Discussion in 'Health, Safety and Vaping' started by Cool_Breeze, Aug 22, 2019.
Image has been removed.
URL has been removed.
Email address has been removed.
Media has been removed.
E-cigs can trigger same lung changes seen in smokers, emphysema
They have this in there
"Moreover, a study from Tarran's lab last year found evidence of toxic compounds in commonly used vaping liquids, and the CDC currently is investigating about 100 recent cases in the U.S. of sudden, serious lung disease in otherwise healthy young vapers."
The 100 recent cases have nothing to do with e-cigarettes with nicotine. They are about teens buying an illegal substance on the street and vaping it. So the rest of the article is suspect too.
North Carolina is tobacco state. Tobacco is its largest cash crop, generating 754 million dollars annually(2012)
I will pay the subscription fee to read through the study proper without any journalistic bias.
@Beamslider - Yes, I agree. I don't think the recent case notion negates the study which was submitted for publication in March of this year.
This is directly at odds with the real-world experience of many smokers who switched to vaping and almost universally report marked improvements in their breathing, even when they had already been diagnosed with COPD.
@Rossum - What are you doing here..!? Are you trying to illuminate this matter so as to draw others to pile on..?
There are testominials about vaping...there are testimonials about God. There are even testomonials about jade eggs.
I know you well enough to surmise that you don't believe this is all a free lunch.
Isn't it just possible though that while former smokers converting to vaping may see marked improvement in their breathing, non smokers who vape might see the opposite.
Isn't it possible that former smokers converting to vaping may see marked improvement in their breathing, might find even more improvement if they quit vaping?
Most of us here accept that vaping compared to smoking is harm reduction. I see no problem with trying to understand the extent of that, good and bad. That said there's no harm in criticising flawed studies if they are indeed flawed. They might not be though.
WOO HOO Free Lunch!
Free? No, it's certainly not free. But it is very affordable.
Yes, I know there are testimonials about all sorts of things. I also know that a whole lot of things that are presented as "science" these days are highly questionable for a variety of reasons.
I think it was zoiD who posted this in another thread. If you haven't seen it yet, it's well worth 30 minutes:
No, but thank you.
Separate names with a comma.