A recent article posted by the American Urological Association (AUA) just last week claims that vaping can lead to increased risks of bladder cancer, and Dr. Farsalinos is citing the story as completely bogus. However, the attention-grabbing headline of the article did not stop it from going viral across social media within a matter of hours. Farsalinos wants to set the record straight by point out the many, very alarming breaches in standard scientific research protocol from the AUA study.
Konstantinos Farsalinos is a highly-regarded cancer specialist from the Onassis Cardiac Surgery Centre in Athens, Greece. He is so well-known that he has been an invited guest speaker to the European Society of Cardiology Congress in Munich, Germany and where he spoke of e-cigs and their relationship to improved myocardial functions. The cancer doc is also a vocal pro-vaping advocate who encourages his patients to quit smoking by switching to vaping.
Dr. Farsalinos and his views of the AUA report
While Dr. Farsalinos bases his opinions on research conducted in 2016 by the Royal College of Physicians in the UK, he has also conducted several scientific research studies of his own. Farsalinos is no stranger to properly performed scientific research, but he does take great issue with the methodologies of the recent AUA study involving vaping and bladder cancer.
“It is all over the news today that e-cigarette use is associated with bladder cancer. This is an impressive statement that would certainly raise concerns if any such association was really shown in any study. First, this is based just on a conference abstract, not a published study. Second, the abstract did not measure any association between e-cigarette use and bladder cancer. It evaluated chemicals linked with bladder cancer in the urine of 13 e-cigarette users compared 10 non-users as controls. No smokers were recruited for comparison.”
To put this another way, Konstantinos Farsalinos believes that by refusing to include smokers into the sample group of participants, the final conclusions derived from the AUA study are essentially false. In his weekly blog, Farsalinos also identifies several other points of contention that make the AUA study entirely bogus.
- Not only was the sample group lacking in smoking participants, it was also comprised of an extremely low number of participants overall.
- The scientists failed to verify whether or not the participants were smoke-free. Instead, they relied on the participants’ answers to verbal surveys, which can be less than accurate.
- The AUA scientists also measured for the wrong biomarkers – specifically toluidine and-naphthylamine.
Dr. Konstantinos Farsalinos asserts that the AUA failed to disclose in their report that the measurable levels of cancer-causing chemicals like toluidine and-naphthylamine are essentially identical when comparing between smokers and non-smokers. By failing to include this significant fact, the resulting conclusions are intentionally misleading to the average reader.He also alleges that this may be the reason that the article was published as a “conference abstract” rather than a peer-reviewed research paper.
The original AUA report entitled Studies Raise Concerns for the Bladder Cancer Risk of E-Cigarette Smokers and Show Intensity of Traditional Smoking Increases Mortality Rate of Bladder Cancer Patients is readily available for review online.