Tag: stanton glantz

  • Oncology Journal Retracts ‘Vape Causes Cancer’ Study

    Oncology Journal Retracts ‘Vape Causes Cancer’ Study

    Credit: Tonefotografia

    A 2022 article that claimed e-cigarette users faced the same cancer risk as combustible cigarette smokers has been retracted by the World Journal of Oncology.

    “After publication of this article, concerns have been raised regarding the article’s methodology, source data processing including statistical analysis, and reliability of conclusions … [because] the authors failed to provide justified explanations and evidence for the inquires [sic], subsequently this article has been retracted at the request of Editor-in-Chief,” the editors state.

    Many of the concerns raised by the editors who retracted the article mirror the problems with other studies that have linked vaping to smoking-related diseases.

    The study failed to address the question of whether diagnoses were made before or after people started vaping, a minimum requirement for inferring causation, a common theme with vapor studies conducted by anti-nicotine researchers. In 2020, the same problem led to the retraction of a Journal of the American Heart Association article that reported an association between vaping and heart attacks by anti-nicotine activist Stanton Glantz, a professor at the University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine.

    The World Journal of Oncology article—which was attributed to no fewer than 13 researchers at institutions such as the University of Missouri, Temple University Hospital, the Mayo Clinic, and the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai—has other obvious problems that should have been apparent before publication, writes Jacob Sullum with Reason magazine.

    It features enough inconsistencies, writing errors, non sequiturs, and failures of reasoning to make you wonder whether peer reviewers and editors actually read it, let alone carefully evaluated its strengths and weaknesses.

    In an email to Sullum, Brad Rodu, a University of Louisville professor of medicine who has been studying tobacco harm reduction for decades, says the “grossly flawed” study of vaping and cancer raises a troubling question: “How could it get through peer review?”

  • Studies Say Vaping ‘May’ Help Smokers Quit Combustibles

    Studies Say Vaping ‘May’ Help Smokers Quit Combustibles

    Vaping studies often contain a lot of modal verbs like can, could, may and might. For example, an updated study on e-cigarettes for smoking cessation by the Cochrane Review suggest that vaping “could” help smokers quit using deadly combustible cigarettes.Smokers Use Vapor

    The Cochrane study looked at 50 studies that took place in the US, the UK, Italy, Australia, New Zealand, Greece, Belgium, Canada, Poland, South Korea, South Africa, Switzerland and Turkey. The review found that e-cigarettes “could” be the answer many smokers are looking for according to an article in The New Strait Times.

    Among the key findings were that smokers were likely to stop smoking for at least six months by switching to a vaping device with a nicotine e-liquid as compared to nicotine replacement therapy (such as gum and patches), nicotine-free vaporizers or behavioural support.

    The researchers, made up of multiple independent and internationally-renowned healthcare experts, found that vaping with a nicotine e-liquid can help 10 in 100 people to stop smoking, compared to only 6 in 100 people who have tried using nicotine-replacement therapy or vaping nicotine-free e-liquids. Only an estimated 4 in 100 who try to quit without support, or those who rely only on behavioural support, are likely to succeed.

    They also did not detect any clear evidence of serious harm from vaping a nicotine e-liquid.

    Jamie Hartmann-Boyce from the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group said there is an increase in evidence of smoking cessation through the use of e-cigarettes compared to the last review in 2016.

    “The randomised evidence on smoking cessation has increased since the last version of the review and there is now evidence that electronic cigarettes with nicotine are likely to increase the chances of quitting successfully compared to nicotine gum or patches,” said Hartmann-Boyce, the lead author of the review. “While there is currently no clear evidence of any serious side effects, there is considerable uncertainty about the harms of electronic cigarettes and longer-term data are needed. Scientific consensus holds that electronic cigarettes are considerably less harmful than traditional cigarettes, but not risk-free.”

    In contrast, a recent study from the University of California San Francisco (UCSF), led by Richard Wang, determined that that e-cigarettes do not lead smokers away from addiction. Wang also claims that e-cigarettes “could” increase a users risk of disease. “If the use of consumer device products is not associated with increased smoking cessation, there is no health benefit,” he said. “Also, as people who smoke add e-cigarettes to their smoking, their risk of disease could increase.”

    Wang worked with fellow UCSF researcher Sudhamiyi Bhadriraju and disgraced former UCSF researcher Stanton Glantz, who has recently had multiple studies retracted for what has been labeled by fellow scientists as “explicit dishonesty.”

    This latest study was based on the collection of 64 trials in which participants were examined. All of them are e-cigarette users, according to an article on Explica.com.

    “In observational studies you are asking people about the use of the devices they bought themselves. But they did it without specific guidance to quit smoking,” says Wang. “In a randomized trial, you test a product, treating it as a therapy or drug to quit.”

    Wang then goes on to say there “may” be a cessation effect. “When certain electronic devices are treated as medicines, there may actually be a smoking cessation effect,” explains Wang. “But it has to be balanced against the risks of using cigarettes.”

  • Controversial Researcher Stanton Glantz Retires

    Controversial Researcher Stanton Glantz Retires

    Photo: StockSnap from Pixabay

    University of California San Francisco (UCSF) professor and anti-tobacco activist Stanton Glantz has retired after 45 years.
     
    “I have finally retired from UCSF, ready to move to the next phase,” Glantz wrote in an email to colleagues that has since been shared by many, including Clive Bates, on Twitter. “I will also be continuing to work with my UCSF colleagues to complete work that is underway. From talking to colleagues who have already retired, I am confident that there will be more ways that I can keep contributing to fighting the tobacco industry and promoting public health.”
     
    Glantz announced that he would be stepping down as UCSF Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education director in June of this year after previously stepping down as principal investigator for the center.
     
    Glantz’s research on tobacco and vaping has been frequently criticized by vaping advocates. Recently, he was forced to retract a 2019 study that suggested a connection between vaping and heart attacks. It turned out that participants in the study had heart attacks before beginning to vape.
     
    In 2018, Glantz was accused of sexual harassment by two different women, resulting in a university settlement of $150,000 outside of court.
     
    Many of his critics are celebrating Glantz’s retirement. “Stanton Glantz’s long-overdue retirement is a win for taxpayers, consumers and public health,” said Taxpayers Protection Alliance President David Williams.
     
    Clive Bates wrote on Twitter, “It should have happened years ago—many lives would have been saved. And much else.”