Is Vaping Dangerous for the Heart?
All of the major news organisations reported on a piece of research last week, detailing claims that vaping increases the risks of suffering from a myocardial infarction (heart attack). Unfortunately, the media organisations have made a series of errors and the team behind the press release less than completely honest. Over the course of this article we will explain why you don’t have to worry and what sensible commentators are saying.
The media loved it
LBC was typical in saying: “Vaping causes substantial increase in the risk of heart failure, study finds”.
The Times echoed the theme: “Vaping can increase the risk of developing heart failure”.
These two were not alone as every major media organisation jumped on the press release. What they were telling you sounds pretty damning – but this isn’t the first time such claims have been made and there are some very important things the newspapers, radio…and the researcher himself…weren’t telling you.
LBC continued: “Scientists tested more than 175,000 adults in the US, both vapers and non-vapers, over four years in one of the largest studies yet to compare the effects of vaping on the heart.”
Again, sounds impressive – but this is not the whole truth.
The study’s lead author
Dr Yakubu Bene-Alhasan, the study’s lead author, told journalists: “More and more studies are linking e-cigarettes to harmful effects and finding that it might not be as safe as previously thought.
“The difference we saw was substantial. It’s worth considering the consequences to your health, especially with regard to heart health.”
“I think this research is long overdue, especially considering how much e-cigarettes have gained traction.
“We don’t want to wait too long to find out eventually that it might be harmful, and by that time a lot of harm might already have been done. With more research, we will get to uncover a lot more about the potential health consequences and improve the information out to the public.”
Bene-Alhasan also attempted to claim that vapes “are not recommended as a tool to quit smoking” – even if you know nothing about how data analysis works, you can probably see this for the lie it is.
How was the study conducted?
Well, “Scientists” certainly did not test “more than 175,000 adults” as claimed in the press release from the American College of Cardiology, and it’s quite misleading of them to say it like that.
The research didn’t test any adults, it involved looking at a data set obtained from the National Institutes of Health, and then purported to analyse any associations between vaping and new incidents of heart failure.
What does the study say?
We don’t know.
Err…what?
This is the thing, there is no physical copy of this research.
What researchers in the UK do is this:
·Conduct the research
·Analyse the findings
·Open themselves up to criticism from their peers
·Publish a report in a respected journal for further peer review
·Only issue a press release when their work is published
What has happened in this case is some research has taken place that involves playing with data. A man claims something has been found and because it’s bad was invited to speak at an American College of Cardiology event. The American College of Cardiology sent out a press release saying bad things about vaping.
At no point has Dr Yakubu Bene-Alhasan’s work been checked by his peers or opened up to public comment.
Is this normal?
Well, no, but it has happened before. In previous years research has claimed to have found similar findings prior to a conference. Once the conference was over, no research paper was published so no claims could be supported.
The major piece of work that did get published went on to get pulled after scientists revealed it was full of flaws, the kind of flaws people suspect Dr Yakubu Bene-Alhasan’s probably contains – but the damage in the media has already been done.
Action on Smoking and Health says
ASH provided a damning caveat for the coverage published by The Times: “Despite the body of the article stating clearly that ‘The new research is observational, and therefore cannot prove cause and effect.’, the headline used by the Times implies causality ‘Vaping increases risk of heart failure, researchers find’. Furthermore, this is news coverage of a press release for a conference paper not a peer reviewed publication which is not due to be presented by Dr Yakubu Bene-Alhasan and so is not available for scrutiny.”
Other comments
Dr Charles Gardner, public health expert, pointed out that peer-reviewed research from the American Heart Association, “shows that people who switch from cigarettes to nicotine vapes have 30% to 40% LOWER RISK of cardiovascular disease (risk indistinguishable from non-users).”
Clive Bates, widely respected harm reduction expert, stated: “The study does NOT allow them to *infer* causality. It allows them to *speculate* on reasons for the association. I can do that too: 1. Incomplete adjustment for confounding by smoking history or other lifestyle risks, and 2. Reverse causation as people at risk switch to vaping.”
Dr K. Farsalinos, a cardiologist, noted that the conference abstract reports that ‘ever use of e-cigs’ raises the risk for heart failure by 20%, but they found no association between frequency of current use and heart failure, and no link among vapers with no smoking history and heart failure. This, he states, makes no sense.
Jody Lanard MD, a former WHO senior pandemic influenza comms advisor, ignored the paper’s claims completely and said: “After reading and discussing evolving data for years, I would definitely put money on these two positions:
1.Not vaping is healthier than vaping — for nonsmokers.
2.Vaping is healthier than smoking — for smokers.
Thus: If you must use nicotine, chose vaping over smoking.”
What should I believe?
It’s confusing, right? Scientists claim it’s safer to vape one minute then the newspapers tell you it’s more lethal than a dangerous thing.
Stick with the independent British research teams, forget about American studies and tune out the noise from the media.
For example, “Vaping substantially less harmful than smoking”, an independent report, commissioned by the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities in the UK’s Department of Health and Social Care, represents the most comprehensive review of the risks of vaping to date.
Dr Debbie Robson, a Senior Lecturer in Tobacco Harm Reduction King’s IoPPN and one of the report’s authors said: “The levels of exposure to cancer causing and other toxicants are drastically lower in people who vape compared with those who smoke. Helping people switch from smoking to vaping should be considered a priority if the Government is to achieve a smoke-free 2030 in England”.
Helping people switch from smoking to vaping should be a priority? Now that sounds like sensible advice!