>>These preliminary findings raise some interesting issues and questions. Is it the specific characteristics of the devices used by the participants in this study that enable them to absorb significant amounts of nicotine, whereas other devices on the market are less able to deliver nicotine? Or is it that these experienced e-cig users have learned the technique required to absorb nicotine from an e-cig, that naïve users in prior studies were unable to do? Maybe it is a combination of both factors?<<
OR, perhaps, its because Eissenberg's first study was flawed. His research model was at fault. Not the electronic cigarettes.
>>I used it last night (18 mg cartomizer) and tested my urine with Nicalert strips this morning. Result? 5/6. Clearly, this result is consistent with recent nicotine exposure. <<
>>In terms of nicotine delivery, these products were as effective as puffing from an unlit cigarette."<<
His first study shows little to no absorbtion. At his home he gets a different result. But you didn't read about that in the media. Instead of his study being at fault. He still chose to blame the product.
Wonder how many people decided NOT to try using an electronic cigarette based off his original study?View Thread