The lead scientist on an e-cigarette study has sparked controversy when she issued a correction that clarified that the study did not show that vapour was as harmful as actual cigarette smoke. Doctor Jessica Wang-Rodriguez was the leading researcher on her study of Oral Oncology and this stated that two e-cigarette products actually damaged cells in such a way, that it could lead to cancer. The study quickly came under criticism because it did not represent any real world use in terms of the e-cigarettes that were compared. The study had a foot note that showed that the study didn’t mimic the dose of vapour that someone would use. In the wake of all this criticism, Rodriguez wrote a quick correction that was added to the study in an attempt to win back the trust of the public.
She said that even though the study was published, the laboratory experiments didn’t actually show that the vapour was anywhere near as harmful to cells as actual cigarette smoke was. In fact, one of the experiments were not addressed in the release and this experiment showed that cigarette smoke killed cells at a faster rate.
Cell damage mechanisms were observed and they both showed that cells were damaged through both vapour and actual smoking. The study also showed that regular cigarette smoke damaged cells at a much faster rate and that more research needs to be done before we can even begin to understand the effects of e-cigarettes. So as you can see, e-cigarettes are very different to standard cigarettes and the damage that they can do is different as well. The doctor who performed the study has made plenty of eye-catching comments and these remain unaltered, however they were certainly picked up by the media. She stated that she didn’t think that e-cigarettes were any better than normal cigarettes. In fact, even medical professionals have gone on to criticise her remarks and there are plenty of public figures who strongly disagree with her opinion. After all, it turns out that it isn’t actually based on real life facts and we all know that everything can be dangerous if it is taken in excessive amounts that are far above the suggested use.
Take Dr Michael Siegel for example. He is a professor at the Boston University of Public Health and he has over 25 years of experience when it comes to tobacco control. He has stated that the conclusion to this experiment has no foundation and that it actually damages the public health, because now those who cannot stop smoking won’t want to try e-cigarettes even though they are proven to help. He has also stated that he believes that the claim is false and irresponsible. The Daily Telegraph editor Sarah Knapton created a headline that stemmed from this story, stating that e-cigarettes are no safer than smoking tobacco. From this piece, Adam Jacobs who is a writer at Stats Guy has released a statement that says he believes that this false study is dangerous, ill informed and irresponsible, to say the least. Knapton’s piece at the Daily Telegraph came in for even harsher criticism when she posted a tweet that said all the latest evidence states that e-cigarettes are just as bad for you as tobacco. At least Rodriguez has stated that she was wrong in her study and she has openly admitted her mistake.