Ran across this Reuters Health study, thought you should see.
- Thread starter ShogaNinja
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
I think the comments on that page say it all. Many good points about how the writer left out important points, such as how bad analogs are for you to begin with. It's also very disappointing how they bring up the FDA's findings from the 2009 studdy in such a vague manner. That would lead the average reader to believe that our PVs are evil without even understanding the 2 main points about the small amount of DEG they found in one single SE cartridge; 1) The levels of DEG found in the cartrige were so small that you would have to vape about 800-1000 of those cartridges to suffer any ill effects from it, and 2) DEG is NOT supposed to be in there in the first place; it was a contaminant in their liquid that shouldn't have even been there. (I don't even wanna imagine the @$$-ripping SE gave their venders over this. 
) I should also add another point. After the FDA's findings were made public, many vendors of PG and VG became more strict in quality control, testing every single batch made before it is sent out. This is good for us, as it means that the likelihood of us running into a bum batch of liquid will be much less than before.
As for vapor causing these drastic changes in lung function, I feel it's blown out of proportion by two groups who have their own interests in working against our favor. It's just lung irritation. Put the PV down for a a few minutes, and your lungs should return to normal. I mean dust does worse things to my lungs than my PV.
But alas, many an unwitting fellow will be deceived by the downplaying of the every important facts behind the issue. I fear there will be more tobacco-related casualties thanks to writers like the one responsible for the article in the OP's link. >:/
[/rant] ...whew!
) I should also add another point. After the FDA's findings were made public, many vendors of PG and VG became more strict in quality control, testing every single batch made before it is sent out. This is good for us, as it means that the likelihood of us running into a bum batch of liquid will be much less than before. As for vapor causing these drastic changes in lung function, I feel it's blown out of proportion by two groups who have their own interests in working against our favor. It's just lung irritation. Put the PV down for a a few minutes, and your lungs should return to normal. I mean dust does worse things to my lungs than my PV.
But alas, many an unwitting fellow will be deceived by the downplaying of the every important facts behind the issue. I fear there will be more tobacco-related casualties thanks to writers like the one responsible for the article in the OP's link. >:/
[/rant] ...whew!
Yeah but to use a relatively reliable source like Reuters. This article is pretty devious... I'm still not 100% sure what to make of some of it.
Don't be too impressed by supposedly reliable sources. In this case, Reuters is a secondary source. The primary source would be the scientific journal where the article authored by the researcher was published. Scientific journal articles are sometimes difficult to read. So it's easier for a reporter to read another, more experienced, reporter's synopsis of the article than to go to the original source and try to decipher it herself.
Even when you have the original source in front of you, you may still be taken for a ride by impressive-sounding scientific terms and by results that are not placed into context.
The study in question, conducted by Varvadas, et al, was published in Chest, and discussed rather extensively in January in the ECF Media & General News forum: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...inds-e-cigarettes-affect-airways-quickly.html
I asked Dr. Riccardo Polosa, a lung specialist who conducts clinical trials using e-cigarettes, for his opinion of the study. I reprinted his message in Response #138. The bottom line: "Thus the authors’ conclusions are not fully supported by the data, and the accumulating evidence is rather strongly supportive of a good safety profile for the e-cigarettes."
Varvadas, et al. managed to convey the impression that vaping will do just as much damage to lungs as smoking. Oh really? Then why is it that after switching to vaping my night-time wheezing and productive morning cough went away? Why are so many former smokers that got that way by switching reporting that their lung health has improved?
The author (and researchers?) failed to make any note about the side effects of the "methods that are known to work. Those, he noted, include nicotine patches and gum, prescription medications like bupropion (Zyban) and varenicline (Chantix), and counseling." Aside from counseling, each of those methods also has some negative effect on the body.
I can vape all month long for the cost of one visit to a psych....
I can vape all month long for the cost of one visit to a psych....
- Status
Similar threads
