Let’s talk about how @American_Heart is again spreading anti-vaping propaganda under the guise of promoting public health. Before examining their latest claim, a brief history lesson is in order. THREAD 🪡
Last November, the AHA's annual conference included an abstract which claimed that “E-cigarette users face 15% higher risk of stroke at a younger age than traditional smokers.” 
Nobody could evaluate the study since it had yet to be presented publicly. Still, the media eagerly regurgitated AHA's press release:
The problem? The study's most striking finding was that "Stroke was far more common among traditional cigarette smokers than e-cigarette users or people who used both, 6.75% compared to 1.09% and 3.72%, respectively." acsh.org/news/2021/11/1…
After critics pointed out that the abstract documented lower stroke risk in vapers, AHA pulled the presentation from its conference without explanation.
AHA's latest claim, also based on unpublished abstracts, was that people who vaped or smoked experienced acute increases in heart rate and blood pressure, and performed significantly worse during exercise compared to those who didn't use nicotine.
The media predictably parroted the abstract:
Independent experts were skeptical of this result. The acute change in heart rate was just a benign, short-term effect of nicotine. Moreover, comparing smokers to vapers is misleading because most vapers are former smokers. https://t.co/uqugnRhPLiinews.co.uk/news/health/va…
The study authors' defense?
Three questions: If nicotine wasn't the relevant "toxic" agent, what was, and in what dose did it cause the observed effects? If Dr. Hajek was wrong to "pass judgment" on an abstract, why did the researchers give hyperbolic quotes to the media based on the abstract?
Bottom line: this is more anti-vaping spin from AHA. Unpublished results should not reach the public via exaggerated headlines before independent experts have a chance to review the research.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
