| Revision as of 21:23, 20 August 2015 editQuackGuru (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users79,978 edits →The source does verify this: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:37, 20 August 2015 edit undoJohnbod (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, IP block exemptions, Rollbackers280,340 edits →The source does verify this: cmtNext edit → | ||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
| "Over the past few months, however, several reports have suggested that EC may pose more risks than previously thought." See page 76. The . ] (]) 21:23, 20 August 2015 (UTC) | "Over the past few months, however, several reports have suggested that EC may pose more risks than previously thought." See page 76. The . ] (]) 21:23, 20 August 2015 (UTC) | ||
| ::Read on - the report then criticises them one by one. Certainly misleading just to add this. are you actually reading the report? ] (]) 21:37, 20 August 2015 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 21:37, 20 August 2015
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Positions of medical organizations on electronic cigarettes article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 14 days  |
 | This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
| |||||||||||
 Archives | |
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
Arbitration committee discussion
(Notice cross posted to: Electronic cigarette, Safety of electronic cigarettes, Legal status of electronic cigarettes, Positions of medical organizations regarding electronic cigarettes, Electronic cigarette aerosol, Cloud-chasing & vape shop. Please focus any discussion on the main page
There is an ArbCom case pending related to this family of topics. SPACKlick (talk) 11:36, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
Public Health England Report August 2015
I saw the PHE report today, don't have time to add it but it's relevant. SPACKlick (talk) 10:26, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
- Link copied from the the main EC talk: E-cigs estimated to be "95% less harmful to health than tobacco products". Press release, with links to the review Little pob (talk) 09:56, 19 August 2015 (UTC) - indeed this is important, but it's 111 pages! The key findings are at the start. Johnbod (talk) 12:23, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
- There are a couple of recent round-ups of UK statements at here and here - both Guardian. Johnbod (talk) 14:24, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
"In 2015 Public Health England released a report stating that e-cigarettes are estimated to be 95 per cent safer than smoking."
- McNeill, A, SC (2015). "E - cigarettes: an evidence update A report commissioned by Public Health England" (PDF). www.gov.uk. UK: Public Health England. Retrieved 19 August 2015.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
Editors can add it to this page. For the main page the current evidence has not changed among reviews. QuackGuru (talk) 18:55, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
The source does verify this
"Over the past few months, however, several reports have suggested that EC may pose more risks than previously thought." See page 76. The source does verify this. QuackGuru (talk) 21:23, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
- Read on - the report then criticises them one by one. Certainly misleading just to add this. are you actually reading the report? Johnbod (talk) 21:37, 20 August 2015 (UTC)