Dear Abby Chimes In

[Texmac1011]

E-Cigarettes Harm The Smoker, But Not Secondhand Breather


I've looked for the 2009 FDA findings, but no luck so far. Does anyone know where to find this info?

 

[Whosback]

Well that's a bit of a mixed bag. Not as bad for us at the reply might lead some to think, but very true about us not hurting anybody else.

 

[KY_Rob]

Isn't she dead? Came back from the grave to voice her vaping opinion?

 

[Whosback]

Isn't she dead? Came back from the grave to voice her vaping opinion?

She had a REALLY binding contract.

 

[KY_Rob]

Lmao Who!!!!

 

[lilmrsyeti]

Isn't she dead? Came back from the grave to voice her vaping opinion?

That was my exact thought when I saw the Title to this thread!

 

[Doberz]

E-Cigarettes Harm The Smoker, But Not Secondhand Breather


I've looked for the 2009 FDA findings, but no luck so far. Does anyone know where to find this info?

FDA Warns of Health Risks Posed by E-Cigarettes

 

[obsidianchao]

Suuuuch bull..... Sigh.

 

[HazMatt]

Dear Abby did die. But, a ghostwriter is keeping the article alive...



not dear Abby's ghost LOL

 

[Mac]

This is what happens when you give advice based on 2 minutes of internet research.

 

[Absintheur]

The 2009 FDA study was badly flawed and very misleading. Yes there are carcinogenics in our vapor, what they don't tell you the levels are so low that you breath in more carcinogenics in the air you breath while driving your car. In other words the FDA study was complete BS, sadly it is still being quoted...

 

[flintlock62]

Well, obviously someone is using Dear Abby's name. At least I hope they are! The FDA 2009 report is from what I gather, ingredients testing from juice that came from China. That is one reason I DIY now. I know what's in my liquid.

 

[Bullette the Cowdog]

Dear Abby's daughter took over the writing years ago. Her name is Jeanne Phillips I think.

 

[FACE MEAT]

There's another thread related to this. This was my response there:

Anybody that reads a "Dear Abby" response and follows the advice deserves to be misinformed.

 

[IntelligentDesigner]

Well, while I do not value her standpoint at all, at least she did vote on our side that we are not harming anyone else.

 

[cardenio]

yeah but if i hear the word carcinogens thrown around any more im gonna flip lol, 2009 was far enough back that nobody should consider it relevant

 

[Lessifer]

yeah but if i hear the word carcinogens thrown around any more im gonna flip lol, 2009 was far enough back that nobody should consider it relevant

Well, the FDA hasn't released another study to contradict their earlier bs. I'm not saying it's right, but many people trust the FDA to keep them safe, hell, I didn't really give it much thought before I started vaping and actually read the study for myself to see how flawed it was.

 

[cardenio]

Well, the FDA hasn't released another study to contradict their earlier bs. I'm not saying it's right, but many people trust the FDA to keep them safe, hell, I didn't really give it much thought before I started vaping and actually read the study for myself to see how flawed it was.

you're completely right :/

They're not stupid, when they tested e-cigs they probably found out that A) ".... man people will not die from these things" and B) "this works better than any anti-smoking product we've supported, better try banning the hell out of it and stop studying"

We may not see a followup report, and people will believe an outdated one if not publicly corrected

 

[tidegirl]

The 2009 FDA study was badly flawed and very misleading. Yes there are carcinogenics in our vapor, what they don't tell you the levels are so low that you breath in more carcinogenics in the air you breath while driving your car. In other words the FDA study was complete BS, sadly it is still being quoted...

... and they failed to mention in the report that the same carcinogens are found in their FDA approved NRT products, in higher amounts than in our juice.

And the sampling was too small to be scientifically accurate.

Wasn't it only one juice that tested + for the carcinogens, but due to the small sampling it threw the % way higher than it should be?

Many more problems with the study, I can't remember all of them now.

 

[bruiser]

There were many informative comments in the comments section on Yahoo, and some really stupid ones.