What If? Video from the ECA

[LameBMX]

Yet another devil's advocate post here. Great video though.

I do not see where we can state the second hand vapors have no effect.

I remember the huge fuss over second hand smoke. It was a major win for non smokers to remove smokers from places. If people did not discover that second hand smoke was dangerous, they would have nothing more than a smell to complain about. That would have been tough to create smoking bans with. I also have seen nothing long term and conclusive concerning second hand vapor.

Again I vape and understand there may be consequences we are unaware of. I also see how logically the previous statement is most likely false. But I also remember smoking was not seen as dangerous, and hope we do not make the same mistakes big tobacco made. I just do not want us to be left with egg on our faces, because we do not wish to accept the fact that nothing except long term use by a broad spectrum of individuals will truly disprove or hopefully prove the level of safety for the vapor and/or the people around them.

[Vocalek]

Well, we have this:

Ecigarette mist harmless, inhaled or exhaled

You're not going to see long-term safety studies yet. But they really are not necessary to drawing a logical conclusion.

If the question is just whether or not chemical X is harmful, they do lab studies to see whether animals are harmed. We already have lab studies that show rats are not harmed by inhaling PG, which constitutes the bulk of any vapor that escapes into the atmosphere. We also had some studies that involved children and they were not harmed.

We also know that inhaling nicotine isn't harmful, or the clinical trials of the Nicotrol inhaler would have revealed that problem. And the quantity of nicotine in the vapor is tiny to start out with and miniscule by the time the vapor is exhaled.

Why not try to push the burden of proof off to the accuser? The acid test regarding whether anything in the air is harmful is to determine whether the air with that substance in it meets OSHA standards. Demand to see OSHA reports showing the vapor is harmful.

The Health New Zealand study did look for some of the things that OSHA finds objectionable, such as Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) and Carbon Monoxide, and did not find those things present.

[LameBMX]

I agree, but unfortunately with the FDA's crappy report (which I can no longer even find on the FDA site, but it is the one that prompted the ECA's response study) has put us in the seat of proving it, or accepting the FDA as gospel as others do. But again I agree and it is also the rules. Drug companies are forced to prove their drugs to the FDA, the FDA is not forced to prove a drug bad, we are not in a criminal court.

And logically you can not draw any conclusion without all the facts. The earth appears flat. So logically there must be an edge of the earth. And even though no one ever actually saw the edge of the earth (the major missing fact), people assumed it was fact. Pigs and monkeys are much closer to human physiology than rats. The children in the PG mist study did not have long term exposure (years to decades worth).

But I agree there will most likely not be any direct long term effects. If there is no direct effects, then the second hand issues becomes a nearly mute point. I am just posing the issue of making long term claims without long term experience. I wish someone could sign us all up for a long term study (and not by some group that is gonna jump to conclusion ie the food products you commonly see in the news one week as bad for you and next month good for you)

Hell, even if the consequences were the same as analogs, reduced price, increased lung capacity and great flavors would keep me vaping.