I'm Getting Worried Now!

ardle1

Sorry to rain on everybody's parade(my own included)but what do you make off this!!http://www.universityherald.com/articles/6213/20131214/ecigs-conventional-cigarettes-smokers-nicotine-toxins-new-york-university.htm

grindle

Eh, it's false? Their source is the Daily Mail and the researcher from NYU who was so badly paraphrased ("may be more harmful" morphed into "cigarettes are safer than ecigs") has no actual study started yet.
He's made a terribly educated or biased-with-malice guess, NYU News paraphrased him, the Daily Mail and some other junky uni-rag added their own faecal sperm to the rotten womb of a "story".

Just because it's on the internet doesn't mean it's true.

Funny how all these...interpretations (?) get news coverage but all of the studies based on science rather than "perhaps" are never heard from unless they've had a manipulative conclusion tacked on.

ardle1

grindle wrote: »

Eh, it's false? Their source is the Daily Mail and the researcher from NYU who was so badly paraphrased ("may be more harmful" morphed into "cigarettes are safer than ecigs") has no actual study started yet.
He's made a terribly educated or biased-with-malice guess, NYU News paraphrased him, the Daily Mail and some other junky uni-rag added their own faecal sperm to the rotten womb of a "story".

Just because it's on the internet doesn't mean it's true.

Funny how all these...interpretations (?) get news coverage but all of the studies based on science rather than "perhaps" are never heard from unless they've had a manipulative conclusion tacked on.

OK, Well as long as your sure!

grindle

Read the articles. Look for the study. Doesn't exist.

The researcher whose quote was twisted said "may" and then goes on to say that he'll be doing a study in the future. Some prick in the college newspaper decided to use that as the basis for an article - "ecigs R daynjeruss cuz me tink dat day R".
No surprise that the Daily Mail would use that as a source.

If a solid study comes out that defines ecigs as a danger you'll see Dr Farsalinos and Dr Siegel telling people about it. Until that happens be sceptical of baseless smear campaigns.

StickyIcky

Ardle answer this for me, where it says...

"Researchers said that due to the 'frequency of puffing' and 'depth of inhalation' e-cigarette smokers absorb higher levels of dangerous chemicals than those who smoke traditional cigarettes.

What are these dangerous chemicals it's talking about?

Here are the list of some of the carcinogenic chemicals in smokes

Arsenic
Benzene
Benzo[a]pyrene
Cadmium
Chromium (Hexavalent)
Formaldehyde
4-(N-Methylnitrosoamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanone (NNK)
Nickel
N'-Nitrosonornicotine (NNN)
Lead (inorganic)
Acetaldehyde
Acrylonitrile
Isoprene
Styrene

Here's a list of the additives in smokes (too long to copy and paste)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_additives_in_cigarettes

Now copy and paste one harmful chemical in nicotine vaporisers ... OR give yourself a hard face palm, then relax and go have a vape.

dePeatrick

Dr Deepak Saxena, associate professor of basic science and craniofacial biology[QUOTE/]
Brilliant.....:D

ardle1

Well lets hope WVO(World Vaping Organisation)off which I have recently became a member, keep on top off scandalous, unfounded articles like this.