Are subohm tanks Safer Than Tobacco Smoking?

The debate on the safety of e-cigarettes has been withstanding for a long time, around half a million people start to switch to vaping last year in Britain.

Comments
  • 3 Comments sorted by Votes Date Added
  • Yes, vaping is far safER than smoking, for smokers and their families.
    The trouble is it's bad for Big Tobacco (they stick citric acid, which is harmful, in their high-nicotine closed systems which are designed to give smokers a bad first impression or keep them dual using with the completely non childproof, and poisonous, death sticks)
    Its bad for state and local governments, at least in the US, who let Big Tobacco bribe them with the MSA payments they've already spent, which is why they're trying to demonize flavored e liquid yet give Big Tobacco's cigalikes, which no one buys for long, a pass)
    It's bad for self proclaimed tobacco control - now trying to be Nicotine Control - and their huge smoker-funded MSA grants. Their stuff works worse than cold turkey quitting - I went onto a QuitNet and checked - and yet is still getting aggressively pushed at smokers, who already know it doesn't work, even when they've never heard of vaping.
    Because it's bad for all these addicts to tobacco money, they are, like any addicts, lying, cheating and stealing to get their fix. I'm starting to believe if everybody keeps on NOT buying cigarettes, the global economy might collapse much sooner, unless necessary changes to mindset are made.
    What will be left standing? Cockroaches, twinkies, and cigarettes. I'm sure once it has driven off the upstart, more effective competition, Big Tobacco will admit their closed systems are deadly, pull them, and keep selling cigarettes.
    Vapeeasies and vape juice running can't be far behind. Just say no to Big Pharma and Big Tobacco. Hold your reps accountable. And find some vaping lobbyists and lawyers. Because that's what we'll have to do.
  •  First, talk about how many people are using vaping to quit, then talk about how false perceptions of harm could prevent smokers from switching, and finish it all up by citing a study that was completely debunked for using flawed methodology within a few weeks of being published that continues to be ignorantly used to propagate the false perceptions of harm the article warns of. 
    If this article is meant to prove the assertions of Deborah Arnott, that ignorance and falsehoods are something worth being concerned about, this article succeeded swimmingly. If it was actually intended to be an informational article however, then it's a massive failure in journalistic principles, ethics and standards.
© 2017 Powered by Aspire