More Studies on Formaldehyde, and Vaping. Same Flaw?

[The Vape Space]

Growing so damn tired of having these studies that don't control for some obvious problems, and this information being used to come to really silly conclusions. I went ahead and made this video to put this all in perspective...

 

[Cloudy Peak Vapes]

Haven't watched the video yet, but I will. My dad emailed me this today,

http://www.nbcnews.com/health/cancer/you-vape-high-levels-formaldehyde-hidden-e-cigs-n290826

Sounds very fishy, I started to do some research on PG inhalation not regarding vaping and it seems the article is not accurate, for one if it was significant in it's concentration, we'd be coughing and uncomfortable while vaping.

I wonder where the money came from for the study. That would tell a bit more of the truth.

 

[Cloudy Peak Vapes]

Very good video.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/mbvd/study-finds-e-cigs-produce-more-formaldehyde-than-regular-ci#.vfE1p6reB

Out of curiosity, since he supports vaping and knows the lies being perpetrated, my dad sent the author of this article an email asking about who funded the study, and mentioning the involvement of big tobacco in all of this. He's an attorney, so letters and emails from him tend to elicit a better response than from me. I'll report back if she answers.

 

[nbp]

I suppose that the results for there research are correct.
If I will take my first E-Cig which I received about 7 years ago and try using it with 5v, I guess I will have the same results and probably a burned nose ;-)
They used an old device that should not be used with such high voltage.

 

[BigNasty]

Take one old shitty study and rehash it every 6 months..
Retest a shitty cigalike nichrome cartridge with unknown filler and set it to maximum fuck you until the plastic off gasses, dry burn and it is well on it's way to forming a puddle of carbon.
Pontificate the dangers of retarded study.

 

[The Vape Space]

This New England Journal of Medicine study failed for a couple of reasons.

1) They only compared two findings. Low vs. High. It's like comparing a rare steak, to a burnt steak are then when finding the burnt steak has carcinogens, declaring red meat a carcinogen.

2) They didn't have a control for dry hits. Assuming that their numbers are accurate, taking 6 second pulls, at 5V, for 3-4 minutes is going to result in dry hits. No CE4 can handle that, either the juice is too thick, or the 100%PG juice would evaporate too quickly.

3) They conflated aldehydes with hemiacetals... Which shows a complete lack of understanding of basic organic chemistry.

Bunk Thinking is loved by the Mainstream Media... I mean... the New York Times keeps Paul "Alien Invasion to Save the Economy" Krugman around.

 

[BigNasty]

This New England Journal of Medicine study failed for a couple of reasons.

1) They only compared two findings. Low vs. High. It's like comparing a rare steak, to a burnt steak are then when finding the burnt steak has carcinogens, declaring red meat a carcinogen.

2) They didn't have a control for dry hits. Assuming that their numbers are accurate, taking 6 second pulls, at 5V, for 3-4 minutes is going to result in dry hits. No CE4 can handle that, either the juice is too thick, or the 100%PG juice would evaporate too quickly.

3) They conflated aldehydes with hemiacetals... Which shows a complete lack of understanding of basic organic chemistry.

Bunk Thinking is loved by the Mainstream Media... I mean... the New York Times keeps Paul "Alien Invasion to Save the Economy" Krugman around.

Hell NO atty can survive a 5v 3-4 minute drag. Thermal dynamics be damned.

 

[The Vape Space]

Michael Phelps, Sasha Grey, and Houdini couldn't inhale that long.

But Aquaman. Aquaman could.

 

[Mike H.]

Seems to me another big tobacco failure at an attempt to regain sales..I recently heard on a local station that e cig smokers are 3 times as likely to catch a lung virus...Tis' the time for public media scares as im sure big tobacco has an inside hand with it all.

 

[BigNasty]

Bad science is bad science.
Combined with lazy yellow journalism and you have all sorts of douche baggery.
My mother brought this up with me last night, explained the egg heads used cigalikes for the test and she was like all "stupid bastards, all I need to know!"

 

[nightshard]

There is no bad science just bad people.

 

[Smoky Blue]

thanks @The Vape Space

 

[freemind]

thanks @The Vape Space

I'd wondered where you have been!

Damnit, stick around.

 

[Smoky Blue]

down, freemind

i am still down, and spinning out..

 

[freemind]

down, freemind

i am still down, and spinning out..

Well that just sucks. Hope you are up and running SOON.

 

[Smoky Blue]

by next week.. maybe..

 

[travanx]

1) They only compared two findings. Low vs. High. It's like comparing a rare steak, to a burnt steak are then when finding the burnt steak has carcinogens, declaring red meat a carcinogen.

That's funny I was just using a similar explanation. Except my version was serving the steak while on fire.

I have an engineering degree and have to write reports pretty frequently for my business. I learned how to do this in college. I have a feeling none of these "scientists" or whatever they are are real, as someone who does eventually care will rip these things apart. These studies are full potato. Then it makes me question just how many published studies are fake?

 

[nightshard]

Here's the simpleton version: when you burn stuff it puts out other burned stuff.

 

[4biddenArtist]

 

[5150sick]

This proves how shitty "scientific" journals really are:
http://www.fastcompany.com/3041493/...coa-puffs-was-accepted-by-17-medical-journals

 

[Number3124]

Here's a simple rule to remember: if it tastes burnt don't vape it. Also, here. Have a video.