5150sick
Under Ground Hustler
Staff member
VU Administrator
Senior Moderator
VU Donator
Diamond Contributor
Press Corps
Member For 5 Years
Mod Team Leader
https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/new-evidence-e-cigarettes-may-harm-your-heart
The "study" - https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/article-abstract/2600166
"The 42-person study, whose findings were published online Feb. 1 in the journal JAMA Cardiology, found that 23 study participants who were habitual users of e-cigarettes were more likely to have signs of two heart risk factors than 19 other participants who did not use e-cigarettes."
There seems to be MANY more than just two heart risk factors with actual smoking of cigarettes:
https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/health-topics/topics/smo/risks
This also fails the litmus test on #6 (at the very least) of the 10 STEPS TO SPOTTING JUNK HEALTH SCIENCE:
6. Is the study size large enough to ensure the effect seen isn’t random?
Beware small study size with big conclusions.
http://steampoweredhuman.com/2017/02/11/10-steps-to-spotting-junk-health-science/
"The study's authors noted that the findings only show an association, not a cause-and-effect link between e-cigarettes and the heart risks."
The old "Our study DOESN'T show what the press release is titled" part of every junk science study
"To further their research, they are now doing a comparison of the heart effects of tobacco cigarettes to e-cigarette use"
...and we have the "We need more money to figure this shit out" that is at the end of any junk science conclusion.
Same bullshit, same school of mistrust.
I don't understand how people don't wonder why there is ONE college system in California that ALWAYS comes up with the OPPOSITE results when it comes to vaping than any other scientists IN THE ENTIRE WORLD???
If anyone could explain to me WHY pro vaping scientists aren't trying to replicate EVERY junk science study from the particular college system I would love to know WHY?
#7 of the 10 tips to spotting junk health science is:
7. Has/can the study be replicated? Are the results consistent?
Because if a study can not be replicated then it is proven to be bullshit - 5150
The "study" - https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/article-abstract/2600166
"The 42-person study, whose findings were published online Feb. 1 in the journal JAMA Cardiology, found that 23 study participants who were habitual users of e-cigarettes were more likely to have signs of two heart risk factors than 19 other participants who did not use e-cigarettes."
There seems to be MANY more than just two heart risk factors with actual smoking of cigarettes:
https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/health-topics/topics/smo/risks
This also fails the litmus test on #6 (at the very least) of the 10 STEPS TO SPOTTING JUNK HEALTH SCIENCE:
6. Is the study size large enough to ensure the effect seen isn’t random?
Beware small study size with big conclusions.
http://steampoweredhuman.com/2017/02/11/10-steps-to-spotting-junk-health-science/
"The study's authors noted that the findings only show an association, not a cause-and-effect link between e-cigarettes and the heart risks."
The old "Our study DOESN'T show what the press release is titled" part of every junk science study
"To further their research, they are now doing a comparison of the heart effects of tobacco cigarettes to e-cigarette use"
...and we have the "We need more money to figure this shit out" that is at the end of any junk science conclusion.
Same bullshit, same school of mistrust.
I don't understand how people don't wonder why there is ONE college system in California that ALWAYS comes up with the OPPOSITE results when it comes to vaping than any other scientists IN THE ENTIRE WORLD???
If anyone could explain to me WHY pro vaping scientists aren't trying to replicate EVERY junk science study from the particular college system I would love to know WHY?
#7 of the 10 tips to spotting junk health science is:
7. Has/can the study be replicated? Are the results consistent?
Because if a study can not be replicated then it is proven to be bullshit - 5150
