I realize not everyone cares about vaping, and if you don't, then you need not read. I realize the common negative opinion on e-cigarette users that exists on this forum, and if you wish to comment on that, you should find another place to do so; I don't care if you want to call me a douchebag for using a safer alternative to smoking.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn28723-vaping-really-isnt-as-harmful-for-your-cells-as-smoking
[quote]“E-cigarettes can cause cancer”; “Vaping ‘no better’ than smoking”: headlines last week challenged the idea that electronic cigarettes are safer than conventional cigarettes, after findings emerged that their vapour damaged and killed human cells.
...
Although the study garnered headlines around the world, researchers contacted by New Scientist have criticised it for its inability to properly compare the damage caused by smoke from conventional and electronic cigarettes.
...
To assess what vaping does to human tissue, the researchers exposed cells to vapour from two brands of e-cigarettes every three days for between one to 8 weeks. However, with cigarette smoke they were only able to expose the cells for 24 hours before all the cells died.
Because the cells were able to survive for far longer when exposed to vapour rather than smoke, the main outcome of the study is the opposite of what the media has reported: that cigarette smoke is far more toxic than e-cigarette aerosol, says Konstantinos Farsalinos of the University of Patras in Greece.
[/quote]
Now, if you read into the article it makes sure to say that e-cigarettes [b]are not harmless[/b], however the relative risk between them and analog cigarettes proves them to be a [b]much[/b] better option.
I wanted to post this article in particular because it brings up a very good point about biased headlines and pragmatism. There's a lot of people who equivocate the dangers of e-cigarettes and cigarettes, who find their reasoning in articles such as “E-cigarettes can cause cancer” and “Vaping ‘no better’ than smoking," when those articles don't actually pull a comparison to actual smoking.
[b]The science of the matter proves vaping poses a danger, however a minuscule one comparative to smoking cigarettes.[/b]
-
So is jumping out of a plane with a parachute, doesn't mean it IS safe.
-
As I've heard from many credible sources, an hour of vaping is equivalent to 100 cigarettes.
-
ASAPSCIENCE!
-
we get it it, you vape
-
Doesn't make it any less annoying to have it blown in your face. Ask the asshole who did it to me at the DMV a few months back. Pretty sure he'll think twice before being an inconsiderate dickhead again. Not saying vaping automatically makes you a douchebag, but over half of the people I've met that vape are the same way.
-
Still, it is healthier to just not smoke or vape at all.
-
Be man and dip. Grizzly wintergreen all the way.
-
TL;DR
-
Edited by joibasta: 1/7/2016 2:42:25 PM*Reads title* *Inserts random "You don't say meme"*
-
As long as they don't blow up near me I'm fine with them.
-
Edited by Vicex: 1/7/2016 12:59:41 PM[b]'Relative risk'[/b] There's the catch. Relative risk is just a fancy way of saying, 'the risk associated with it is lower when you take into account massive populations and ignore 'healthy' populations. While they may produce marginally less hazardous effects, when you look at the absolute risk associated with E-cigarettes, it's still quite high.
-
It is better but doesn't mean you can still get infections in your throat and lungs.
-
No shit Sherlock. Doesn't mean vaping isn't bad for you.
-
Still better not to smoke at all
-
Edited by McB82: 1/6/2016 6:01:51 AM//: [b]TRANSLATION: 01 [/b] :// //: [b]THE LANGUAGE THAT IS USED IN OP'S POST COMES FROM A RARE DIALECT KNOW AS RETARDATION[/b]. :// //: [b]IT IS KNOWN TO BE CONTAGIOUS, BUT DUE TO ADVANCEMENTS IN SCIENCE AND MEDICINE THERE IS A WAY TO BE CURED IF INFECTED[/b]. //: [b]UNFORTUNATELY, OP HAS A HIGH COUNT OF RETARDATION CELLS THAT HE IS CONSIDERED AS A "FULL RETARD" [/b]. :// //: [b]PLEASE USE EXTREME CAUTION IN DEALING WITH THESE TYPES OF SCRUBS, BEST COURSE OF ACTION IS TO USE [i][u]EXTREME PREJUDICE[/u] //: END REPORT[/b]. ://
-
Being safer than regular cigarettes isn't exactly an accomplishment. Most things are safer than carcinogenic rolls of tobacco
-
Or you don't smoke anything. Ever.
-
I hear that vaping is a better alternative to actually smoking substances tabacco - related but people are not sure of the results. Like of course we know the effects of long or short term smoking Tabacco products. But do the scientists know the potential of vaping? If so, have they released it to the public? I truly am curious to know. I myself smoke marijuana and have had friends tell me, Vaporizing the Buds is a "cleaner" way to smoke. I truly question this. Please someone post some informative links.
-
Safer=yes Safe=no
-
Edited by Sturm with no Drang: 1/6/2016 2:58:37 AMChemicals not meant to be in the body are just bad altogether, but I can't blame a brudda for lighting up a cig when he needs his fix, y'know?
-
Op is wrong
-
They contain formaldehyde which can kill
-
But they're not as good as real smoke haha(cough)ha(weez)...I'm gonna go sit down
-
Yeah but under certain circumstances e-cigarettes can produce upto 3 times the formaldehyde that a cigarette does (usually when using higher voltages or from a malfunction). In other ways they can still be worse than cigarettes too eg it can be more damaging to your lungs bacterial defences. Basically if you vape for any reason other than quitting smoking you're an idiot.
-
I'll be honest. As a person who does not smoke I don't give a shit. I really don't care what other people do with their bodies.
-
Yeah, but it's still not good for you. Either way, have at it!