Prestigious medical journal endorses vaping as preventative to lung disease

The anti-vaping lobby often pays so-called researchers to publish papers that wrongly imply that vaping can lead to increased risks of respiratory disorders like bronchitis, emphysema, and more recently, COVID-19.  However, these junk science reports almost always fail to perform the same scientific experiments on the smoking of combustible tobacco.  Without a second set of comparative statistics, the reader is often led to believe that vaping is just as dangerous as smoking. 

Fortunately, a prestigious medical journal is now publicly endorsing vaping products as a safer and healthier alternative to conventional cigarettes for those suffering from various breathing disorders.  The UK-based Lung Disease News (LDN) now says that the vapor produced from electronic cigarettes carries much less risk of both respiratory disease and carcinogenic intake compared to that of tobacco smoke, according to their research.  In a peer-reviewed study published in the journal Tobacco Control, the co-authors claim that the carcinogenic potency of e-cig vapor is less than one-percent of that of combustible cigarette smoke.

“The aerosols form a spectrum of cancer potencies spanning five orders of magnitude from uncontaminated air to tobacco smoke. E-cigarette emissions span most of this range with the preponderance of products having potencies<1% of tobacco smoke and falling within two orders of magnitude of a medicinal nicotine inhaler; however, a small minority have much higher potencies.”

Related Article:  Tricks of the trade: How mainstream media spreads disinformation about vaping

In its study entitled, Comparing the cancer potencies of emissions from vapourised nicotine products including e-cigarettes with those of tobacco smoke, scientists from the School of Earth & Environmental Sciences at the University of St Andrews in Scotland measured numerous carcinogen values of aerosols produced by several different brands of vaping devices, heart-not-burn technologies, and traditional cigarettes. 

Comparing vaping, H-n-B technologies, and smoking

Potencies were measured, evaluated, and compared using a conversion procedure which allowed the scientists to express the toxicities and saturations of various carcinogens in a common unit of smoke versus vapor. What the co-authors determined is that vaping has the lowest potencies, smoking has the highest, and heat-not-burn (H-n-B) technologies fall somewhere in the middle.  While higher levels of health risks can evolve from vaping in rare occasions, it is usually the result of improper use of the device by the vaper – not because of the e-liquid or the device itself. 

"These high-risk results tend to be associated with high levels of carbonyls generated when excessive power is delivered to the atomiser coil. Samples of a prototype heat-not-burn device have lower cancer potencies than tobacco smoke by at least one order of magnitude, but higher potencies than most e-cigarettes. Mean lifetime risks decline in the sequence: combustible cigarettes >> heat-not-burn >> e-cigarettes (normal power) ≥ nicotine inhaler.”

Related Article:  New Canadian research confirms teen vaping does not lead to adult smoking

As the Scottish scientists make clear, the term “improper use” usually refers to vaping at temperatures that are so high that they can essentially vaporize the metal coil within the device itself which only increases the vapor’s toxicity levels to abnormally high values.  What they are not making clear for the average, non-scientist reader, however, is that these excessively high temperatures would be simply excruciating for the typical vaper to endure.   

The co-authors have a purpose here.  Knowing that their research is going to be read and shared with academics, researchers, and tobacco control specialists around the world – including those who create and spread falsified vaping disinformation– the Scots are putting these anti-vaping lobbyists on notice.  They are essentially saying, “Gotcha!” 

The Scots know that many of the junk science studies being shared in social and mainstream media are written by research authors-for-hire who intentionally manipulate the data in their findings to please the anti-vaping lobbyists who hire them.  By cranking up the heat of the vaping devices being used in their experiments to astronomical levels, they can produce “findings” that seemly prove that vaping is more dangerous than smoking.

To be clear, this notion is absolutely incorrect.  The UK’s Royal College of Physicians determined in 2016 that vaping is 95 percent less harmful than smoking, and a multitude of public health agencies around the world support and endorse these findings. 

Related Article:  New study suggests vaping CBD as possible treatment for COVID-19

(Images courtesy of Shutterstock)

Leave a comment

Please note, comments must be approved before they are published