Another Bogus Article - The health claims of E-Cigarettes are going up in smoke.

[MonkInsane]

http:// www. forbes. com/sites/jasperhamill/2014/08/31/the-health-claims-of-e-cigarettes-are-going-up-in-smoke/

While not totally negative - it is for the most part. I thought the whole metal-containing vapor thing has been addressed?

 

[roosterado]

Forbes has posted at least 1 positive e-cig article in the past this one is mostly negative It Does say the metals where most likely from the cartridges, another reason to some to 2nd Gen or 3rd Gen devices

 

[rothenbj]

Don't drink the water-

Drinking Water Contaminants | Drinking Water Contaminants | US EPA

Fear is alive!

 

[oplholik]

The news sites are just loaded with all kinds of misinformation, and untruths lately. The big push is on!

 

[dragonpuff]

This article wraps up two of the most recent issues into one, and paints them both in an extremely negative, and untruthful light.

The first, the metals study, actually showed that e-cigarettes are very safe with respect to metal content, but the results are being twisted and contorted to deceive the public into believing that e-cigarettes are dangerous. See this thread for more:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...angers-e-cigarettes-toxic-metals-exposed.html

The second, on diacetyl, is an issue that's being blown far out of proportion just to make e-cigarettes look bad. See this thread for another article on that, which includes dubious claims that it actually killed someone:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...lers-hawk-poison-nicotine-juice-tyneside.html

The entire Forbes article is written to scare people into thinking that new research is showing vaping to be dangerous and "risky" for anyone who wants to "take the chance."

"But for many health-conscious people, the damage is likely to have been done. Once upon a time, the world didn’t know about the many terrible effects of cigarettes. It was only after a concerted campaign by scientists, doctors and activists that the risks began to be publicized and governments began to act on them. The long term implications of switching to E-Cigarettes have not yet been tested, so anyone using the devices has to ask themselves if they are willing to take the risk of becoming a guinea pig."

So Forbes is making it sound like they're doing us a favor by sharing this glorious truth in an effort to save us from the latest scourge of evil tobacco products, when in reality they are lying through their teeth.

I wonder who paid them to write this article...

"Are you willing to take the chance and keep on vaping?"

Yes. Yes I am, because you, sir, are full of . End of story.

 

[Nate760]

This article, and all scare-mongering hit pieces like it, proceed from a false assumption: that unless vaping is shown to be 100% risk-free, it's a public health menace and no one should do it. The concept of harm reduction is something these people simply can't wrap their heads around, and besides that, they're not even consistent in the application of their own hideously flawed logic. If they applied the same standard to any other food/beverage/medicinal product that they insist on applying to vaping, they'd be agitating for a society in which no one consumes anything but distilled water and homemade bread.

When you get right down to it, there's only one pertinent question that needs to be asked in any discussion about vaping: "How much less hazardous is it than smoking cigarettes?" When people are so caught up in their own emotion-based moralizing and puritanism that they can't be bothered to ask the only question that matters, then nothing else they say warrants serious consideration by anyone.

 

[bigdancehawk]

If there have been any comments, I can't seem to access them.

 

[dragonpuff]

This article, and all scare-mongering hit pieces like it, proceed from a false assumption: that unless vaping is shown to be 100% risk-free, it's a public health menace and no one should do it. The concept of harm reduction is something these people simply can't wrap their heads around, and besides that, they're not even consistent in the application of their own hideously flawed logic. If they applied the same standard to any other food/beverage/medicinal product that they insist on applying to vaping, they'd be agitating for a society in which no one consumes anything but distilled water and homemade bread.

When you get right down to it, there's only one pertinent question that needs to be asked in any discussion about vaping: "How much less hazardous is it than smoking cigarettes?" When people are so caught up in their own emotion-based moralizing and puritanism that they can't be bothered to ask the only question that matters, then nothing else they say warrants serious consideration by anyone.

^ This! This comment deserves it's own special recognition, thank you! I couldn't have put it better myself