Number of listings removed from our directory since 1st November 2019 = 210
|
12 September 2019
|
Scientists Weigh In - Secondhand Vapor is Not Harmful
Vaping did not really hit its optimum when it came around in 2004. The game changed a few years ago with the introduction of user-friendly devices introduced by the industry. However, people who have a different opinion have constantly been attacking the vaping community through their access to mainstream media, and here’s the reason why.
WHY THE VAPING COMMUNITY IS UNDER ATTACK
The strength of the arguments around vaping rests on the effect of secondhand vapor on a non-vaping community. Many have argued that this secondhand vapor is harmful to anyone exposed to it. Other things that were considered include the harmful impact of secondhand vaping on the environment. It is believed that vaping pollutes the air and harms children and young adults, much like smoking does. A study even suggested that people indoors are also not safe from this pollution, as it diffuses deposits of harmful substances into the air.
THE TRUTH ABOUT VAPING
Cigarette smoke consists of 69 carcinogenic chemical compounds out of the 4000 that it is made up of. However, the vapor from vaping is not as harmful as most people think. The substance that is emitted from vaping devices and the pen is called e-liquid. According to peer-reviewed and prominent scientific research, this substance produces nothing harmful, implying that an ePuffer has no adverse effects on non-vapers.
PROOF THAT VAPING DOES NOT POLLUTE AIR INDOORS
Scientific research concluded that there was a 20% increase in the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in a properly ventilated room through the usage of e-cigarettes. It then went on to suggest that there was also an increase in aluminum to about 2.4-fold, excluding other pollutants’ increase. However, the research was conducted with the vape sessions of nine volunteers. This is relatively too small a sample to draw any serious conclusions. The research refused to provide an approach that was taken to come to this conclusion. Details like the substance that their vaping devices contained were also left out of the research. This incomplete information makes it difficult to draw a conclusion as to whether or not to trust the research. Another public study that was conducted came up with a very different conclusion. This research focused on examining the quality of the air of 300 homes around San Diego. The research aimed at contrasting air quality. This was done between homes that are smoke- and vapor-free compared to the ones with smoking and/or a vapor lifestyle. 43 homes were seen to practice indoor vaping, and none of these homes showed an increase in air pollution. This simply proved that vaping outdoors is quite different from vaping indoors. Scientists went further to conclude that non-vaping bystanders are not affected by secondhand vapor. A large number of studies have failed to connect vaping aerosol to harmful health effects.
Scientists also went ahead to inform non-vaping bystanders to avoid being overly concerned about the supposed harmful effects of vaping. This implies that the attack on the vaping community can cease and the non-vaping community has nothing to worry about.
|
|
|
