Does your child vape? Looking for UK parents to interview

[sydsut]

As a cancer sufferer myself I want the Cancer Research resources spent on scientists, in labs and hospitals, doing they're bit, and not someone putting questions to parents about their feelings, opinions and attitudes towards wee Johnny's or Jenny's vaping habits. As for doing my research, you only have to look at the articles in the press, the fact that people's attitude to how dangerous vaping is has actually worsened over the last few years while REAL scientific research is finding increasingly positive results. No matter what the outcome of this research shows it will be twisted to bash vaping and vapers by the entrenched ANTZ and their coterie of lickspittle press flunkies to sell their papers. I would suggest a good perusal of the thread vapers.org.uk - Nothing About Us. Without Us.   Lastly cancer is a Scientific and Medical problem not a Sociological one. Sorry rant over.

[Richard46]

Nov 17, 2016 18:46:05 GMT Bobsbeer said:

Nov 17, 2016 17:34:23 GMT Richard46 said:

It would be interesting to know why Cancer Research UK want to know about these parental attitudes and how such data would influence their corporate strategies and/or be employed in some other way.

Wow some attitudes on here really do amaze me. I can think of many reasons why research around vaping attitude is important.  CRUK are not the ones asking the question Richard46 .  They are funding the research, and by doing so hopefully adding to the body of knowledge around e cigs.  Or are we happy in our ignorance and quoting anecdotal evidence?  I personally am glad CRUK are funding such research.  We can all say the Government should do it instead and you are right.  The fact is they are not, so I am more than happy that CRUK have stepped into the breach.  

Whose responsibility is this type of research? It's someone else's responsibility according to some.  I disagree. It is our responsibility.  We give Government our money by way of taxes to spend on our behalf, we also give money by way of donations to CRUK to spend on our behalf.  What is the difference?  The research needs doing, so does it matter who funds it?  All charities are worthy causes.  I'm more than happy for CRUK to research anything surrounding vaping.  I'm also more than happy to give them my money to do it with.

I can think of many reasons as well; but what I would find interesting is CRUKs actual reasons.
CRUK will not have devised the actual questions being asked but they will have specified the objectives of the research. At least I would hope they have, giving money for undefined activity would not be responsible behaviour for a registered charity.   

[Bobsbeer]

Don't get me wrong sydsut, in many ways I agree with you, but the ONLY way we will ever get public opinion to accept vaping is via independent and well conducted research. Eventually the weight of evidence will win. No doubt Galileo faced this when he claimed the world was round, but we know who won that argument eventually. I am also convinced we will also win this argument, but we need proof. We need evidence. That can only be gained via well conducted research.

We probably have all been affected by cancer in some way or the other. My mum died from pancreatic cancer, two weeks after being diagnosed, so I fully support treatment/cure type research into the many different types of cancer. I also recognise that prevention is better than cure, so they both go hand in hand. Both are important in terms of reducing the incidence of cancer, and the way we as a society deal with such a monster of a disease.

Yes Cancer Research UK should and does fund research into treatment and cure. I also agree that they should fund research into prevention. Moving people away from tobacco is a way of prevention. There is a great deal of misinformation and myth surrounding e cigs. How can that be defeated if not by research? How can vaping be accepted in the wider world than by research? How can smokers be convinced to stop smoking and switch to a 95% safer alternative than by research?

As vapers we have already been convinced and we do not need any research to convince us that what we are doing is to our benefit. Sadly we are the minority. Sadly big business will try to bury the benefits. Big Tobacco tried to maintain tobacco was safe until the weight of evidence became too much to maintain that position and the world turned against tobacco. We need to do the same for vaping. I personally don't care where the funding comes from as long as it comes. CRUK are in the business of saving lives. So funding research that will promote e cigs in the longer term is in my view a good thing. Restricting that funding only helps the neh sayers, Big Tobacco and the ANTZ brigade.

[striker42]

Greg, you've hit the nail on the head, everyone is free to donate wherever they wish without being accused of being narrow minded or any other garbage. I made my decision not solely on the evidence of what has been said here but a combination of things. Research is all good and well in any subject but the main part of it for me is, will there be action taken on the end result of any research ? Cancer treatment, based on previous research results doesn't have a great track record of action being taken. Maybe around 4/5 years ago research was thought to have made a major breakthrough in the treatment of breast cancer. What happened there ? Let me refresh a few memories, it was shelved because it was too expensive. So why spend on research if the end result is a non starter due to finances. Don't forget that ultimately the people that put it on the shelf are the same people that charge the public purse for toilet roll to wipe their botties in their parliamentary second homes whilst also paying their mistress to do a bit of secretarial work (allegedly). On a personal note, I lost my Dad in May 2015 after a 10 month battle with lung cancer. Three weeks after he was diagnosed and the type of cancer identified he was told, due to the cost of the treatment for that particular type of cancer, it was unavailable on the NHS. However it was available At a private clinic in Glasgow @ £800 per treatment which he needed every 5 weeks. So I guess in a way there was an end result to that research..............if you could afford to pay for it. All of which leads to me asking myself, do the people in control really want to find a cure for cancer ? I'm beginning to think not, in their chain of thought, every life lost is a pension saved. Narrow minded I might be, cynical, definitely.

[Bobsbeer]

everyone is free to donate wherever they wish without being accused of being narrow minded or any other garbage.

striker42 I am sorry you feel accused of being narrow minded, as you appear to be insinuating. You are free to decide where or even if you donate to charity as you and your conscience see fit. Far be it from me to influence you in any way.

The comment I made about being narrow minded was about what research can and can't be conducted and restrictions being placed on that research. I'm sorry to hear what happened with your Dad, but what research is conducted and the outcome and discoveries resulting from that research are two separate things.

So why spend on research if the end result is a non starter due to finances.

What the NHS may or may not be able to afford is up to us as a society in the UK. The results of the research are available to all wherever they live in the world. That does not or should not prevent the research in the first place. How we use the research is an altogether different beast, but should not prevent science and knowledge moving forward.

[Deleted]

Never ever supported cancer research as they support vivisection
www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-us/we-develop-policy/our-policy-on-supporting-science/the-use-of-animals-in-cancer-research

[pipeman01]

TL DR...

2 of my children vape, one is 26 and the other 31.... does that help?

[domesticextremist]

Nov 17, 2016 19:58:33 GMT sydsut said:

No matter what the outcome of this research shows it will be twisted to bash vaping and vapers by the entrenched ANTZ and their coterie of lickspittle press flunkies to sell their papers. I would suggest a good perusal of the thread vapers.org.uk - Nothing About Us. Without Us.   Lastly cancer is a Scientific and Medical problem not a Sociological one. Sorry rant over.

This basically, though put rather more pithily than I could manage.

The debate about CRUK is irrelevant and their agenda or not doesn't matter. Even if the research findings are positive, those groups who do have an agenda against vaping (and there are many) it will be seized upon and twisted to their ends. It is the nature of the study that is the problem - parents worrying about their children's activities and all the what-ifs that follow. What if vaping is a 'gateway drug' to smoking, what if they just like those sweet shop flavours and are getting hooked on nicotine without knowing it etc, etc ad nauseam. Parents love to give themselves nightmares about their kids and the tabloids love to feed the flames.

There are many more much more useful and fruitful lines of research about vaping that could be followed, so why land upon such a potentially controversial and contentious one?

[X&Y]

Crikey i got out well last night.

Why am i going back in again?

Oh well

Firstly has anyone ever seen a child (under 18) vaping?

I haven't

Seen it become more prevalent in adults, still in the minority of adults though, but then so was smoking.

Secondly when the person donated to CRUK surely they thought that their money was going towards researching Cancer and not on surveys trying to find out about vaping views.

Almost like mis-selling.

Again, not meaning to offend, just my two penneth.

[lobeydosser]

<<< Almost like mis-selling. >>>

Yes I agree X&Y .

I'm sure there is a law against obtaining money by misrepresentation.
Just a pity that there is not an equal one against the way it is spent.

[striker42]

No need for sorry's Bobsbeer and no need to back pedal either. Your narrow minded comment was made directly in relation to your previous statement about people withdrawing their support for CRUK. After some more thought, another couple of things have ruffled my feathers regarding this research.
1. Why have CRUK waited until now, right at the very start of the first of the TPD directives coming into force, to decide to conduct research into the possibility that vaping is the best way forward in the fight for smokers to give up the weed. Where were they when we all were fighting against the TPD ? For me they're a little late to the party.
2. The EU parliament and the public at large, wouldn't take on board the findings of research conducted by at least 15 of the worlds top Professors/Doctors/Scientists. What would give you the impression that the public opinion would change on the findings of a university research, should the result of said research be positive for vaping.
Oh, and I can see a headline for publishing the findings
"Cancer research UK fund study into under age vaping"
Certainly puts vaping on a pedestal and shows it in a good light ................. Not !
GunJack, well done on getting wee gun one of the stinkies and onto vaping. Might I respectfully add that you didn't need the result of any research to tell you that it was a safer alternative. Your own experience as a smoker and your responsibility as a caring parent led you to take that course of action. 

[GunJack]

Thanks striker42 , and that's why I took part....... I did have my experience as a smoker-turned-vaper to use with Mini-Gun#1, but there will be many parents out there who's kids start smoking and don't have that personal experience to draw on. If this study and the report it will generate helps even one parent to get their kids off tobacco, it will have done some good irrespective of who's funded it

[striker42]

Nov 18, 2016 6:45:07 GMT GunJack said:

Thanks striker42 , and that's why I took part....... I did have my experience as a smoker-turned-vaper to use with Mini-Gun#1, but there will be many parents out there who's kids start smoking and don't have that personal experience to draw on. If this study and the report it will generate helps even one parent to get their kids off tobacco, it will have done some good irrespective of who's funded it

Having given the explanation GunJack, I fully understand your reasons for taking part. But I will respectfully disagree on the funding being irrespective. 

[DaveJ]

Nov 18, 2016 6:45:07 GMT GunJack said:

.... I did have my experience as a smoker-turned-vaper to use with Mini-Gun#1, but there will be many parents out there who's kids start smoking and don't have that personal experience to draw on. ...

That's where my simplistic view ("vaping is for adults") falls down.

I recognise it. But how do you draw up rules/laws that tread the line between not encouraging use of vape gear as "toys" by the young, yet still make vaping available to those who best benefit?

Well done GunJack in guiding your young one to a better way.

[bioxx]

Nov 16, 2016 12:04:49 GMT richarduel said:

Our research team at the University of East London is currently working on a Cancer Research UK funded project that explores parent/carer views of their children’s possible/actual use of e-cigarettes....

This is what I have a problem with. Cancer and e-cigs in the same research/sentence. There will then several headlines about this research pop up and that's what people see and read. I'm absolutely not comfortable with this implication.

In computer terms it is not enough to just say 'I hacked the NSA' you need to show proof of concept if you want to go public with that. So far I haven't seen any proof of concept that vaping actually causes cancer. But that's not even what this research is about. Its about kids vaping so why does CRUK get involved in this at all? Don't they have better things to research and spend their money on?