This is exactly what makes New Zealand researchers who published their work in a reputable British

I was surprised by the abundance of comments received after my previous post. I wanted to illustrate the distinction guarantee hazard / risk by taking this example, but it has attracted a much wider debate. Obviously, the e-cigarette is a big social issue.
A first set of arguments for the importance of considering the e-cigarette as a drug and undergo a process of introducing similar to the drug market. That would be some logic since puts forward the importance of this product to cure tobacco addiction. It could therefore be given the same status as nicotine patches and sell pharmacy - or reimbursed by the health insurance. On the other hand, it would be ironic that tobacco counter and the e-cigarette sales restricted to the pharmacy. This is all that we can conceive of a purely recreational use of this product, it is not necessarily used to quit tobacco.
The real issue is actually the quality control of the liquid used by the e-cigarette. I stand on the basis of available data that emitted fumes are dangerous, guarantee but with a level much lower than expected risk of tobacco. The fewer impurities and there will be less dangerous inhalants. It can be assumed that this is more of the Consumer Code as the Code of Public Health.
Another set of arguments on the effectiveness of e-cigarettes to reduce tobacco addiction. This is a more complicated guarantee issue than it appears in the first approach. For example, a survey that asks for vapoteurs they stopped using the cigarette is not convincing. This for many reasons, for example the fact that they have become vapoteurs is because they wanted to quit tobacco. And if the survey is conducted from a website that solicits testimony to this effect, guarantee the biases are so strong that the results are worthless.
To evaluate the efficacy of a product or practice with respect to a given objective (here smoking cessation), it is necessary to have a term of comparison. For example, compare two groups, one wanting to quit tobacco using the will and the other using the e-cigarette. Or compare two groups wanting to quit tobacco, one using the cigarette and the other the nicotine patch (or medicine or acupuncture, etc..). Strictly speaking, these two groups should be drawn as is done when drugs are tested.
This is exactly what makes New Zealand researchers who published their work in a reputable British journal, The Lancet. They divided at random into three groups 657 people wanting to quit smoking e-cigarette with 16 mg of nicotine, e-cigarettes with nicotine 0 mg (placebo) and patch with 21 mg of nicotine. Monitoring guarantee of tobacco was produced for 6 months. Abstinence was 7.3% in the first group, 4.1% in the second and 5.8% with the patches. I'm not here to do a course in statistics, but the reader guarantee must understand that when comparing samples, there is a so-called random fluctuation is possible. This is taken into account by calculating a statistical test that shows whether the observed guarantee difference is significant guarantee or not. In this case, the difference between the three groups was not significant. A simple way to summarize this is to say that in this study, the e-cigarette has not been shown to be more effective than a patch or a placebo e-cigarette in terms of nicotine.
On a complex topic like this, the conclusion should not be based on a single study. As noted by some readers of this blog, one brand of e-cigarette has been tested and a single dose of nicotine. Further studies are needed, but those who do not use the procedure will draw a low level of evidence.
Thus, in the case of a consumer product, not only the quality of liquid should be certified, but if traders use a health claim, it should be rigorously evaluated. Feasible guarantee as The Lancet has just published.
This entry was posted in Health and tagged (s) key (s) cigarette, danger, e-cigarette, efficiency, drugs, evidence, risk. You can Bookmark the permalink. | Alert |
Hello, your site is very interéssant. I already am writing an article about: The e-cig appears as an undeniable revolution in society, many smokers switch to electronic cigarettes.
First person know the long term effects of electronic cigarette, however the short-term effects are known and represent an improvement