Two Anti-Vaping Studies Retracted Over Severe Data Errors

,
retracted vape studies, e-cigarette research bias

The scientific credibility of anti-vaping research has taken a significant hit following the retraction of two prominent studies. The Journal of Investigative Medicine recently withdrew a 2023 paper that claimed to link e-cigarette use to lung diseases in the United States, citing unresolved doubts regarding data accuracy and methodology.

The retracted paper, titled “E-cigarette use and prevalence of lung diseases among the U.S. population a NHANES survey,” was led by Sudha Dirisanala of the Emory University School of Medicine, alongside co-author Urvish Patel of the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai. The publisher launched an internal investigation after readers raised concerns, ultimately pulling the paper when the authors failed to provide clear explanations of their data and calculations.

This is not an isolated incident for co-author Urvish Patel. In January, another of his studies – which claimed vaping caused an earlier onset of strokes – was retracted due to critical calculation errors. That study suffered from severe bias, failing to account for the subjects’ previous tobacco smoking histories and oversimplifying the causal relationship between vaping and cardiovascular events.

To highlight the differences between these two retracted publications, the table below outlines their core profiles and reasons for withdrawal:

Retracted Study TitleClaimed Health RiskPrimary Reason for Retraction
“E-cigarette use and prevalence of lung diseases…”Increased prevalence of lung disease in the US population.Inability of authors to clarify data, calculations, and individual contributions.
“Effect comparison of e-cigarette and traditional smoking…”Higher risk and earlier onset of stroke among vapers.Severe calculation errors and failure to account for past smoking histories.

“This situation raises serious questions about the validity of studies linking electronic smoking to various pulmonary and vascular diseases,” stated Dr. Fabio Beatrice, Director of the Scientific Board of the MOHRE Observatory (Mediterranean Observatory on Harm Reduction). Dr. Beatrice pointed out that robust data from Sweden shows that non-combusted nicotine delivery (via snus) has drastically reduced lung cancer rates. Furthermore, recent Cochrane reviews have found no evidence of e-cigarette toxicity comparable to combustible tobacco.

Johann Rossi Mason, Director of MOHRE, warned that the academic pressure to “publish or perish” has turned scientific journals into vectors for sloppy, alarmist research. “The retraction of these two studies is a symptom of a system in crisis,” Mason said. “Every retracted study leaves a trail of misinformation that is incredibly difficult to erase, ultimately driving bad public policy and depriving adult smokers of validated harm reduction tools.”

Matthew Ma
Follow
Latest posts by Matthew Ma (see all)

Related posts:

Global Vaping RegulationsGlobal Vaping Regulations: A Comparison of UK and US Laws UK vape tax, Vaping Products Duty, tobacco price increaseUK Vaping and Tobacco Prices to Surge This October Under New Duty Rules 1721231968 Donald TrumpEvidence Supports Trump’s Claim: Vaping Helps People Quit Smoking Vietnam Proposes a Vape TaxVietnam Bans E-cigarettes and Heated Tobacco Products Starting 2025 Philippines Vape PricePhilippines Increases Floor Prices for Cigarettes and Vape Products FDA authorizations smoke-free alternativesFDA Authorizations for Smoke-Free Alternatives Advance Tobacco Harm Reduction
8 Months After Act 852: Why Malaysia Can’t Measure Vape Law SuccessMalaysia vape Ban