Some of the LinkedIn Responses are direct and on-point, and also hilariously/depressingly based depending on how you look at it:

EDIT: In hindsight, I think I should’ve looked into posting this in a different community… It’s closer to a silly “innovation”… soo… is this considered FUD? I also don’t support smoking or vaping, especially among kids. Original title had “privacy-violating” before the “solution”.

  • @Dasus
    2•14 days ago

    Ah, finally, there’s actual studies showing actual dangers, and not just manufactured bullshit from the cases where bad regulation lead to people vaping acetate E? Can you please link me those studies so I can use link them forwards?

      • @Dasus
        1•14 days ago

        Not readable from EU unless I decide my privacy and data don’t matter at all, which I won’t be doing.

          • @Dasus
            3•14 days ago

            Thanks.

            But again, that’s mostly about the flavourings, and the flavourings found specifically in US markets. So that’s more like “the US regulatory framework needs work” and less “vaping is dangerous”.

            Taking a hit from a vape that has no flavourings or nicotine is essentially exactly the same as taking a breath on a dancefloor in a club when the fog-machine is blowing clouds. Literally the same process, just nearer your mouth and smaller.

            That article even says

            *“While there’s little research on the side effects of vaping CBD, some general side effects — which tend to be mild — of CBD use include: irritability, fatigue, nausea and diarrhea.”

            And that’s pretty ridiculous.

      • @Dasus
        3•14 days ago

        Ugh, that’s no good! It doesn’t say what you think it does. It shows that they are safe, not that they are harmful.

        For this study the team included 30 youths aged between 21 and 30 years between 2015 and 2017. They did not have a history of traditional smoking or e-cigarettes.

        ^ Small sampling.

        The participants were divided into two groups – one of the groups was a control group while the other was asked to use e-cigarettes at least twice a day taking 20 puffs during an hour at one time. To measure the puff count, the refills given to the users had LED screens with a puff counter. The e-cigarette refills used contained 50% propylene glycol (PG) and 50% vegetable glycerine (VG) and no nicotine or flavours. The study duration was for one month.

        For all the participants, a bronchoscopy was performed at the start of the study and again five weeks after. The lung tissues, bronchi and the lung health were recorded at these sessions. The team wrote, “Inflammatory cell counts and cytokines were determined in bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) fluids. Genome-wide expression, microRNA, and mRNA were determined from bronchial epithelial cells.”

        Results revealed that there was no significant difference in levels of inflammatory cells among the e-cigarette users and the control group.

        No difference in between the control group and the vapers?

        So I don’t know if you’ve mistakenly been sharing that, but it supports the opposite of what I gather is your view on the matter. I know it might not seem like that if you only read the headline, but I tend to actually read the articles and studies I link myself. You know, to avoid awkward things like this.