A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.
dart board;; science bs
rule #1: be kind
In other news, ground breaking research comcludes 2+2=4.
Fun fact:
Your lungs are designed to breathe AIR.
Not random chemicals from a Chinese plant?
Basically, breathing in any kind of particulates is bad for you, and very fine particles (like smoke/vapor) can pass through cell walls and interact with your proteins resulting in transcription errors during cellular reproduction. For instance, asbestos fibers can tangle with and damage chromosomes [2]. The more often you do it, and the more volume you expose your lung tissue to, the higher the odds that something will go catastrophically wrong.
Hmm, the link to the study in the article doesn't work, so I can't read it (or check who paid for it), but it sounds like it only says that there's a chance it might cause lung cancer, it doesn't say the rate. Also:
“We’ve always assumed that vapes are safer than cigarettes, but you know, what we’re showing is that they might not be safe after all. We have no conclusive way in which to get people off the vapes.
“So in smoking, we’ve got ways in nicotine gum, various drugs that we can give people to stop them from smoking. The evidence regarding people stopping vaping is very inconclusive.”
But nicotine gums and the like also work for vaping, it's still nicotine in the end
I will add that this study looked at biological markers of inflammation and so on with cells exposed to vape vapor. If you are looking at it and saying "looks like there is activity, so maybe there is harm, more likely than not" but not saying anything about how much harm then it is not very useful for making choices. Sure, it is not without some risk, but a quantified risk assessment would say that based on the current best evidence it is likely not anywhere near as bad as smoking and it is easier to taper nicotine out if you want to do that.
From a public health/harm reduction perspective vapes may be a useful tool if used correctly, or a terrible additional harm with increased addictiveness and known dangerous chemicals, such as the popcorn lung issues. We need rational science and appropriate regulation, not panic and bizarre policies.
I mean obviously, inhaling nicotine can't be healthy or neutral for you... How does it compare to real cigarettes? 100x less bad? oh ok
You sure about that 100x?
I like it when people preach these conclusions. X is 100x less damaging than y so I will use x 100 more! With cigarettes now you have to go outside smoke a few and go back in. With vapes just suck on. Not to mention the new vaping liquids with the nicotine salts that are so much more addictive than nicotine from a regular cigarette.
There was a brief moment when I thought nicotine will die out but then somehow we now have bubblegum flavoured disposable vaping pens littered all over. At least we got rid of the plastic straws. Fucking twats!
But...is it the vaping or the nicotine? Wouldn't take either but am curious
Since vaping has been around since 2006, we should have seen a whole lot of such cases, if it's likely.
It takes over 25 years to see cancer effects of smoking.
But any source of inflammation is an increased risk of cancer.
Lol, take a look at the timeline for cigarettes. The time between something causing harm and someone putting together the statistics to prove that it does is not that short. 2006 was like yesterday. Kids that started vaping as children in 2006 aren't even old enough for a midlife crisis yet.
It's a matter of how much attention was put on the matter before and after
Actual researches could've existed for a while or were left stagnant prior to the current trend, which attracted a fresh group of curious minds to continue where the last left off.