Nicotine - Misperceptions, Misinformation, or Disinformation: Difference between revisions

 
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 686: Line 686:


===2020: [https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2767134 Association of the US Outbreak of Vaping-Associated Lung Injury With Perceived Harm of e-Cigarettes Compared With Cigarettes]===
===2020: [https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2767134 Association of the US Outbreak of Vaping-Associated Lung Injury With Perceived Harm of e-Cigarettes Compared With Cigarettes]===
*After the US outbreak of vaping-associated lung injury, views on e-cigarettes among smokers in England deteriorated. The proportion perceiving e-cigarette use as less harmful than cigarette smoking decreased, and the proportion perceiving e-cigarette use as more harmful increased by over one-third.
*Citation: Tattan-Birch H, Brown J, Shahab L, Jackson SE. Association of the US Outbreak of Vaping-Associated Lung Injury With Perceived Harm of e-Cigarettes Compared With Cigarettes. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3(6):e206981. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.6981
===2020: [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11166-020-09329-2 NEWS THAT TAKES YOUR BREATH AWAY: RISK PERCEPTIONS DURING AN OUTBREAK OF VAPING-RELATED LUNG INJURIES]===
*The  increase  in  e-cigarette  risk  perceptions  might  discourage  adult  smokers  from using e-cigarettes  as  a way  to  quit  smoking,  despite  evidence  from a  clinical trial  that  ecigarettes  are  a more  effective  cessation  method  than  FDA-approved products  such  as  the nicotine  patch.
*Our econometric results suggest that the immediate impact of the first information shock was to increase the fraction of respondents who perceived e-cigarettes as more harmful than smoking by about 16 percentage points.  More  targeted advice  about  the  risks  of  THC  e-cigarettes (vs nicotine products)  might have  more  effectively  reduced  the  use  of  those  products,  potentially  preventing  EVALI  cases.
*[https://documentcloud.adobe.com/link/review?uri=urn:aaid:scds:US:12fcbbc8-dece-407e-9669-8c22ad2b395e PDF Version]
*Citation: Dave, D., Dench, D., Kenkel, D. et al. News that takes your breath away: risk perceptions during an outbreak of vaping-related lung injuries. J Risk Uncertain 60, 281–307 (2020). doi: 10.1007/s11166-020-09329-2
*Acknowledgement: Dhaval Dave acknowledges support through grant R01DA039968 from the National Institute on Drug Abuse. The authors are grateful to Cornell University and the Health Thought Leadership Network at Bentley University for funding the data collection.


===2020: [https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/DAT-04-2020-0022/full/html Perceptions of nicotine in current and former users of tobacco and tobacco harm reduction products from seven countries]===
===2020: [https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/DAT-04-2020-0022/full/html Perceptions of nicotine in current and former users of tobacco and tobacco harm reduction products from seven countries]===
Line 872: Line 881:
==Academic Community==
==Academic Community==
*This section outgrew this page and is now located on the [https://safernicotine.wiki/mediawiki/index.php/Nicotine_-_Retracted_Studies,_Papers,_and_Articles  Nicotine - Retracted Studies, Papers, and Articles] page.
*This section outgrew this page and is now located on the [https://safernicotine.wiki/mediawiki/index.php/Nicotine_-_Retracted_Studies,_Papers,_and_Articles  Nicotine - Retracted Studies, Papers, and Articles] page.
===2022: Referring to: [https://openresearch-repository.anu.edu.au/bitstream/1885/262914/1/Electronic%20cigarettes%20health%20outcomes%20review_2022_WCAG.pdf Electronic cigarettes and health outcomes: systematic review of global evidence]===
*2022: [https://colinmendelsohn.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Mendelsohn-Wodak-Hall-Borland.-A-critical-analysis-of-Ecigs-and-health-outcomes-systematic-review-of-global-evidence.-DAR-2022.pdf A critical analysis of ‘Electronic cigarettes and health outcomes: Systematic review of global evidence’]
**Contrary to the conclusions of the Banks review, the evidence suggests that vaping nicotine is an effective smoking cessation aid; that vaping is substantially less harmful than smoking tobacco; that vaping is diverting young people away from smoking; and that vaping by smokers is likely to have a major net public health benefit if widely available to adult Australian smokers.


===2021: Referring to: [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41415-021-3563-1 Erosive potential of commonly available vapes: a cause for concern?]===
===2021: Referring to: [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41415-021-3563-1 Erosive potential of commonly available vapes: a cause for concern?]===