Vapes saved me from an early death due to smoking and it bothers me on a personal level when people spout falsehoods about them. And on a civic level when those people are government officials.
People are not “spouting falsehoods.” Read the studies I linked. You weren’t impressed with meta-analysis you found, the studies I show described their methodologies in detail.
Vaping may be better than smoking, but it is not good for you. Nicotine is harmful. Aerosols in your lungs are harmful. These are not really things you can argue with.
You can argue that it is less harmful (which I would agree that the lower temperature and lack of burning plant matter is probably a good thing), but arguing that it is not harmful at all is solidly pseudoscience.
Arguing that there is a conspiracy between the government and scientific researchers to pretend that nicotine is harmful is getting into Qanon territory.
I worked in a middle school, and this kind of “vape is harmless” rhetoric is literally killing children. And yes - middle schoolers are probably getting sketchy carts from China - but a lot of them are hurt by the idea that vape is perfectly safe. (Friend helped on a school district lawsuit against Juul)
Remember how desperately the cigarette industry attacked the science behind the harm caused by smoking - the lies, the paying off doctors? I know you said you won’t click on YouTube links, but Knowing Better has a great video on that history. Do you think the people manufacturing vapes have your best interest at heart, and wouldn’t do the same?
So far, the only sketchy science I’ve seen has been people trying to claim vapes are killing our children. It’s a classic moral hysteria. Every. Single. Case. Of kids being harmed by vapes has been sketchy Chinese shit, which they wouldn’t try to get if you people weren’t so insistent on banning vapes in the US!
I’m arguing that vapes are less harmful than alcohol, fast food, or car exhaust. Less harmful than sitting at a desk all day. Less harmful than any of a thousand things people do daily. This absolute hysteria around vaping needs to end.
And it’s less a conspiracy than a social movement - if you want funding, find vapes to be harmful. If you want your career destroyed, tell the truth. I don’t think there’s a cabal of evil moustache-twirling scientists; I think there’s a very powerful social and financial incentive to come to certain conclusions.
I don’t think the science is sketchy - I’ve linked 4 or 5 studies so far which seem to indicate that nicotine has cancer promoting effects and seem to be in mostly decent journals. (I’m not an oncologist ofc, if you’d like to make some arguments about the impact factors of those journals, that’s usually the last refuge of “the science clearly shows something I don’t like.”) Here’s another:
And yes - we are surrounded by carcinogens. The harm of nicotine is that it facilitates those carcinogenic effects. If you’ll read that article, or the others I’ve linked - that’s what the problem is. Carcinogen + nicotine = increased risk of cancer.
if you want funding, find vapes to be harmful. If you want your career destroyed, tell the truth.
What is more financially incentivized here? Let’s “qui bono” our conspiracy theory.
Do you think that Juul or Phillip Morris or whatever wouldn’t fund studies that said vape is harmless? When we think, who has the money for funding, who makes money from the conception of vape as harmless…
Why exactly do scientists and the government have a “party line” against vapes? Do you not realize that the same arguments you are making now were made about cigarettes?
Edit: diving into that study more:
In some cases, cellular damage from e-cigs was found to be more extensive [my emphasis] than the damage imposed by traditional cigarettes [56]. Comparing the exposure of different bronchial epithelial cell isolates from COPD patients with vaporized JUUL and a reference standard cigarette showed augmented cell cytotoxicity, especially in response to flavored e-cig aerosols and LDH secretion as previously reported [57]. A 2019 study on the airway smooth muscle cells (ASMCs) of COPD patients showed increased secretion of IL8 following e-cigarette exposure, supporting other reports that e-cigarettes lead to increased neutrophilic inflammation in pulmonary tissues [55]. The findings in this study suggest the progression of COPD may be accelerated by e-cigarette use [55]. The pathogenesis of COPD is highly associated with increased inflammation, particularly from macrophages and neutrophils [55]. Of note, as previously mentioned, even the carrier liquid component propylene glycol can negatively affect the airways: Using bronchial epithelial cells and an in vivo sheep model, it was demonstrated that exposure to e-cig aerosol of 100% propylene glycol resulted in increased mucus concentration as relevant to lung disease and COPD [58], Figure 1. The exposure of human airway epithelial cells to e-cig aerosols can increase the secretion of inflammatory cytokines, such as IL6 and IL8. Furthermore, human lung fibroblasts show stress responses and morphological changes upon e-cig exposure, such as an increased secretion of IL8 or even cell death, especially after treatment with cinnamon-flavored e-liquid [59].
Do you think that Juul or Phillip Morris or whatever wouldn’t fund studies that said vape is harmless?
Absolutely! Cigarettes are the money makers. Vapes have been eating into their profits. When vapes are restricted, cigarette usage goes way up.
I’ve linked 4 or 5 studies so far which seem to indicate that nicotine has cancer promoting effects
The problem as I’ve mentioned is these studies will have titles and abstracts that say vapes are more dangerous than fentanyl, but the actual science doesn’t support that conclusion. Typically the study will show that vapes can cause cancer in some way, but completely fail to give any context for how dangerous it is in comparison with other environmental factors. In the worst case, they’ll actually cook the books with insane concentrations of nicotine or outrageous assumptions about vape use. Well I guess the worst case was that one study which literally fabricated data, but that’s an outlier.
Phillip Morris sells vapes. Cigarette companies have been pivoting, because of the false conception that vapes are safe.
The problem as I’ve mentioned is these studies will have titles and abstracts that say vapes are more dangerous than fentanyl, but the actual science doesn’t support that conclusion.
Is this true of any of the six or so studies I’ve linked so far? Most of what I’m pulling isn’t from the abstracts btw.
In the worst case, they’ll actually cook the books with insane concentrations of nicotine or outrageous assumptions about vape use. Well I guess the worst case was that one study which literally fabricated data, but that’s an outlier.
Can you give specific examples of this happening? Name of study, institution?
Is this coming from Joe Rogan or something? Nicotine denialism is wild.
Sorry, I had to take a break from Lemmy. Sometimes the stupid gets overwhelming.
Can you give specific examples of this happening?
Did you not read my two very long and detailed analyses of the various studies the NIH cited to support their vape hysteria statements? It takes a long time to go through any given study with a critical eye (you have to research the context for the data they publish) so I’d prefer not to for the grab bag of studies you linked.
If you insist, I can look over them this weekend. But the issues generally boil down to either lumping cigarettes and vapes together, or taking numbers wildly out of context to arrive at a desired conclusion. I did name and link the specific studies I already reviewed in those two comments. And yes, one of them literally cited “unpunlished private data” ie absolutely nothing, and then drew conclusions from it.
No withdawal - I’m vaping right now.
Vapes saved me from an early death due to smoking and it bothers me on a personal level when people spout falsehoods about them. And on a civic level when those people are government officials.
People are not “spouting falsehoods.” Read the studies I linked. You weren’t impressed with meta-analysis you found, the studies I show described their methodologies in detail.
Vaping may be better than smoking, but it is not good for you. Nicotine is harmful. Aerosols in your lungs are harmful. These are not really things you can argue with.
Sure, I agree. But it’s SO MUCH LESS than tobacco that we should not view them as in the same ballpark.
You can argue that it is less harmful (which I would agree that the lower temperature and lack of burning plant matter is probably a good thing), but arguing that it is not harmful at all is solidly pseudoscience.
Arguing that there is a conspiracy between the government and scientific researchers to pretend that nicotine is harmful is getting into Qanon territory.
I worked in a middle school, and this kind of “vape is harmless” rhetoric is literally killing children. And yes - middle schoolers are probably getting sketchy carts from China - but a lot of them are hurt by the idea that vape is perfectly safe. (Friend helped on a school district lawsuit against Juul)
CDC data from 2020:
Remember how desperately the cigarette industry attacked the science behind the harm caused by smoking - the lies, the paying off doctors? I know you said you won’t click on YouTube links, but Knowing Better has a great video on that history. Do you think the people manufacturing vapes have your best interest at heart, and wouldn’t do the same?
So far, the only sketchy science I’ve seen has been people trying to claim vapes are killing our children. It’s a classic moral hysteria. Every. Single. Case. Of kids being harmed by vapes has been sketchy Chinese shit, which they wouldn’t try to get if you people weren’t so insistent on banning vapes in the US!
I’m arguing that vapes are less harmful than alcohol, fast food, or car exhaust. Less harmful than sitting at a desk all day. Less harmful than any of a thousand things people do daily. This absolute hysteria around vaping needs to end.
And it’s less a conspiracy than a social movement - if you want funding, find vapes to be harmful. If you want your career destroyed, tell the truth. I don’t think there’s a cabal of evil moustache-twirling scientists; I think there’s a very powerful social and financial incentive to come to certain conclusions.
I don’t think the science is sketchy - I’ve linked 4 or 5 studies so far which seem to indicate that nicotine has cancer promoting effects and seem to be in mostly decent journals. (I’m not an oncologist ofc, if you’d like to make some arguments about the impact factors of those journals, that’s usually the last refuge of “the science clearly shows something I don’t like.”) Here’s another:
And yes - we are surrounded by carcinogens. The harm of nicotine is that it facilitates those carcinogenic effects. If you’ll read that article, or the others I’ve linked - that’s what the problem is. Carcinogen + nicotine = increased risk of cancer.
What is more financially incentivized here? Let’s “qui bono” our conspiracy theory.
Do you think that Juul or Phillip Morris or whatever wouldn’t fund studies that said vape is harmless? When we think, who has the money for funding, who makes money from the conception of vape as harmless…
Why exactly do scientists and the government have a “party line” against vapes? Do you not realize that the same arguments you are making now were made about cigarettes?
Edit: diving into that study more:
Absolutely! Cigarettes are the money makers. Vapes have been eating into their profits. When vapes are restricted, cigarette usage goes way up.
The problem as I’ve mentioned is these studies will have titles and abstracts that say vapes are more dangerous than fentanyl, but the actual science doesn’t support that conclusion. Typically the study will show that vapes can cause cancer in some way, but completely fail to give any context for how dangerous it is in comparison with other environmental factors. In the worst case, they’ll actually cook the books with insane concentrations of nicotine or outrageous assumptions about vape use. Well I guess the worst case was that one study which literally fabricated data, but that’s an outlier.
To clarify, you have no evidence of this and this would possibly be considered libel.
Ok, so you are just trolling. Got it. Fuck off.
Phillip Morris sells vapes. Cigarette companies have been pivoting, because of the false conception that vapes are safe.
Is this true of any of the six or so studies I’ve linked so far? Most of what I’m pulling isn’t from the abstracts btw.
Can you give specific examples of this happening? Name of study, institution?
Is this coming from Joe Rogan or something? Nicotine denialism is wild.
Sorry, I had to take a break from Lemmy. Sometimes the stupid gets overwhelming.
Did you not read my two very long and detailed analyses of the various studies the NIH cited to support their vape hysteria statements? It takes a long time to go through any given study with a critical eye (you have to research the context for the data they publish) so I’d prefer not to for the grab bag of studies you linked.
If you insist, I can look over them this weekend. But the issues generally boil down to either lumping cigarettes and vapes together, or taking numbers wildly out of context to arrive at a desired conclusion. I did name and link the specific studies I already reviewed in those two comments. And yes, one of them literally cited “unpunlished private data” ie absolutely nothing, and then drew conclusions from it.