The author of this article, an Australian tobacco control activist, claims to "debunk" the claim that vaping is at least 95% safer than smoking by using the debunked link between nicotine vaping and EVALI; misrepresenting traces of "toxic" substances as being remotely close to those found in smoke; scaremongering by bringing up extremely rare "burns" typically caused by mishandling lithium batteries; ignoring that the “gateway to smoking” theory has been discredited by real-world, record low smoking rates, and exaggerating transitional dual use. NONE of which proves vaping isn't STILL at least 95% safer than smoking. In fact, the only two valid risks she mentions–trace levels of some chemicals and the risk of mishandling–are the only reasons why vaping isn’t considered 99.99% safe.
Just as an example of how extremely anti-vaping Dr. Jongenelis’ views are, she once testified before the Australian Parliament that she agreed with the ridiculous statement that "smoking is more harmful than vaping but that does not make vaping harmless - in the same way that being hit by a car on the freeway is less harmful than being hit by a truck but it is not desirable.”
theconversation.com
Just as an example of how extremely anti-vaping Dr. Jongenelis’ views are, she once testified before the Australian Parliament that she agreed with the ridiculous statement that "smoking is more harmful than vaping but that does not make vaping harmless - in the same way that being hit by a car on the freeway is less harmful than being hit by a truck but it is not desirable.”
No, vapes aren't 95% less harmful than cigarettes. Here's how this decade-old myth took off
The industry and its allies have been so effective at publicising this unscientific guesstimate, it continues to be used to undermine Australia’s public health policy.
theconversation.com
