8 / 46
22
TOBACCO BUSINESS INTERNATIONAL
MARCH/APRIL 2016
SFATA SPEAKS
By cynthia cabrera
I
t’s hard not to cringe when reading a news story about
yet another “scientific study” that says vapor products are
bad for you. Many in our industry refer to this as “junk
science.”
Nearly two dozen published studies on vapor products
over the past few years, ranging from toxicity levels to
teen use, have been refuted by some of the world’s
leading tobacco control researchers.
Just recently, a meta-analysis published in
The
Lancet Respiratory Medicine
journal saying that
e-cigarette use actually lowers smokers’ odds
of quitting tobacco was heavily scrutinized
by several leading researchers, including the
anti-tobacco group Truth Initiative (formerly
Legacy For Health), a U.S. public health
nonprofit, calling the research “invalid” and
“scientifically inappropriate.”
It’s clear that findings from these studies
reported in the media have contributed to
negative perceptions of vapor products. But it
doesn’t start there.
We cannot control what is being published
in scientific journals, although we hope that
submitted research is at least properly vetted.
What we can do, however, is contribute to the way
reporters are covering these analyses. Our scientific
advisory board will soon release suggested guidelines
as a series of questions for reporters to consider before
filing their stories.
One of the first questions to address is whether or not
the article is based on scientific evidence. Other questions can
Truth
in
Science
Communication is critical in refuting misleading
research about vapor products.