New study: vaping no more toxic than breathing air

[stevegmu]

This assertion strikes me as more naive than thinking the results of this study were not crafted to get the results that the funders wanted. Like way more naive.

That's pretty much what all the politicians have stated. Perhaps you should watch the C-Span hearing with J.D. Rockefeller...

 

[Jman8]

That's pretty much what all the politicians have stated. Perhaps you should watch the C-Span hearing with J.D. Rockefeller...

Would you like me to link you to scientists' comments that show that most scientific studies are objective / neutral?

 

[stevegmu]

Would you like me to link you to scientists' comments that show that most scientific studies are objective / neutral?

Geez, wonder why scientists would say their work is objective...

 

[Jman8]

Geez, wonder why politicians that are bought and paid for would deny saying this during a public hearing...

 

[Marc411]

To bad this won't go mainstream!

Tobacco Harm Reduction

 

[stevegmu]

I thought Big Bad tobacco was the enemy?

 

[jpargana]

I have a very different take on this study that I don't think has been addressed yet. I think BAT was throwing down a political gauntlet to the scientific community, somewhere along the lines of "I dare you to reproduce this and publish"

Many people here find the results incredulous, or nearly so. But really, it's sort of a Duh moment if you have a handle on the components of vape juice and their histories...

PG has long been used in the medical industry as a "base" for various inhalers, and I think they even fog rooms with it? Now, it stands to reason that before the medical industry started using that as an (FDA approved) inhalation vehicle, that much study was done on possible toxicity. No one may have done quite the same study BAT did using the particular tissue cultures but one way or the other PG must have been determined to be quite safe.

VG has long been used as "Disco smoke" and we can certainly expect that OSHA and whoever looked closely at the possible toxicity issues related to inhalation and I am confident that VG is known, as an absolute fact, to the best of the ability of real science, to be quite benign when inhaled.

BAT, and BT in general, has been doing 100 years of research into Nicotine. So surely they know it is benign. We know it, but we also know of the "conspiracy" to equate Nicotine with smoking, and etc, etc, ad nauseum. But at the end of the day, inhaled nicotine is quite safe and everyone knows it even though the PTB refuse to quite acknowledge that.

So that leaves just whatever flavorings BAT used (or might have used). And despite the few protestations to the contrary here, no one is ever going to unravel the mysteries of all the hundreds of flavorings we use now. But surely BAT, in the normal course of their research into the eCig market, has at least informally studied the flavor issue, to the extent they felt they would test well. The only people surprised are the people here that are convinced (via propaganda) that their "must be something unsafe with these eCigs".

So aside from flavoring issues, really the results of this study are not any more interesting or surprising than a study indicating well filtered spring water is safe to drink.

But the politics that the vaping industry is faced with, and that includes BT to the extent they want to be players, demands that gauntlet be thrown. Otherwise no one would study it because they won't like the answer that everyone knows will come out of any study such as this. vaping really is safe.

 

[jpargana]

It is the lack of any long term vaping studies which is why some politicians are against e-nic...
I just read a new thread about someone complaining about throat and lung irritation from vaping. Guess that's propaganda, as well...

I do not see politicians attacking every other item we use, without "long term studies" to clearly show us they are 100% safe.

Cellphone radiation, WI-FI radiation, new medicines, new flavourings/colorings/preservatives in our food... NONE of those had any "long term study" before they were released into the market. And why is that? Because the *only* way to make a useful long-term study, with a sample of users large enough to be meaningful, is precisely, letting people use the product!
Users *are* the guinea pigs in the first years, the contributors for that "long term study".

Why do politicians want us to believe the the e-cig should be the *only* exception, out of all those consumer products out there? Could it be, because there are no economical interests against cellphones, WI-FI, etc, etc... ?

And many people are swallowing all that nonsense - hook, line, and sinker

 

[CarolT]

I just Don't know all the Details of what ISO 3308:2012 does and doesn't include.

"Reference 3R4F cigarettes were smoked to the ISO6 smoking regime (35 mL puffs drawn over 2 s with 1 min intervals) in accordance with the standard ISO 3308:2012, and using an 8 s exhaust and a bell-shaped smoking curve. Cigarettes were smoked to eight puffs/cig."

I saw that. So it was cigarettes, plural. But they still don't say how many.