Battle Over Ecigarettes Starts To Heat Up
Clamour is growing from medical professionals and governments for full investigation of products and for stricter regulations to be drawn up
Source
E-cigs damage DNA in lab study
Heavy exposure to e-cigarette vapor damages DNA in cells, causing genetic instability that could lead to cancer, a new study found. Even nicotine-free vapor induces damage, indicating that other substances in e-cigs can damage cells. Ref. Source 7k
Local man injured from e-cigarette
A local man is recovering from third degree burns after he says an electronic cigarette exploded in his pocket. Just 24 hours after surgery, he's sharing his story so no one else falls victim to an unexpected explosion. Ref. Source 5a.
I don't smoke at all or have any inclination to get into 'vaping', but my wife used to smoke and used e-cigarettes to quite smoking. I am so inclined that whenever something is new to me, I investigate it to the best of my abilities. In my search, I haven't come across much that would make me think that e-cigarettes are really all the dangerous. At first, the market was a little unregulated and people put nonstandard things in them, which made it more dangerous, but now that it is pretty 'mainstream' it is only a handful of ingredients. I know for consumers it is scary when you see things like propylene glycol and glycerine, but these are not scary additives. They have been well studied by the FDA and are considered 'safe' (Though they are artificial, so they have some side-effects/drawbacks). I see lots of concern over getting teens addicted early, but it comes back to the same old argument of IF teens are going to be smoking anyways, e-cigarettes are much safer (I am not assuming that teens are going to smoke or saying that we should allow them to purchase these). We have to promote awareness that all smoking is bad, inhaling anything except air is bad for your lungs, but if you are going to smoke, smoke e-cigarettes and not regular cigarettes. A similar parallel exist to promoting abstinence. Of course complete avoidance of the problem is the best solution, but is not exactly practical or reasonable. So we need to teach safe practices as well and inform everyone of the relative risks of each choice.
Our world is not black and white. It isn't as simple as smoke and you will get cancer or heart disease or whatever. There is a definite risk, but what about the risk of unmanaged stress? I know my wife picked up smoking mostly because you can get an easy 5 minute break every hour at work with it. It was a chance to be social and not have to deal with customers for 5 minutes. When she quite smoking, she was expected to not take any break except lunch. It is unfair and a difficult thing to deal with. Who's to say which is more damaging in the long-run for each individual person?
I see it like a novelty that will probably wear out at some point. Chewing gum might be easier and you don't need this big object sticking out your mouth. I'm personally uncomfortable having to carry around any kind of apparatus to feed a habit.
Unproven claims run rampant in e-cigarette business
Electronic cigarette makers and sellers are making all kinds of health claims, many of which likely won't stand up to scrutiny under recently announced FDA regulation, a new study has found. Ref. Source 9j.
E-cigarette use among college students: Helpful aid or risky enabler?
Electronic cigarette (E-cigarette) use continues to rise, and current data regarding use of e-cigarettes among college students are needed. The study connects e-cigarette use in colleges to high rates of alcohol consumption and other factors such as: gender, race/ethnicity and traditional cigarettes. The rise of e-cigarettes may be a positive consequence of cigarette smokers who use this product to quit smoking or to avoid the toxicity of traditional cigarettes. However, e-cigarette use does not always reflect an attempt to reduce cigarette smoking and may instead indicate a general propensity to use psychoactive substances, especially among emerging adults. Ref. Source 3n.