If you had to put a percentage on how much less harmful vaping is than smoking?

[Snickerfritz]

And, are there any actual studies that support your estimate? I have a friend who's a skeptic. He concedes that vaping is definitely safer than smoking, but says he doubts it's more than 50% less safe. 'Says I'm deluding myself if I think inhaling nicotine isn't harmful. I don't want to delude myself. Crowd sourcing.

 

[Bullette the Cowdog]

I'd say vaping is 80-90% less harmful than cigarettes.

This is very unscientific. I am just a Cowdog after all.

Woof!

 

[Snickerfritz]

90% was the figure I cited, with of course nothing to back myself up, but I definitely don't want no throat cancer, oof!

 

[IntelligentDesigner]

Um, Potato!

 

[volume control]

Ninetyninepercent

 

[Abe_Katz]

THR scientists seem to think that vaping is on par with snus in harm reduction. That would mean that it is about 98% safer than smoking. With smoking the problem isn't the nicotine, it is the tar, and particulate as well as the greater heat of burning vegetable matter that causes the harm. In short the problem with smoking is the smoke. That doesn't exist with vaping or with smokeless tobacco.

Even traditional American smokeless tobacco is about 95% safer than smoking.

 

[bazmonkey]

I don't want to delude myself. Crowd sourcing.

...Because if we're all deluded as a group it feels better?

We can't tell, we really can't tell. There's no long-term info on it because no one has used them long-term yet.

I just want to take the time right now to point out that DOW chemicals (makers of like, most of the propylene glycol out there) does NOT recommend using PG in theatrical fog machines because of lung irritation, and also recommends that those using fog machines limit its use to performances when possible. A Swedish study (this is from the wiki page on PG, reference 37) found a "strong" connection between concentrations of airborne PG in households and children developing asthma and allergic reactions.

A vaporizer is a hand-held fog machine that we're sucking straight off the tap, so... chew on that before you think it's truly "safe".

I don't want anyone to think I'm trying to talk vaping down. I'm not. I'm sold, hooked, and would never go back. I whole-heartedly recommend it to smokers.

That said, I'm not about to pretend there are no ramifications to vaping. And I'm certainly not going to put a % on it. What exactly does it mean to be 50% less safe??? If a disease makes the same fraction of people sick but the symptoms are half as severe, is that 50% more safe? What about one that hurts just the same but has a 50% less chance of infecting you? See what I mean?

 

[HK-47]

Suggestion: Explain to your skeptic friend that he should do some research...both on this forum and on his own...and make up his own damn mind.

Those of us here have primarily achieved some pretty remarkable results...but there are considerations that have yet to be factored in. One of those is definitely long-term effects of vaping.

 

[bazmonkey]

Um, Potato!

I thought that was what the blonde in the potato sack hiding from the cops said after the brunette said "woof" and the redhead said "meow".

 

[Snickerfritz]

Suggestion: Explain to your skeptic friend that he should do some research...both on this forum and on his own...and make up his own damn mind.

Those of us here have primarily achieved some pretty remarkable results...but there are considerations that have yet to be factored in. One of those is definitely long-term effects of vaping.

Well, that's pretty much what I'm trying to do with this thread, trying to suss out resources to do said research from this community. I wouldn't know where to start, apart from Google I guess.

 

[HK-47]

Answer: Ah, well. There is a medical sub-forum on this board that does have some information as to the health benefits and potential risks associated with vaping.

You can also look into CASAA's information, which is an organization that fights for our rights as vapers, which will have studies and databases as well that they have been using to fight regulations against vaping.

 

[stefania123]

Is your friend a skeptic smoker or non smoker?

 

[stefania123]

A Swedish study (this is from the wiki page on PG, reference 37) found a "strong" connection between concentrations of airborne PG in households and children developing asthma and allergic reactions.

hmm.. im really not sure what study you are referring to, but it seems to contradict this:

"The report of the 3 years' study of the clinical application of the disinfection of air by glycol vapors in a children's convalescent home showed a marked reduction in the number of acute respiratory infections occurring in the wards treated with both propylene and triethylene glycols. Whereas in the control wards 132 infections occurred during the course of the three winters, there were only 13 such instances in the glycol wards during the same period."

http://ajph.aphapublications.org/action/doSearch?searchText=glycol

 

[Snickerfritz]

Answer: Ah, well. There is a medical sub-forum on this board that does have some information as to the health benefits and potential risks associated with vaping.

You can also look into CASAA's information, which is an organization that fights for our rights as vapers, which will have studies and databases as well that they have been using to fight regulations against vaping.

Thank you.

 

[Snickerfritz]

Is your friend a skeptic smoker or non smoker?

Non (tobacco) smoker.

 

[stefania123]

if you are vaping, and it is '50 percent less harmful' than smoking as your non smoking friend estimates, what is their point exactly? that you should try to quit cold turkey, and if you dont succeed u should just go back to smoking 100 percent harmful cigarettes again? or do they want to start vaping?

 

[HK-47]

Propylene Glycol is a common ingredient used as a base in many of the e-juices out there. There are people who develop or have an allergy to PG, but in general PG is a bacteri/virucide so it actually curbs that behavior in general, barring an allergy.

Since you said non-tobacco smoker...I'm guessing that your friend is looking for something to 'fill in the gap' as it were. It's his choice and he should be the one doing the homework, not you.

I will never recommend anyone who is not already a smoker to take up vaping as the long term consequences are unknown and it's arguably not wise to pick up a habit when you don't have one already. Vaping may be safer than breathing the air (in some cities) but I'd probably say that anyone who says that vaping is SAFE is lying. There simply doesn't exist proof enough of that, especially long-term. The technology hasn't been around long enough, so to a certain point most of us are guinea pigs in this.

That being said, for many long term smokers (myself included) vaping has been a real god-send and could very easily be argued as a HRT (Harm Reduction Therapy) compared to smoking.

 

[Talyon]

Somewhere in these forums is a study that was conducted looking for nicotine in exhaled smoke vs vapor, and the nicotine was .55 something not sure the term and .05 nicotine. I don't know if it was in millions of particles per etc. but going by this I'm questing 90% better. The results were tying to detect I think 26 diff chemicals. I have a pic of the study but not the link and I'm not at home to post. Hope u find it.

That being said I don't debate with anyone about my Vapeing. If there interested I give a brief safety training course. it's my life n I'm NOT hurting others anymore then their hurting me.

 

[chrisrook]

99.999%

Or maybe that's the Kleenex i'm thinking of.

 

[Snickerfritz]

if you are vaping, and it is '50 percent less harmful' than smoking as your non smoking friend estimates, what is their point exactly? that you should try to quit cold turkey, and if you dont succeed u should just go back to smoking 100 percent harmful cigarettes again? or do they want to start vaping?

I guess his point is just that it's not as harmless as I want to think it is? He doesn't want to start vaping.