Sorry, but your repetition of this garbage gives ammunition to the anti-smokers. If you think that the same words will not come back to describe vapers, then you are fooling yourself. It is creeping in day by day...look at the "third hand smoke" study and the crafty inclusion of e cigs in that study. The vaping/smoking issue is indeed one and the same. I find the use of anti-smokers rhetoric more troubling in ex-smokers and vapers than I do in non-smokers. You will become your own worst enemy by repeating this garbage.
Comparing studies of dubious standards to what someone actually smells is intellectual dishonesty on your part, isn't it? And as for rhetoric, according to dictionary.com, it is defined as:
1.) (in writing or speech) the undue use of exaggeration or display; bombast.
(i.e., calling a fact or opinion 'garbage' or 'rhetoric' because you disagree with it).
I'm not making the argument pro or con whether second hand smoke causes cancer, I'm making a statement, that upon vaping for an extended period, I find stale smoke to occasionally stink.