New Research About Vaping

Check out this article written by Science News: https://www.sciencenews.org/article/vaping-linked-host-new-health-risks

Am I the only one who is getting a bit tired of seeing articles about these "findings" when the researchers in question will not provide documentation about which eliquids were used, which company made the eliquids, which companies supply the ingredients for the eliquids, and the flavorings used?

In my humble opinion, reputable researchers document this information and make it available to their peers and the public. Reputable researchers also do not make generalizations about the effects of a substance unless they have a decent-sized sampling of the substance being examined. It is very rare for "scientists" who research eliquids to be held to the same standards that scientists who research a cure for cancer are. Cancer researchers are derided when they have ten times more documentation and evidence than "eliquid researchers" do.

I also find it offensive that smokers are banned from smoking in public areas because the carcinogens in second-hand smoke is a "public safety" issue; however, vaping is being held to the same standard as smoking, despite research that indicates that second-hand vapor is relatively harmless. I'm sorry, but when did vaping become a "public health" issue? It's socially acceptable to go to a bar and get stinking drunk, despite the public safety and health issues caused by drinking, but it's not okay for me to vape?! Really?

Rant over, thank you for reading.

 

Well you are absolutely right in questioning the methods and source of this research, and you should do so with every piece of information that is out there. There are entire academic institutions dedicated to reviewing data and so ones that are not put through that rigorous test I do not tend to trust, and this would certainly fall into that category. Like you said they leave a lot out when it comes to data collection and other aspects of actual research, so I would press pause on this one.

 

Seems to be totally true. I always wanna see their sources. Otherwise, it's just a bunch of statements. Kind of dogma. Or, maybe, it's just a paid news/research.

 

I absolutely agree! All this research is sketchy in my opinion and there seems to be too many holes in the research that they are publishing. I really feel that the research that is published is very biased.

 

Well, it's not just about the passive effects of vaping to others but its about the discomfort that it may cause by the second hand fumes. Many are allergic, many just treat the fumes as like passive smoking and will definitely not like it.
The research should go on, and they should detail everything to us public which withholding anything with proper sources.

 

Actually, several studies have been performed about that topic. The legitimate studies that are substantiated by evidence show that second hand vape is not a threat to the general public. Here is an example of one legitimate study: http://vapeaboutit.com/scientific-study-proves-second-hand-vapor-is-not-harmful

I cannot dispute the fact that certain scents can cause an allergic reaction. What I will say is that this argument against ecigs is specious. Women and men are allowed to wear copious amounts cologne and perfume in public places without being considered threats to public safety.

 

Vaping isn't anywhere near as harmful as cigarettes and shouldn't be held to the same social stigmas. Sadly it is in the majority of cases and governments are more than happy to ban something if there is even a smidge of information that it causes damage. Messed up world we live in, eh?

 

I can't help but wonder who commissioned these studies in the first place. One thing is certain, it costs money to be able to carry them out, and the results the sponsor wants to see can easily be 'found' amongst the data. As someone who once worked for a very large survey company, I am well aware of how big a part bias plays in getting results. Those with the most to lose by vaping would be the tobacco companies. I am sure it would suit their agenda very well, for vaping to be treated the same way as cigarettes, and therefore become a less attractive option for those hoping to use it as a substitute.

 

I just hear that e-cigs cause problems to your body. Some doctors say that e-cigs can cause bronchitis. So, e-cigs can possible kill you. I guess every drug has risk. I do not believe that it is true. But, sometimes I found myself getting sick when I vape too much. There is a possibility that the rumor is true. That is the news I heard on the web.

 

I would be the last person to step forward and say that vaping is healthy, but very often these studies aren't impartial. they normally have an objective and try to reach it. It's not easy to find a unbiased study that will inform the general public about the effects of vaping. Whether they are beneficial or not.

 

The methods definitely need to be questioned. I'm not naive enough to think that vaping is 100% healthy, but I have a hard believing some of these studies saying vaping will kill you. It just be clearly noted which where they sourced the juices and which types of devices they used. We all know they aren't all created equally.

 

I learned a long time ago that it is extremely difficult to find unbiased opinions about the subject in comparison to smoking. One of the most important questions is not whether or not vaping should be conducted regularly for long periods of time, but rather whether it is the most positive alternative to smoking available. If they don't answer that question, is just undermining an extremely important tool for smokers that are quitting.

 

Exactly, these questions are hardly ever answered, there have been some studies that do say that it's healthier but those tend to be pushed to the side in favor of those that say they don't. I think because there aren't that many people vaping yet they are a easy target.

 

I wouldn't take any research as one to be trusted until after 5 years from now. Right at this moment everybody has an interest and is paying a researcher to say something about e-cigs, however in about 5 years when all the people will realize the point we are moving to, which is the point where people vaping becomes something normal, and smoking will become a prohibited habit (not by law, but it will be looked as something bad). Only then "honest" researchers will come out and do a proper study on this. Until then everybody can say what they want.

 

For any medication to get approved it needs to be tested over a period of 10 years. I think that it's still early days and we will see a lot of articles in favor and against vaping.

 

I don't know about the validity of this study. For instance, they scraped cells from the noses of smokers and vapers, as well as those who don't use both. So they found out that in smokers, about 53 genes were significantly decreased in activity and in vapers, the same 53 genes were decreased in activity with an additional 305 more. I mean, I just cannot understand or comprehend why the result would be like that. Is this even plausible? Here's a link to another study opposing this study's findings:

https://www.newscientist.com/articl...ly-isnt-as-harmful-for-your-cells-as-smoking/

In this study, cells were exposed to either vapour or smoke. The result? Cells exposed in cigarette smoke died within 24 hours of exposure. The cells that were exposed to vapour survived far longer since they were able to expose it every three days, for eight weeks to e-cigarret vapour.

The study is quick to say though that yes, vaping is safer than cigarette smoking but of course, more research needs to be done still to know the long-term effects of vaping.

 

The media on the news does not really matter but people want to laugh more than they want the truth. I see on T.V. Shows that they use insults as a form of comedy. But, that form of comedy is being used too much. I think it is being used too much.

 

I think as people using the products were always going to be skeptical. I don't think these preliminary findings are accurate enough for us to go off of. We need to look at the data compiled 5-10 years down the line to see any real findings. Either way I think most people know that there can be risks involved in partaking in vaping, just like using any other stimulant.