Request for clear information
Frank Bayens, professor of psychology, is not worried about his message on Twitter:
This message, and a large number of follow-up messages on the Twitter account of Bayens, are addressed to the Dutch Association of Physicians for Pulmonary Diseases and Tuberculosis (NVALT) and in particular lung physician Leon van den Wrath. You can read about the connection between e-cigarettes and stroopwafels in this blog.
Stroopwafels and gastrointestinal disorders
Suppose there is an investigation into medical complaints in people who sometimes eat stroopwafels. Eight doctors respond that the complaints are indeed known. This is followed by a few people who, after hearing this call, also indicate that they belong to this group. Is that sufficient reason for a stroopwafel ban?
No, Bayens argues, because there is insufficient information to draw conclusions. After all, you know nothing about the history of the patient, the diet and other possible causes of the complaints. Even if there is a link, this may be due to an allergy, and what about the millions of people who don't suffer from complaints after eating stroopwafels? And should it be wrong, what are the risks of oliebollen, chocolate balls and tompoes? Will stroopwafels go into the underground circuit with all its consequences?
Why is NVALT against e-cigarettes?
Professor Bayens' metaphor is clear; why does NVALT condemn e-cigarettes without clear substantiation? On the official website of NVALT there are 10 propositions against vapors where the term "scientific basis" only appears once. And the word "none" also stands for that. Bayens is not so much for the e-cigarette as against assumptions from the medical angle without objective research. "Addictive effect", "increased chance" and "not suitable" are nice cries that read well in a press release, but it is a pity that the Association of Physicians apparently blows more hot air than collects facts.