to safer nicotine merchandise, however there might be a big destructive impact to public well being in consequence. As Swift went on to say, “when men come to be undeceived, it is too late; the jest is over, and the tale hath had its effect.”

Whether or not this specific barrage of misinformation is an instance of deliberate media manipulation is tough to guage. If it was, the AHA has performed the correct factor in eradicating it, albeit too late.

Nevertheless, that is simply the newest in a string of destructive media tales about vaping which have plagued the controversy lately, most of which have little or no foundation in truth. Usually the analysis itself is fatally biased with the researchers deciding on a pre-conceived narrative after which inventing or manipulating information to assist it.

There are numerous organizations so against tobacco hurt discount – the substitution of safer nicotine merchandise as an alternative of smoking – that they’re determined to seek out hurt in e-cigarettes.  For a lot of, with out the hurt of flamable cigarettes their careers are threatened. If vaping changed smoking and did their job of lowering smoking with little or no value to the taxpayer, they’d obtain no grants and don’t have anything to do.

It appears doubtless that on this occasion the AHA is responsible solely of selling a weak speculation with out prudently assessing the accuracy of its conclusions, however the media can also be responsible of not double-checking info earlier than producing sensationalist headlines which might have an actual and damaging impact on public well being in lots of nations.

We should always count on higher from public well being researchers and science journalists alike.

Martin Cullip is the Worldwide Fellow at The Taxpayers Safety Alliance’s Shopper Heart and relies in South London, UK.

What's Your Reaction?

hate hate
confused confused
fail fail
fun fun
geeky geeky
love love
lol lol
omg omg
win win


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Choose A Format
Personality quiz
Series of questions that intends to reveal something about the personality
Trivia quiz
Series of questions with right and wrong answers that intends to check knowledge
Voting to make decisions or determine opinions
Formatted Text with Embeds and Visuals
The Classic Internet Listicles
The Classic Internet Countdowns
Open List
Submit your own item and vote up for the best submission
Ranked List
Upvote or downvote to decide the best list item
Upload your own images to make custom memes
Youtube, Vimeo or Vine Embeds
Soundcloud or Mixcloud Embeds
Photo or GIF
GIF format