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.
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.
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.