I went from smoking a pack a week, which was very likely to give me lung cancer at some point, to vaping nicotine. The latter is very unlikely to give one lung cancer and there have been no reported cases of lung cancer linked solely to vaping.
Furthermore, the whole debacle with THC vaping juice containing a vitamin E acetate that resulted in several deaths was reported in an absolutely disgusting manner. THC and vitamin E acetate were rarely mentioned in these reports. It was usually reported as "vaping mysteriously causing deaths" and even associated with companies like Juul who don't deal with THC at all.
The irony that we've gone from "Reefer Madness" to "Nicotine Vaping Madness" when black market THC pods were straight up killing people is so unfortunate.
Even NPR reported incredibly questionably on this.
Full disclosure - I don't think kids should be vaping or smoking, but there is no proof that vaping nicotine causes anywhere near as much damage as smoking cigarettes. I also have no problem with smoking marijuana in moderation (and perhaps less so for developing minds), but won't be touching any THC vape pods until it's clear that no one is using Vitamin E acetate in their juice.
The article directly contradicts this statement and says it's a myth (number 5).
>Our latest report found no evidence so far to support the concern that e-cigarettes are a route into smoking among young people. UK surveys show that young people are experimenting with e-cigarettes, but regular use is rare and confined almost entirely to those who already smoke. Meanwhile, smoking rates among young people in the UK continue to decline.
There are some intertwingled effects where increased vape use (and decreased smoker population) might be contributing to the unfashionability of smoking, both among teenagers and in society at large.
Perhaps we could compare teenage smoking rates in countries where e-cigarettes are banned / unavailable versus countries where they are available. I don't have this data or any studies to point to, but I would be interested to know more.
Having said that, the concept does seem very strange to me as someone who used to smoke and switched to vaping because it's better in every way. It tastes better (with so much more variety in flavors), it's not as harsh on your throat and it doesn't leave an embarrassing odor on your body that non-smokers will judge you for.
The only reasonable conclusion I personally could come to is that people are more likely to switch from smoking to vaping and very rarely the other way around.
Again, this isn't scientific. Also, kids shouldn't vape or smoke. Period.
_But_, if they do vape and get addicted to nicotine at a young age, I personally find it preposterous that they would switch to cigarettes for their nicotine in large numbers.
Maybe safer in a sense that normal bullets are safer to get shot with than depleted uranium rounds...
Even tobacco chewing is associated with (oral) cancer. Lower rates than smoking and lung cancer, but still. Could use some data on pure nicotine.
That's not the case in the US where a bunch of non smokers, often young people, started vaping.
All case mortality is worse in nicotine users.
I've seen some strange reactions from family about my vaping (which I've used to cut down smoking significantly). The hypocrisy award goes to my sister claiming it was dangerous and targeted at kids (due to the flavors), she said this while downing an alcopop drink and running one of those essential oil vapour machines in the house.
If you have a large population then any small risk means harm will be caused to a small number of people.
If people who start vaping are ex smokers we can balance that tiny risk against the huge benefits of smoking cessation.
We can't do that same balancing for young non smokers who start vaping, so from a public health point of view we'd want to avoid it.
For instance - no kids shouldn't vape nicotine.
But parents also shouldn't be misinformed and think their kids could end up in the hospital and die after only a few weeks of vaping because they saw a headline about how vaping is killing people which conveniently leave out the fact that this was only a problem with black market THC vape juice.
Some more information here: https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2019/09/27/7651511...
They get them in bulk for stupid cheap, often with various names like Dank Vapes (which actually is a real company but IIRC they passed someones pesticide lab test but were still labeled low quality) or whatever else you can imagine, there's a /r/fakecartridges subreddit. Edit: I should mention, Dank Vapes is one of the most common counterfeit brands to buy from these wholesalers I mentioned. That's an immediate red flag on a cart.
So.. at this point I just wouldn't trust any carts unless you're buying them from a REGULATED shop and they're a well known brand or making them yourself. I had no idea CA/CO and I assume WA allowed unregulated/unlicensed stores or items to be sold but that's also a thing.
They'll can contain stuff like pg (propylene glycol), k2, pesticides, vitamin-e which damages your lungs, etc and who knows what else, their goal is usually to cut it down to a smooth moving and clear gold THC oil. I've seen some of these go through basically an arms race where dealers want you to keep coming back so they spike them with stuff that gets you more "high" - k2, etc. You can basically drive through any major downtown and see the effects of people on k2 "spice" which is a generic term now because the original ingredient, JWH-018 was banned in the USA a few years ago so now even "k2" is some umbrella term for just random chemicals you're inhaling to get tossed. Lots of addicts are using this stuff and when you see one passed out and covered in puke while going to lunch downtown often they've smoked some random "k2" variant. It used to be a somewhat decent chemical for people who didn't want to pop drug tests (Military, etc), it was literally a synthetic cannabinoid. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JWH-018
People have been flocking to use carts instead of flower because they're just super easy to deal with. You can smoke them just about anywhere, bars, bathrooms, etc and most people wouldn't even notice.
Hopefully this isn't a scary level of detail. Anyone who is doing this stuff already knows the process, hopefully this educates people who are STILL buying these random cartridges and they stop buying them. Do NOT buy what you don't know.
edit: There are people who make legit carts at home, I don't want to sound like nobody does that.
"Vaping changes oral microbiome, increasing risk for infection" https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-02-vaping-oral-microbiom...
"Vapers show chemical changes in their genome linked to cancer" https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-02-vapers-chemical-genom...
I wonder if tobacco companies are behind most of the misinformation about vaping. While I'm sure most if not all of them have e-cigarette product lines, the margins have to be terrible compared actual cigarettes. Folks into vaping aren't buying their nicotine and flavors from these companies.
There are two better places to look: the pharma industry and their collection of minimally-successful smoking cessation products; and governments that are looking at enormous revenue loss, especially those that have already spent funds from the Master Settlement Agreement. (It may be worth noting, as well, that the loudest anti-smoking orgs are also getting their funding from the MSA. Don't get me wrong, I'd like to see combustible tobacco disappear, but there are people of the like of Stanton Glantz who've rather enjoyed the funding, and who have demonstrably lied in their opposition to vaping.)
I'm thinking of organizations like Truth, D.A.R.E., that sort of thing.
That's all a bit conspiratorial though and I have no evidence to support it.
But of course, although snus is a credible safer alternative to cigarettes, it is banned in every other EU country while cigarettes remain completely legal.
Swedish Snus is cold-cured, while other dip is heat-cured. It is well established that partial combustion of organic matter creates a bunch of different carcinogens. With cigarettes, you are inhaling partial combustion products from plant matter that has already undergone partial combustion once, and you have astronomical cancer risk. With dip, you are putting partially combusted plant matter in your mouth and have quite high cancer risks. With swedish snus, you are putting zero partial combustion, and no discernible cancer risk.
I think the evidence regarding swedish snus shows that it is far less carcinogenic than traditionally-cured oral tobacco, but still significantly carcinogenic. In particular, swedish snus has very little in the way of nitrosamines , a major carcinogenic element of heat-cured tobacco products.
RE: harmfulness of nicotine, my impression was that it was a little more harmful to the heart than caffeine. I suppose this would depend on dosage, which is difficult to compare.
I recommend reading it, it's very informative!
In Sweden it used to say "causes cancer" on the tin like it does on cigarettes. But the government removed the warning and now it just carries a nonspecific "harmful to health" warning. I guess that means that there wasn't enough proof that it actually causes cancer. But of course, future research might prove again that it does.
This is entirely not true in the US though, right? Curious how that can be so different.
To clarify - I mean that perhaps British young people that would ever experiment e-cigarettes are already experimenting with cigarettes, whereas American young people are less inclined to (I think the legal age is mostly higher, for a start?) and so the intersection with e-cigarette users has a smaller, and different, starting point.
I doubt that statistic and would like to see the survey they referred to.
I'm sure there will be more studies about what is safe. But I don't want to be a participant in the study.
Vapor is not smoke. Full stop.
Furthermore, this very article dispells the misconception that second hand vaping is an issue.
Apologies if you're just merely presenting your views on a related subject, but based on the context, it does seem you're mistakenly equating second hand smoke with second hand vapor.
(Sorry, this is an Asimov reference)
The problem is the young cohort. I guess if we let vape companies sell Disney branded pink princess vape kits, we might keep kids out of smoking, and so this really is a blip and we can continue our black-humour approach to public health and end-of-life statistics.
It is obviously impossible to prove that this played a role. But anecdotally, I know many very rational people who are surprisingly antivaping -- because kids.