- Status
More innuendo and made up crap by Yahoo Lifestyle "reporter" Abby Haglage, Teens who vape may be at more risk of serious infection from the coronavirus — here's why. This is open for comment and rating if you have a yahoo account. Flame on!
I see they put most of their bull
behind a paywall. Good. They can keep it there lol
About the Center | Center for Tobacco Regulatory Science and Lung Health (TCORS)
That's where some of these opinions are coming from, a Tobacco reasearch organisation that has conducted no reasearch into vaping it seems.
The words baised and unsubstantiated come to mind.
And Panagis Galiatsatos's research seems to be seriously biased, as he uses the tainted black market THC cartridges issues that arose last year to further his opinion.
Here's a link to reasearch that he has performed.
Panagis Galiatsatos's research works | Johns Hopkins Medicine, Maryland (JHUSOM) and other places
That's where some of these opinions are coming from, a Tobacco reasearch organisation that has conducted no reasearch into vaping it seems.
The words baised and unsubstantiated come to mind.
And Panagis Galiatsatos's research seems to be seriously biased, as he uses the tainted black market THC cartridges issues that arose last year to further his opinion.
Here's a link to reasearch that he has performed.
Panagis Galiatsatos's research works | Johns Hopkins Medicine, Maryland (JHUSOM) and other places
Last edited:
This is a week old. It's just speculation coupled to cherry-picked data. Dr. Farsalinos has done his own analysis of the Chinese data:
"An unusually low prevalence of current smoking was observed among hospitalized COVID-19 patients (8.7%, 95%CI: 7.6-9.9%) compared to the expected prevalence based on smoking prevalence in China (30.3%, 95%CI: 28.4-32.1%; z-statistic: 22.80, P < 0.0001)."
Smoking, vaping and hospitalization for COVID-19 - Article (Preprint v10) | Qeios
And in the CDC's MMWR:
"Finally, for some underlying health conditions and risk factors, including ... being a current smoker ..., few severe outcomes were reported; therefore, conclusions cannot be drawn about the risk for severe COVID-19 among persons in these groups."
Preliminary Estimates of the Prevalence of Selected Underlying...
The fact that there were few severe outcomes is revealing, all by itself.
"An unusually low prevalence of current smoking was observed among hospitalized COVID-19 patients (8.7%, 95%CI: 7.6-9.9%) compared to the expected prevalence based on smoking prevalence in China (30.3%, 95%CI: 28.4-32.1%; z-statistic: 22.80, P < 0.0001)."
Smoking, vaping and hospitalization for COVID-19 - Article (Preprint v10) | Qeios
And in the CDC's MMWR:
"Finally, for some underlying health conditions and risk factors, including ... being a current smoker ..., few severe outcomes were reported; therefore, conclusions cannot be drawn about the risk for severe COVID-19 among persons in these groups."
Preliminary Estimates of the Prevalence of Selected Underlying...
The fact that there were few severe outcomes is revealing, all by itself.
The pertinent word here is “may” which frequently means “I pulled this thing out of my ....”. She’s not wrong in that it “may”. There hasn’t been ANY research. If it does happen though it won’t be because of p25. There ISNT any p25. There’s the cylia thing. Ecigs aren’t good for throat cylia. They’re not NEAR as bad for them as smoking is though. The problem with this whole crowd is they keep saying “if we just kill vaping we can kill smoking too”. They’re wrong. They remain wrong. They’ve always been wrong.
Agree. Though, of course, conflation of vaping and smoking is deliberate, rather than of ignorance. This is the well-tested and proven technique of association used in both propaganda and information warfare. Another technique used often is the repetition of lies. The result, over time, is that the uninformed begin believing, “well, there must be some truth to this.” Only effective counter I know is calling out liars forcefully every time they lie so they become associated as such. In this game, if we do nothing, we will lose.
Just a thought here @bombastinator, but I think that big Tobacco would love to kill vaping. As vaping affects big Tobacco's profit margins.
So if they kill off vaping and other Nicotine replacement options, the only things that are left are various Tobacco products.
Instantly their profits increase, also various corporations and individuals would also profit as well due to the impact on the health of Tobacco product users.
Turns out quinine and cloroquine are immune suppressants. These things are complicated.
Considering that vaping has reasonably been shown to be much less dangerous than smoking, this seems a particularly bad time to criticize it, without additional evidence or clarification.
One thing cited was sharing among young vapers and weed smokers, which is almost nonexistent among ex-smoker vapers and easily avoidable.
Considering that vaping has reasonably been shown to be much less dangerous than smoking, this seems a particularly bad time to criticize it, without additional evidence or clarification.
One thing cited was sharing among young vapers and weed smokers, which is almost nonexistent among ex-smoker vapers and easily avoidable.
I think the reviewer is too harsh and perfectionist. However, I liked this:
"In reality, the typical review in public health is 1/10th as long, does not even try to review the technical content and instead is based mostly on whether the reviewer likes the conclusions, misses most of the glaring errors in the paper, and offers advice that would probably make the paper worse rather than better."
Since the coronavirus is attacking the lungs, anything that has to do with it gives a high risk of getting it.
Yes and no.
Also, its not just the respiratory system, it also invades the digestive system and nervous system.
Um "anything to do with the lungs" does NOT mean you are "more likely to catch it." Let's just say you are a young Sherpa living at high altitude in the Everest tundra, I'd say your cardio vascular system there is going to be LESS at risk of catching it than those living in the constant SMOG of LA or NY, to give a few examples.
I wondered what the LA people THOUGHT when they could see the Hollywood sign without a brown sheen of "Glug."
Probably something like, "OOOH I can't wait to drive there" but many an aspiring actor I mean full time waiter is not KNOWN for their ability to put two and two together at least not ALL of them.
Anna
One day I will find 21 jump street the original cast and watch it. I'm just saying.
Also: "I sometimes think common sense is not a virtue, it is earned by paying attention to the like, WORST of hard knocks and going "What did *I* do, not whining about everything else under the sun."
But, I can't say I was early to the game on THAT one either.
I wondered what the LA people THOUGHT when they could see the Hollywood sign without a brown sheen of "Glug."
Probably something like, "OOOH I can't wait to drive there" but many an aspiring actor I mean full time waiter is not KNOWN for their ability to put two and two together at least not ALL of them.
Anna
One day I will find 21 jump street the original cast and watch it. I'm just saying.
Also: "I sometimes think common sense is not a virtue, it is earned by paying attention to the like, WORST of hard knocks and going "What did *I* do, not whining about everything else under the sun."
But, I can't say I was early to the game on THAT one either.
You can't blame the reviewer for telling the harsh truth, as that would be like blaming the truth for being too harsh. As for being too perfectionist, in many cases that's just part of the price you have to pay for having been born as a gifted person, and, while it is true the fact being gifted doesn't automatically translate to being a better person, it can still nevertheless be argued, sensibly, that this is very often what it truly takes to change the world.
If you read through the comments section that's below Carl V Phillips' review article, specifically the comment regarding nitrous oxide and carbon monoxide, that's when you'll soon find that there is solid evidence to conclude that inhaling exactly that which is commonly thought to be toxic can in fact be turned into something that PROTECTS health, simply by lowering the dosage strength to a certain low level.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and the evidence so far is just preliminary. I prefer to let things settle down a bit first, rather than rush into proclaiming that smoking is protective, as if it's settled. (I don't like the taste of crow.)
I don't think any claims are going to be substantiated, not until long after the dust has settled, especially since they are counting deaths as covid that haven't even been TESTED.
It has been my observation (personally) as I drove (ONCE) through the smog of LA that I was thinking at least my tobacco exhales LOOKED healthier than the sky, but this observation is personal in nature only.
Anna
It has been my observation (personally) as I drove (ONCE) through the smog of LA that I was thinking at least my tobacco exhales LOOKED healthier than the sky, but this observation is personal in nature only.
Anna
That's pretty much EXACTLY what Carl V Phillips also wrote, i.e., the claims are extraordinary, whereas the evidence is not. But then, the same also applies to the claim that smokers are more at risk for the Coronavirus, and, actually, that was also my point.
- Status
Similar threads
