Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Thursday September 15 2016, @11:37PM   Printer-friendly
from the put-that-in-your-pipe... dept.

Electronic cigarettes that heat propylene glycol and glycerol, with or without nicotine and flavours, have been found to be safe based on a new meta-analysis of studies:

An update to the Cochrane review on electronic cigarettes [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010216.pub3] [DX] has restated the findings of the initial research, which was completed two years ago. It found that e-cigarettes are potentially a valuable smoking cessation aid, although there was not enough evidence to conclude that they helped people quit smoking confidently.

The updated review now also includes observational data from an additional 11 studies which found no serious side-effects from using e-cigs for up to two years. Aside from throat and mouth irritation, which commonly dissipated over time, the review's co-author, Jamie Hartmann-Boyce, said "in the short to medium term, we didn't find any evidence that they were associated with any serious side-effects."

Evidence from two trials found that e-cigarettes helped smokers to quit in the long term, but "the small number of trials, low event rates and wide confidence intervals around the estimates" meant that the researchers could not conclude with confidence that e-cigs helped smokers quit more than other cessation aids.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by sjames on Friday September 16 2016, @06:01AM

    by sjames (2882) on Friday September 16 2016, @06:01AM (#402641) Journal

    Hear! Hear!

    Possibly because most ecig vendors in the U.S. are small businesses the industry as a whole has shown proper concern for safety. Advice and perhaps some spot testing and remediation should be more than sufficient.

    The part of the new regulations banning vape shop employees from helping customers replace a heating coil (intended to be an end user procedure) claiming it constitutes manufacturing is proof enough that this is nothing more or less than the FDA grabbing power and throwing their weight around for amusement purposes.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 16 2016, @06:24AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 16 2016, @06:24AM (#402646)

    Could they work around that by letting a customer trade in for a new vape, repairing it, then reselling it?

    • (Score: 2) by sjames on Friday September 16 2016, @07:02AM

      by sjames (2882) on Friday September 16 2016, @07:02AM (#402656) Journal

      No. If they repair it, they are a "manufacturer" and must meet a ton of additional requirements.

      And that's just for replacing or even cleaning the expendable heating coil that is intended to be replaced by the owner.

      The closest to a workaround is if another customer volunteers to help or point them to search on youtube for an instructional video.

      Imagine if only an FCC certified radio technician was allowed to put a battery in a cellphone for a customer and you'll have some idea of the level of overreach here.