Overall a good article.
I wish there was a better pool of research for these article.
I hate the rehash of disproven research.
I like a comment left at the end of the article:
__________________________________________________
Before mentioning an outdated 2009 FDA study, maybe the author should get their facts straight. First of all, only 6 out of 18 samples (not "more than half") were reported to have carcinogenic "
tobacco-specific nitrosamines." What the study failed to mention, was the levels of these chemicals. Analysis done a week later by Dr. Michael Siegel, Professor in the Department of Community Health Sciences, Boston University School of Public Health, discovered that the TSNAs were at virtually undetectable levels (under 8.2 nanograms). As a reference, the average person is exposed to 1 microgram of nitrosamines per day from the environment. That's 1000 nanograms!
The author also mentioned trace amounts of diethylene glycol found in one sample. It’s never been discovered in any other study since, and at the amount discovered (less than 1%) it would take 750,000 e-cigs to receive a lethal dose.
This study has been proven (time-and-time again) to be misleading and blatantly inaccurate, yet it continues to be mentioned by the media and other new sources. People should do their research before writing (or reading) stories like this. Find a complete list of the most up-to-date studies on e-cigs here:
E-Cigarette Studies & Research | Cig Buyer.com
____________________________________________________________________
