Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: How to Generate Bogus Conclusions (E-Cig Study Edition) [View all]NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)99. What's that have to do with the price of tea in China?
Seriously? You are just pulling things out of nowhere now.
Look, they CANNOT just study people using e-cigarretes because those people are not SMOKERS of cigarettes. That is why they studied SMOKERS who use e-cigarettes. And 94% of that sub-group of SMOKERS who vape intended to quit (more than the non-vapors).
Now those "conclusions" are simply straight from the study. You don't need to further obfuscate this and make up excuses for why this study is not valid.
Which means they selected for people least likely to quit, and discovered they were least likely to quit.
They studied smokers. That's what they studied. At the end of the day, certain characterstics of those smokers indicate a better or worse chance of quitting at the end of 1 year. According to this study, you can pick two smokers out of a population, and if 1 of them uses an e-cigarette, they are less likely to quit smoking 1 year later. Ironically, that e-ciggar has a higher likelihood of intending to quit too.
Now, those are the numbers, despite any further pretzel logic.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
151 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I am looking to quit, but will settle for now for reducing cigarette consumption. That's a win.
Comrade Grumpy
Mar 2014
#3
It is? The poster below you disagrees, and so does everyone I know who vapes.
DisgustipatedinCA
Mar 2014
#4
Why do these people need to use them where cigs are not allowed? No need to change that part!! nt
Logical
Mar 2014
#133
It's kind of like Republicans wanting to make those on welfare suffer more, there's
TransitJohn
Mar 2014
#137
"to determine whether e-cigarette use predicted successful quitting or reduced cigarette consumption
NoOneMan
Mar 2014
#60
Look at the study. 1-Year Success rate is 13.8 (non-users) vs 10.2 (e-cig users)
NoOneMan
Mar 2014
#52
No. Vaping is not smoking. Gum is not smoking. Patches is not smoking. Smoking cigarettes is smoking
NoOneMan
Mar 2014
#109
It can be. I know many people who taper down the strength until they are using no nicotine. -nt
Liberal Veteran
Mar 2014
#12
You reduced the use of e-cigs as solely a means of substituting nicotine delivery.
KittyWampus
Mar 2014
#124
Neither are demonstrated to be effective in increasing long term cessation of smoking
NoOneMan
Mar 2014
#24
Who says tobacco smokers want to stop using nicotine entirely? That is your straw man.
KittyWampus
Mar 2014
#123
I wish the people who are against e-cigs would just be clear in their demands.
Liberal Veteran
Mar 2014
#8
"Common sense dictates that they should work at least as well as patches or gum"
NoOneMan
Mar 2014
#127
The researchers at UCSF who study tobacco know a boatload about biostatistics
ProfessorPlum
Mar 2014
#95
I am fine with them if they don't use them where real cigs are not allowed. nt
Logical
Mar 2014
#134
why do smokers need to use them other places? They satisfied their cravings fine before. n-t
Logical
Mar 2014
#136
I don't want to be around it. Don't like it. Good enough reason? Like I said.....
Logical
Mar 2014
#139
Yes it is good enough. And cities and companies are agreeing. I love your whining....
Logical
Mar 2014
#141
No, it's really not good enough. And I love your illogical pseudo logic
SirRevolutionary
Mar 2014
#143
Oddly enough, your whims are not the sole consideration in all human affairs
cthulu2016
Mar 2014
#147