Vaping - Popcorn Lung

[COYBL25]

View attachment 15848

lol, what's sad is that some of them actually look like this !

 

[Ashtonian]

Vaping is hardly good for you mate. I'm not going to burn my lads inhaler and give him a toke am I? Theres plenty of stuff that's perfectly fine for you till you burn it

Again mate, Vaping is not burning whatsoever, not a single device uses fire nor has any mechanism to burn anything. No burning involved, so no carcegens released unlike smoking.

 

[Jacko93]

Again mate, Vaping is not burning whatsoever, not a single device uses fire nor has any mechanism to burn anything. No burning involved, so no carcegens released unlike smoking.

Forgive me, heated until boiling point........

 

[Ashtonian]

Forgive me, heated until boiling point........

still not anything proven to be 'harmful' in that, that is the point which seems to go unnoticed.

A very bias article once a month that is paid for negatively, yet all the actual scientific research done by the industry never sees the light of day on it. Diecytal studies were done by vaping companies back in April and a lot of companies who make liquids paid out of their own pockets to verify their own products.

(not aimed at you directly that mate, well not the rest of it lol)

 

[Moomin]

still not anything proven to be 'harmful' in that, that is the point which seems to go unnoticed.

A very bias article once a month that is paid for negatively, yet all the actual scientific research done by the industry never sees the light of day on it. Diecytal studies were done by vaping companies back in April and a lot of companies who make liquids paid out of their own pockets to verify their own products.

(not aimed at you directly that mate, well not the rest of it lol)

Once again, it was a Harvard independent study.

The tobacco companies paid for it own biased tests in the fifties and sixties. The truth is simple, they will hide the true risks and tell lies in the name of profit. They don't care about the damage to the likes of me and you, the executives just want new holiday homes.

They will fight for years and years and prolong court cases hiding the truth so they can get people addicted to there killer drug.

I can't believe people are getting fooled again.

 

[Tubey]

Once again, it was a Harvard independent study.

The tobacco companies paid for it own biased tests in the fifties and sixties. The truth is simple, they will hide the true risks and tell lies in the name of profit. They don't care about the damage to the likes of me and you, the executives just want new holiday homes.

They will fight for years and years and prolong court cases hiding the truth so they can get people addicted to there killer drug.

I can't believe people are getting fooled again.

Yet all they can say is it contains a chemical that is found 100x more in normal cigarettes, and have not linked e-cigarettes to "popcorn lung" in any way whatsoever.

It's a poor study and even poorer journalism on the back of it.

 

[Ashtonian]

Once again, it was a Harvard independent study.

The tobacco companies paid for it own biased tests in the fifties and sixties. The truth is simple, they will hide the true risks and tell lies in the name of profit. They don't care about the damage to the likes of me and you, the executives just want new holiday homes.

They will fight for years and years and prolong court cases hiding the truth so they can get people addicted to there killer drug.

I can't believe people are getting fooled again.

A harvard study only published in the Bro bible and Gizmodo type websites who are essentially paid advertising sites lol

Acrtually a quick google of harvard independant study on the topic of dyacetal produces only the daily mail as the most solid source for the story. Again it is weird how many real news outlets ran with the 95% safer than smoking story not too long ago but only second rate websites are running an 8 month old revelation?

you can keep fighting the case mate but if the Daily Mail is the best carrier of this story then i would call it bull and move on with it.

 

[Ashtonian]

Yet all they can say is it contains a chemical that is found 100x more in normal cigarettes, and have not linked e-cigarettes to "popcorn lung" in any way whatsoever.

It's a poor study and even poorer journalism on the back of it.

If you want proof of it being paid for negative publicity, check out the Bro bible story, it actually finishes with 'you may as well go and smoke, do it with gusto'.

Not blatant subliminal messaging at all....

 

[Tubey]

If you want proof of it being paid for negative publicity, check out the Bro bible story, it actually finishes with 'you may as well go and smoke, do it with gusto'.

Not blatant subliminal messaging at all....

LOL at you thinking I'd ever visit that website. The name alone says it all.

 

[Moomin]

A harvard study only published in the Bro bible and Gizmodo type websites who are essentially paid advertising sites lol

Acrtually a quick google of harvard independant study on the topic of dyacetal produces only the daily mail as the most solid source for the story. Again it is weird how many real news outlets ran with the 95% safer than smoking story not too long ago but only second rate websites are running an 8 month old revelation?

you can keep fighting the case mate but if the Daily Mail is the best carrier of this story then i would call it bull and move on with it.

The Telegraph as well. Liverpool University a critic of the testing done by vaping companies, suppose they are paid off as well. Face it, you are believing the lies of greedy people who don't care about the damage done to human life.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/sci...g-chemical-linked-to-deadly-popcorn-lung.html

 

[graeme2911]

there you go mate.

I know you are taking the mick but another DID YOU KNOW moment, propylene glycerol is half of the e liquid....also used in inhalers?

ecigs don't do the same job but the same stuff that's in a medicine for asthma sufferers is also found in the healthier version of smoking. Mad that.......

I'm no scientist, but isn't this the same argument anti-vaxxers use about there being mercury in some vaccines?

 

[jayden28]

Every month there's something new about how bad vaping is for you,tabbaco companies will do anything but I doubt vaping will kill millions and millions of people a year like cigarettes do.

 

[Blue 1]

I'm no scientist, but isn't this the same argument anti-vaxxers use about there being mercury in some vaccines?

Not entirely.

Anti vaxxers deliberately or otherwise don't differentiate between ethyl mercury and methyl mercury. Ethyl mercury, the one found in some vaccines, passes through the system. Methyl mercury accumulates.

 

[Ashtonian]

The Telegraph as well. Liverpool University a critic of the testing done by vaping companies, suppose they are paid off as well. Face it, you are believing the lies of greedy people who don't care about the damage done to human life.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/sci...g-chemical-linked-to-deadly-popcorn-lung.html

Ok mate, just to pull a few things out of that 'probably' same article from a decent source this time

E-cigarettes use battery-powered cartridges to produce a nicotine hit via inhalable vapor without the tar and other carcinogens in inhaled tobacco smoke.

Well the vast majority of the vaping community do not use e ciggerattes or cartridges of any kind. Does that mean the research does not apply to that? Or is the study and research being done on devices that very few people use to force results through to push an agenda?

Dr Allen and colleagues tested 51 types of flavoured e-cigarettes and liquids sold by leading brands for the presence of diacetyl, acetoin, and 2,3-pentanedione, two related flavouring compounds which may pose a respiratory hazard in the workplace.

So that is pretty much scare mongering, may as well say people who vape in work are going to harm you.

“In addition to containing varying levels of the addictive substance nicotine, they also contain other cancer-causing chemicals, such as formaldehyde,

That is if you burn the coil. If you burn the coil it wont taste nice, in fact there is a massive give away when you are even close to burning the coil. So Therefore if you dont burn then you wont get anything like that getting produced.

but also no mention that the thing they gave up (smoking) has 100 times the level of the substance they are scare mongering. So technically that is proof that e cigs are a much better option than cigarettes as your 'Study' that you bash the things with can only argue something that is 100 times LESS than what they gave up before (along with Carbon diaxide/monoxide/tar/cargegens etc)

 

[Moomin]

Ok mate, just to pull a few things out of that 'probably' same article from a decent source this time

E-cigarettes use battery-powered cartridges to produce a nicotine hit via inhalable vapor without the tar and other carcinogens in inhaled tobacco smoke.

Well the vast majority of the vaping community do not use e ciggerattes or cartridges of any kind. Does that mean the research does not apply to that? Or is the study and research being done on devices that very few people use to force results through to push an agenda?

Dr Allen and colleagues tested 51 types of flavoured e-cigarettes and liquids sold by leading brands for the presence of diacetyl, acetoin, and 2,3-pentanedione, two related flavouring compounds which may pose a respiratory hazard in the workplace.

So that is pretty much scare mongering, may as well say people who vape in work are going to harm you.

“In addition to containing varying levels of the addictive substance nicotine, they also contain other cancer-causing chemicals, such as formaldehyde,

That is if you burn the coil. If you burn the coil it wont taste nice, in fact there is a massive give away when you are even close to burning the coil. So Therefore if you dont burn then you wont get anything like that getting produced.

but also no mention that the thing they gave up (smoking) has 100 times the level of the substance they are scare mongering. So technically that is proof that e cigs are a much better option than cigarettes as your 'Study' that you bash the things with can only argue something that is 100 times LESS than what they gave up before (along with Carbon diaxide/monoxide/tar/cargegens etc)

Wow, you believe the people who want you to use there products so they can profit from you before independent world renowned Universities.

If domestos told you it was safe to drink bleach would you drink it?