American Heart Association Spreads More Anti-Vaping Propaganda
The American Heart Association is once again spreading anti-vaping propaganda under the guise of promoting public health. Before examining their latest claim, a brief history lesson is in order.
Last November, the AHA's annual conference included an abstract which claimed that “E-cigarette users face 15% higher risk of stroke at a younger age than traditional smokers.” Nobody could evaluate the study since it had yet to be presented publicly.
Still, the media eagerly regurgitated AHA's press release:
The problem? The study's most striking finding was that "Stroke was far more common among traditional cigarette smokers than e-cigarette users or people who used both, 6.75% compared to 1.09% and 3.72%, respectively."
After critics pointed out that the abstract documented lower stroke risk in vapers, AHA pulled the presentation from its conference without explanation.
AHA's latest claim, also based on unpublished abstracts, was that people who vaped or smoked experienced acute increases in heart rate and blood pressure, and performed significantly worse during exercise compared to those who didn't use nicotine. The media predictably parroted the abstract. A Sky News headline proclaimed “Vaping adults displayed ‘worrisome changes’ in blood pressure and heart function, study finds.”
Independent experts were skeptical of this result. The acute change in heart rate was just a benign, short-term effect of nicotine. Moreover, comparing smokers to vapers is misleading because most vapers are former smokers. Professor Peter Hajek of the Wolfson Institute of Population Health at Queen Mary University of London told iNews UK:
“The key heart health risks of smoking are not caused by nicotine but by other chemicals in tobacco smoke that are not present in e-cigarette vapour. The slant put on the finding is irresponsible as it can put smokers off switching to a much safer alternative.”
The study authors' defense?
We agree that nicotine is not the toxic agent in our work . . . We encourage Dr. Hajek and others to read our entire paper, rather than pass judgement on an abstract or partial new release.”
Three questions: If nicotine wasn't the relevant "toxic" agent, what was, and in what dose did it cause the observed effects? If Dr. Hajek was wrong to "pass judgment" on an abstract, why did the researchers give hyperbolic quotes to the media based on the abstract?
The Bottom Line: this is more anti-vaping spin from AHA. Unpublished results should not reach the public via exaggerated headlines before independent experts have a chance to review the research.