New E-Cig Online Survey - PSU - Dec 20, 2012

Status
Not open for further replies.

tnt56

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Aug 30, 2012
6,592
11,480
67
Tripple digits half way to home
Sorry just me but they kinda pi$$ed me off with that survey. I did take it but some of the questions, well they ain't got a clue. So I at least tried to help. Some of the questions did not allow the proper answer for them. But I'll take it and live with the time. Not that bad to help others try. IMHO.
 

Janet H

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Sep 3, 2011
2,129
66,997
PA
Sorry just me but they kinda pi$$ed me off with that survey. I did take it but some of the questions, well they ain't got a clue. So I at least tried to help. Some of the questions did not allow the proper answer for them. But I'll take it and live with the time. Not that bad to help others try. IMHO.

The study was revealing about the lack of understanding of vaping. I guess it's going to depend on what the purpose of the survey is. Hopefully there isn't an agenda and the result will be honest. I'm looking at it as an opportunity to educate. I'm hoping that the results will be postd.
 

Ratman

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jul 10, 2012
1,432
3,831
Tulsa OK
Survey completed. Agree some were impossible to answer properly due to the way the questions were asked and the answer choices but that shows the need for the survey IMO. Education is important and I am sure we would have an easier legislative row to hoe if there was a universal better understanding from non vapers. Then we would only have to fight political corruption and big pharmacy for the most part.

I hope this gets done correctly to help with that education instead of providing more inaccurate portrayals that just muddy the waters.
 

jfjardine02

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Nov 15, 2011
125
47
Hershey
@Sherid
I understand that it is not easy to estimate the number of "occasions" of vaping per day, when in reality an e-cig often isn't used in these "10 minute" or "15 puff" bouts of vaping. But if your best guess that you use it to approximately replace the 15 cigarettes you smoked, then that may be the best estimate answer. On the funding, this research project is funded by an internal grant from Penn State research institutes (PS Cancer Institute, Social Science Research Institute and Clinical & Translational Science Institute). It is not funded by any "anti-smoker" organization, nor by RWJF (who are far from being an anti-smoker organization btw).
 

sherid

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
May 25, 2008
2,266
493
USA
Thanks for the answers. I am amazed that you say that RWJF is not an anti-smoker organization. It would be interesting to see a study of RWJF itself as the backbone of denormalization of smoking, drinking, fast foods and other behavioral issues in society. On the other side of these issues, there is much controversy especially with those who believe that RWJF and the drug companies (Johnson and Johnson, the parent funding source of RWJF) are simply a reawakened eugenics movement, determined to gain control of government legislature through billions of grant funding. You could start here, What’s Ailing Johnson & Johnson? | Ethisphere noting the advice about the RWJF and its connections to J and J.
 

jfjardine02

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Nov 15, 2011
125
47
Hershey
This is off the topic of this thread, but just for clarity, RWJF is a charity created entirely from an endowment given by Robert Wood Johnson....the original leader of Johnson & Johnson. When he died he left virtually all of his vast fortune to create the RWJ Foundation, which is a charity that aims to improve health and healthcare for all Americans. Once it was created, RWJF is necessarily/by charter entirely separate from J&J. As a "pro-health" organization they could reasonably be called "anti-smoking" but thats not the same as "anti-smoker" (unless you seriously believe that Philip Morris, Reynolds etc really have the best interests of people who smoke at the forefront of their business?).
 

sherid

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
May 25, 2008
2,266
493
USA
I believe that RWJF has the best interests of itself and its initiatives as do all money making organizations. If you believe that denormalization is not anti-smoker, then you have not really looked at the resulting policies that come from it. I have a very hard time understanding how a charity could gain so much power within the US government and the legislature that comes from its lobbying efforts. Phillip Morris is a for profit company, not a health organization. All of us have/had the choice of whether or not to buy its products and use them. Organizations such as RWJF forces us to behave according to its beliefs through undue influence and cash issued to lawmakers. It removes choice. This really is not off topic as most studies of smokers and tobacco use are funded from organizations like RWJF. http://31.216.132.122/web/www.data-yard.net/16/pharma.pdf
 

jfjardine02

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Nov 15, 2011
125
47
Hershey
I believe that your characterization of RWJF is largely factually inaccurate. RWJF is a charity that aims to improve health and is technically forbidden from engaging in lobbying. If you believe that a for-profit company whose business is to sell an addictive product that kills when used as intended (e.g. PM) is "pro smoker" and doesn't use its cash to influence legislators then I don't think further discussion is going to change your opinion. We simply have different opinions on the way the world is. But all of this is irrelevant to this thread, as the research we are discussing is NOT funded by RWJF, pharma or tobacco companies. Its aim is to improve understanding of electronic cigarette use.
 

sherid

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
May 25, 2008
2,266
493
USA
Sorry that some of us are a bit skeptical, not of your research but of much of what has passed as research where e cigs are concerned. It is our hope that your research will be unbiased and untainted by a prejudice against anything that looks like smoking as so many previous studies have done. It is my hope that this research and subsequent studies will not simply revert to recommendations of Chantix and Nicorette gum as the preferred road to tobacco cessation/alternatives, although the current NRT's have a dismal success record and in the case of Chantix, a dangerous and sometimes deadly quit drug.
 

Fiamma

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Apr 9, 2012
1,438
1,380
So Calif
Sorry that some of us are a bit skeptical, not of your research but of much of what has passed as research where e cigs are concerned. It is our hope that your research will be unbiased and untainted by a prejudice against anything that looks like smoking as so many previous studies have done. It is my hope that this research and subsequent studies will not simply revert to recommendations of Chantix and Nicorette gum as the preferred road to tobacco cessation/alternatives, although the current NRT's have a dismal success record and in the case of Chantix, a dangerous and sometimes deadly quit drug.

You will find a lot of us who vape are in agreement with sherid's observations. Whether you personally agree or not is immaterial as long as your research is HONEST and TRUTHFUL, not slanted or tweaked to support some pre defined conclusion desired by the funder. We've all seen plenty of that kind of 'research result'.

The survey really does show us that you don't understand vaping at all, I don't count puffs, I do have a pretty good idea how much e liquid I go through in a day, in the various flavors I'm using that day. I also had some problems with the hardware as I use a variety of devices and delivery systems. I never used a look a like. I started with an Ego T.

The answer to how much I vape, for me, is how much I need to vape. Stressful times will see me vape more. Boredom will see me vape more. Doing exacting mental work will see me vape more. If my hands are busy I vape less. To quantify that is nearly impossible in a one size fits all survey.

As I have not smoked since starting with an e cig nearly 2 years ago I had to go back and think about how much I smoked on a daily basis, and a lot of those probably burned up in the ashtray. I always had one lit if I was awake and not in a no smoking situation. I spent a lot of time outside smoking, at the office. I used to take my thorny problems out there with me so I could solve them faster.

I would happily be your lab rat but I live on the West Coast. I can't really afford to fly back and forth.

Just for info purposes, I am 72 yrs old, soon to be 73. I smoked for 55 years, the last 20 of them at 2 cartons a week. I tried to quit many times, gum, patch, hypnosis, acupuncture at the end. Nothing lasted more than a week. The gum made me nauseous, the patch caused me to hallucinate and hypnosis and acupuncture didn't give me any benefit. The worst part of trying to quit was the lack of mental acuity I suffered each time. I could not think, solve problems with my usual facility, I was extremely irritable and downright cranky. My employees begged me to smoke. I also gained a lot of weight.
 

sherid

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
May 25, 2008
2,266
493
USA
Forgive me for going on, but all companies in the private sector continue to sell products that can sometimes be deadly. The gun makers, the motorcycle and car manufacturers, etc. etc. It is up to the consumer to CHOOSE if he/she wishes to buy the product any way. Sometimes we make bad choices; nevertheless, no one is forcing us to buy these things. BTW, have you ever noticed the drug commercials that end in a 30 second list of side effects including heart attack, death, and stroke, suicide ideation, etc. etc. ? I cannot believe that people ever ask their doctor for those drugs, but they do. I cannot believe that the products are even allowed to advertise. Wonder why that is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread