How does QSR account for this huge difference? I know which figure I believe.
Allen carr easy way to quite smoking Patch#
According to Cochrane, based on genuinely independent, peer-reviewed data from over 100 clinical trials, the success rate for the nicotine patch is approximately 10%. To anyone who works in the smoking cessation field, these figures are laughable.įor example, their fifth ranked product - for which they claim a 90% success rate - is a nicotine patch. Looking at the effectiveness 'data', QSR claims that the success rates for their top 5 products are 100%, 97.5%, 95%, 92.5% and 90% respectively. QSR claims to have used stringent criteria for their product selection: "effectiveness, longevity, safety, side effects, quickness of results and success rates." Allegedly based on 'consumer feedback' and their own research they give brands marks out of ten based on each criteria. Anyone can claim a 100% success rate - show me the data. QSR makes enormous claims for the products they promote - bigger claims, in fact, than many of the manufacturers themselves - but unless they are supported by evidence (in the case of smoking cessation, evidence is usually via controlled studies published in peer-reviewed medical journals) they are worse than useless. But despite this damning indictment from real scientists, QSR claims: "Herbs have shown overwhelming evidence that they work." Sadly, they do not quote any studies, research, testimonials or statistics to support this claim, and this is the second problem. This is a scientist's way of saying "It doesn't work". Here is what the esteemed Cochrane Collaboration had to say about lobeline for smoking cessation: "There is no evidence available from long-term trials that lobeline can aid smoking cessation." It adds, "Even short-term studies do not indicate a consistent effect on smoking behaviour." For example, all of their recommended herbal products are based on the substance lobeline, an alkaloid extract of the flowering herb lobelia. My skeptical antenna was twitching from the second I got to their site.įirstly, they claim to provide "in-depth reviews and rankings of leading quit smoking products" but four of the five products they recommend are herbal or homeopathic products, which real scientific research has conclusively shown to be ineffective. The site claims to provide smokers with 'independent research' into 17 quit smoking products, but a cursory glance at their research 'methodology' suggests that the whole thing is designed to lure desperate smokers into buying expensive but third-rate infomercial products. The people who run the QuitSmokingRankings (QSR) website must think smokers are REALLY stupid.
0 kommentar(er)
