The costs of running this huge site are paid for by ads. Please consider registering and becoming a Supporting Member for an ad-free experience. Thanks, ECF team.

Watched a video and it got me curious on this study

Discussion in 'General Vaping Discussion' started by PatVapes, Sep 15, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Image has been removed.
URL has been removed.
Email address has been removed.
Media has been removed.
  1. PatVapes

    PatVapes Super Member

    Dec 11, 2018
    Lima, Peru
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. Rossum

    Rossum Surly Curmudgeon Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Supporting member
    Dec 14, 2013
    NE FL
    It's possible to show just about any desired result with a properly designed "mouse study".
     
    • Agree Agree x 6
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  3. bombastinator

    bombastinator ECF Guru Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Sep 12, 2010
    MN USA
    There are a lot of words like “may” and “might” in it. It’s not totally impossible I suppose. The particulars of the study aren’t discussed.
    One of the things I’ve found that needs to be looked at hard with mouse studies and detection studies is how much are they actually talking about and how much actual effect there might be. Some detection techniques have gotten very very sensitive, and I’ve noticed that when they say “some” it is because they are avoiding saying how small the actual number is. Remember there is a lot of money coming from several directions that badly want to kill e-cigarettes. Some of it cares who it might kill in the process but most of it really really doesn’t.

    The various ingredients in e-cigarettes, with the exception of the actual nicotine have been tested separately and are GRAS. It would have to be the nicotine specifically or a combination of the chemicals involved which is somehow worse than them separately, and even then it would need to be worse than, say, regular city air. Which often turns out not to be the case.
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
    • Like Like x 1
  4. PatVapes

    PatVapes Super Member

    Dec 11, 2018
    Lima, Peru
    Right, I don’t really trust this study at all. Also, it’s really weird they come up with this stuff now when a lot of members from this very same forum have been vaping for years and they have never had any issues.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. bombastinator

    bombastinator ECF Guru Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Sep 12, 2010
    MN USA
    We’re seeing a lot of resurgence of previously debunked stuff suddenly rushing back.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  6. scott58

    scott58 Super Member ECF Veteran

    Aug 23, 2009
    NorthWest Indiana
    Well I'm not a mouse so..

    And they're not even sure about those.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  7. Baditude

    Baditude ECF Guru ECF Veteran

    Apr 8, 2012
    Ridgeway, Ohio
    Having worked in the medical field for over 30 years, I agree with all previous replies. Studies can be manipulated to suit the sponsor's agenda by cherry picking findings. It's not a reliable study unless a separate group finds the exact same results. Ever heard the term double blind study?

    How Chantix was ever approved for the consumer market is beyond my comprehension except that the manufacturer must have paid money to the FDA under the table.

    Chantix blamed for 3,063 serious injuries and 78 deaths

    FDA medical adviser: 'Congress is owned by pharma'
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 2
  8. PatVapes

    PatVapes Super Member

    Dec 11, 2018
    Lima, Peru
    I think I’m better off not trying to get news on vaping lol :lol:
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
  9. Baditude

    Baditude ECF Guru ECF Veteran

    Apr 8, 2012
    Ridgeway, Ohio
    Just based on the earliest studies on e-cigarretes, reports of harmful chemicals like formaldahide were found to be present in vapor. Upon deeper scrutiny of that study, only miniscule traces could be detected, while compared to cigarette smoke which had something like 400 tmes that amount. Just a small detail like that makes it a flawed study for harm reduction. At the very least, it was a misrepresentation of the truth. Plus, the people who do these studies realize they won't be chosen to do another study by the same sponsor if they don't find the results the sponsor was looking for. That's the reason why double blind studies are important.
     
    • Like Like x 4
    • Agree Agree x 2
  10. stols001

    stols001 Mistress of the Dark Nicotinic Arts Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Supporting member
    May 30, 2017
    If I had to be a mouse in a study it sounds like that would be the one to be in.

    I mean, all mouse studies mean you are dead on the table with your guts under a microscope by the end.

    But lets face it, if you had to be in a mouse study for like science, none of this "learn the maze for the cheese" bit I WANNA VAPE.

    Also, as a human I would like to vape and somehow, I am finding this mouse study very unconvincing because...……… science!

    And not just even science this time, GOOD science versus BAD science.

    Anna
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  11. Eskie

    Eskie ECF Guru Verified Member ECF Veteran

    May 6, 2016
    NY
    Poor mice, them and cell sitting in culture dishes minding their own business are getting the crap beat out of them.

    JCI is an extremely well regarded, peer reviewed (as in legitimate, not "yeah sure, we reviewed it and thought it was OK and there were no typos) journal so writing off what's being formally published isn't the wise course of action. I would note that right up front in their summary they state

    "Here, we show that compared with smoke exposure, mice receiving ENDS vapor for 4 months failed to develop pulmonary inflammation or emphysema. However, ENDS exposure, independent of nicotine, altered lung lipid homeostasis in alveolar macrophages and epithelial cells."

    We're back to safer than cigarettes, not safe. The fact there may be some disruption of lipid homeostasis may be important as contributing to why the reactions to vaping THC Vitamin E enhanced vape oil was more irritating and aggressive as it was. As to regular e cigs/ENDS/ non-cannabis like us people vape, experience to date is consistent with that first sentence. However, I have zero problem with people doing long term longitudinal studies on vapers to monitor for possible long term health risks. As to testing the solvents used, sure, why not? And if it translates to real issues in real life situations, I'd love to know now that I'll be vaping my own flavored juice as long as I want to or until I'm dead (hopefully not from vaping, but let's fact it, none of us get out of here alive).

    Now, as to the news source, they need to learn how to read medical literature without turning stuff into click bait.

    Edit: this isn't bad science, this is bad science reporting by a news source who cherry picked through and got some click bait quotes that might not even have been said. We've seen it before, and we'll see it over and over again in the future.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  12. evan le'garde

    evan le'garde Vaping Master ECF Veteran

    Apr 3, 2013
    The absolute best way, and only way to study the long term effects of vaping is to study vaping forums.

    Mike
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Funny Funny x 3
  13. PatVapes

    PatVapes Super Member

    Dec 11, 2018
    Lima, Peru
    I agree with the fact that the reporting of these studies is not exactly the best. Considering the attention span of most people nowadays, they see the title and assume something that may or may not be true. It gets worse when there are doctors and science channels on YouTube reporting these things.

    Now, they’re clinging on the idea of “hundreds of lung illness cases have been detected and linked to vaping” but there are so many people out there that have presented no issues with vaping through years of having picked up the habit. So I think all of that should be researched. It’s extremely interesting to me.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  14. evan le'garde

    evan le'garde Vaping Master ECF Veteran

    Apr 3, 2013
    Right !. It's no good asking people who don't vape what they think of vaping. Come and ask those people who've been vaping endlessly for years about their health. Hundreds of thousands visit these forums but i don't see any government funded studies taking place in this hive of vaping activity. They must be out of their minds. Or just plain stupid !. Like this recent activity regarding a flavour ban in North America. They should come here and ask us !.

    It's always seems to be the way that it's us asking them to reconsider regulations. But they never actually come to places like this where all the vapers hang out and actually find out first hand what it's all about from the real guinea-pigs, mice, whatever !.
     
    • Like Like x 4
    • Love Love x 1
  15. Rossum

    Rossum Surly Curmudgeon Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Supporting member
    Dec 14, 2013
    NE FL
    I believe this is largely a question of what a person vapes. PG, VG, nicotine, and appropriate food flavorings seem to be pretty much problem free.

    Most of those with lung damage have admitted to vaping THC products, and the common thread with those products causing problems seems to be an inappropriate "thickener".
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
    • Like Like x 1
  16. DarrenMG

    DarrenMG Senior Member ECF Veteran

    May 9, 2015
    An acquaintance of mine lost their cat because they carelessly left chocolate out, and they weren't aware cats should not eat chocolate. Apparently the toxic agent in chocolate is theobromine. It is poisonous to us too, but our bodies are larger, and we are able to process the small amount of theobromine. Poisons in foods are common. I could bring up the lima bean story as an example, but you all know what I am getting at...

    I accept that e-liquid may contain trace amounts of poisonous chemicals. Vaping is still about harm reduction, not 100% harm removal. Dose of those poisons and the effect on mice doesn't necessarily tell us much about the impact on humans.

    p.s. I suggest we ban chocolate because it contains a poisonous chemical. Kidding! Really, kidding!
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Informative Informative x 1
  17. Sloth Tonight

    Sloth Tonight CF Moderator Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Supporting member
    Jun 25, 2014
    Adirondacks
    You'd better be kidding :-x

    In all seriousness, you're spot on.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  18. stols001

    stols001 Mistress of the Dark Nicotinic Arts Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Supporting member
    May 30, 2017
    Cats too? This must be the only thing cats and dogs have in common.

    But yes, our bodies are BUIILT to handle and process toxins, they really are.

    I smoked for over 20 years and at the end I was at 3 ppd. Other than the last 18 months or so, it really wasn't that unpleasant or even affecting my health that much. I mean it was, but not with the type of insane urgency it did at the end.

    The body is built to handle and filter toxins but the problem becomes when the toxin load becomes overwhelming.

    I genuinely believe that before all the additives, tobacco was less bad for you. My PCP agreed in a way, I told him I couldn't regulate my smoking at all so about 6 years in I began smoking additive free cigarettes. He was like, "That's probably why you aren't dead yet."

    A lot of hazardous things do not actually need to be as hazardous as they are, it's just something about human nature these days where you can only get your hands on a certain seed that requires a very toxic use of pesticides, people deliberately adding "additives" that are addictive, etc.

    It's sort of unfortunate, and yet, life expectancy does keep expanding although I think predictions on that are that it will actually decrease after the boomer generation. I can't remember.

    I read a study on picky eating once and actually it was fairly interesting .Genetically, it makes sense to only try a very small bit of food (it might be poisonous) during hunter gatherer times. So babies are born with the natural tendency to like, not be so into a food until it is presented 3 times (and with no, "You have to take a bite.") I thought it was interesting. Then you have the type of baby I was, I would do things like happily eat the escargots that the rest of the family found disgusting (I was like, 2.)

    I also have a stomach of cast iron, apart from occasionally puking while drinking (and it was occasional) I can count on the fingers of one hand the times I have gotten a stomach bug/food poisoning. I wonder if the two things are connected.

    I would make an excellent Food Taster for the Court-- or maybe not. Because the arsenic in the special dish wouldn't phase me but the king would die. Maybe they need someone weak and pathetic and limp to taste their food and then start vomiting blood, etc.

    Anna
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. AttyPops

    AttyPops Vaping Master ECF Veteran

    Supporting member
    We're inhaling stuff.
    When your standard is "only clean air", then anything "causes damage". Watch:

    "Standing by a roadside with auto exhaust may damage the lungs".
    "Living down-wind of a power plant shows damage to lungs."
    See?

    Dang cars and power plants. Ban them....
    ;)

    Vaping is really about harm reduction for smokers. Us vapers aren't the ones saying it's totally safe. (usually)
    The only thing safe to put in your lungs is clean air. And air has never been 100% clean either (think allergies, viruses, bacteria, mold). So...

    but this part:
    does impart some concerns. It was with PG and VG. But dosage?
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 2
  20. Ceejay0875

    Ceejay0875 Super Member ECF Veteran

    May 24, 2016
    Iron_Stomach.png
     
    • Funny Funny x 3
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice