New Study of Passive Vaping Shows No Evidence of a Significant Public Health Hazard
- Thread starter oplholik
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
It is amazing how researchers can try to spin something! It would be way wrong to admit the truth, instead, grasping on ANYTHING that potentially sounds negative to try to validate their point. Wonderful world we live in. I will stand in opposition of these control freaks, liars, and the like, with every last breath I have!
On the other side of the coin, the study does suggest good news which in itself is not surprising!
On the other side of the coin, the study does suggest good news which in itself is not surprising!
An interesting take on that paper 
Granted, it does state "Overall, our data underline that e-cigarettes are not emission-free ..."; but the complete statement is "Overall, our data underline that e-cigarettes are not emission-free and impair indoor air quality. "
Not sure about some of the data generated; it would have been better (IMO) to monitor more than one day as a control baseline.
Also, the only increased metal found during vaping sessions was aluminum; where would that come from?
Overall, I wouldn't break out the bubbly for this study (for either side of the 'war').
Granted, it does state "Overall, our data underline that e-cigarettes are not emission-free ..."; but the complete statement is "Overall, our data underline that e-cigarettes are not emission-free and impair indoor air quality. "Not sure about some of the data generated; it would have been better (IMO) to monitor more than one day as a control baseline.
Also, the only increased metal found during vaping sessions was aluminum; where would that come from?
Overall, I wouldn't break out the bubbly for this study (for either side of the 'war').
An interesting take on that paper
Overall, I wouldn't break out the bubbly for this study (for either side of the 'war').
It's a bit more alarmist than that.
Much like the faulty CDC study; this will be used in arguments everywhere to regulate or outright ban PVs.
An interesting take on that paper
Not sure about some of the data generated; it would have been better (IMO) to monitor more than one day as a control baseline.
Also, the only increased metal found during vaping sessions was aluminum; where would that come from?
Overall, I wouldn't break out the bubbly for this study (for either side of the 'war').
one of the typical ingredients found in antiperspirants is an aluminum compound
That's why a number of us use deodorant instead of antiperspirants, and use roll-ons rather than aerosols.
I'd think aluminum could only come from the coil.
Last edited:
Kanthal wire (for the coil) is only ~5% aluminum, with iron (70-75%) and chromium (20-24%) the other constituents. I've actually heated iron/chromium/aluminum (FeCrAl) foil to 1000 deg C; the aluminum just migrates to the surface and forms aluminum oxide - it doesn't vaporize and enter the atmosphere.
Nichrome wire doesn't have aluminum in it.
I'm voting for someone discretely spritzing their pits since they were stuck in one room with 8(?) other people.
Nichrome wire doesn't have aluminum in it.
I'm voting for someone discretely spritzing their pits since they were stuck in one room with 8(?) other people.
Also see C.V. Phillips' response to the same study: Letter re fatal flaws in Schober et al. paper on environmental vapor | Anti-THR Lies and related topics
PAHs occur in several foods, such as cereals, vegetable oils, coffee, home-cooked foods, usually when smoking, heating and drying processes are involved, or in seafood from polluted waters. Home cooking, such as grilling, roasting and smoking, particularly charcoal grilled/barbecued foods, can lead to high concentrations of PAHs.
Group 2A: The agent is probably carcinogenic to humans.
In some cases, an agent may be classified in this category when there is inadequate evidence of carcinogenicity in humans and sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals...
Group 2A: The agent is probably carcinogenic to humans.
In some cases, an agent may be classified in this category when there is inadequate evidence of carcinogenicity in humans and sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals...
I was just reading a report on how they test animals by giving the rats overdoses of doses in order to shorten the time. Hello, anybody home? This only proves that overdosing is dangerous.
Seems as if anti vapors are grasping for whatever they. Makes them look pretty desperate.
So why please have I been able to cut my asthma/ anti-inflammatory medication in half since I started vaping?
My 11 year old daughter has asthma and the only environmental trigger for her is cigarette smoke. I haven't smoked since before she was born, but she visits her dad every other weekend and he and his girlfriend still smoke. Even though they don't smoke in the apartment while the kids are there, or smoke in another room behind a closed door, she tells me that she has to use her inhaler several times while she's there and she sometimes is still wheezing when she comes home.
She has absolutely no issues with vaping (she likes the way it smells actually). It doesn't affect her at all.
Exactly!
If the researchers really want to know the effects of vaping they should start studying the vapors not the equipment,take a reality check & get out in the field.They spend so much energy & $$$$$$$ trying to prove a negative
I'm just one of, I'm sure millons who have seen positive health benefits from vaping.
Inhalers down to half of my original doses
Blood pressure fallen 4 points,which a 20yr old would be proud of.
No smokers cough (after smoking for ummm nearly 50yrs)
Blood work done recently that shows absolutely NO anomalies & the researchers would be jealous of.
We as vapers feel rightly betrayed,since we have taken responsibility for our health are now faced with oppostion to keep us 'hooked & sick"
This isn't about"safety" or 'health or the 'chillun' it's just about 1 thing & that's MONEY
Healthy folks dont generate profits for anyone.....full stop!
Another rant over....it's all been said before sigh!...
Last edited:
This study was not funded or influenced by pro E-CIG funding. The author appears to be a Bavarian toxicologist. I am sure it will be ignored by the anti's.
I often think of myself as part of a vaping control group, since I was tobacco-free for almost 14 years when I started. Even though I chain vape at home, my lungs feel fine (unless I have been doing something silly like not changing the cotton in my dripper). Additionally I have lost 10 pounds because I can actually distinguish real hunger now instead of "boredom" hunger or my sweet tooth kicking in.
My only lingering concern about vaping is the flavorings; I don't worry about the nicotine (at 6mg, it's great for helping mental focus without getting me shaky, like caffeine does).
Looking desperate to us, like good science to the political folks who make the laws. What we're seeing is the building of "evidence" that they'll use the same as they did with smoking and second hand smoke. Anyone that believed e cigs would be treated better than cigarettes was fooled. "E cigs are not a safe alternative to smoking".
- Status
