3 ms·

We really need some data about vapers, some of them get way more nicotine than smokers, directly into their lungs, but with less irritation. The real protectiv

We really need some data about vapers, some of them get way more nicotine than smokers, directly into their lungs, but with less irritation. The real protective factor may actually be the constant irritation provided by the smoke, not the nicotine itself. What about Marijuana smokers? Then we need to differentiate between long-time smokers with damaged lungs and short-time smokers with more or less intact lungs. In any case, we need to get over our confirmation bias that smoking is universally bad.

stronglikedan 6y ago
Isn't it pretty much established science, not confirmation bias, that smoking is indeed universally bad? I mean, even if a handful of good things may come from it, it's still overwhelmingly bad for overall health. To be clear, I'm talking about the act of inhaling a combusted substance, smoke, not vapor.
- gridlockd 6y ago
  The fact that there's so much data on the dangers of smoking causes confirmation bias. However, science is never complete. It's not inconceivable that, say, smoking causes some changes that are protective/hormetic in some cases. That doesn't imply it's a worthy tradeoff to be a lifelong smoker, of course. The question is, what are the fact that we aren't trying to find, because it goes completely against our expectations?
intpx 6y ago
The USS Roosevelt data would be an amazing sample set-- vape and snuff use is very prevalent among sailors.
stuntkite 6y ago
My girlfriend and I vape and caught the bug in March. I had no idea the phat cloudz were what saved us. Honestly, neither of us much felt like vaping when the fever was bad. But I had to read this paper twice to make sure it wasn't saying the opposite. This is interesting because the news and politicians have been reporting that smokers and vapers are at risk. I never say any information to back that up, especially vaping. I think I saw one study recently where they concluded that vaping had basically no effect on outcome. I should take a look at that study again if I can find it.
- kerkeslager 6y ago
  > My girlfriend and I vape and caught the bug in March. I had no idea the phat cloudz were what saved us. That is not a conclusion I would draw from this study, or any study I've come across. I do agree, however, that the conclusion that vaping is a risk factor is also not backed up by any literature I've seen.
  - stuntkite 6y ago
    I was being glib about the vaping. Getting sick was awful and honestly I didn't even think about my nicotine addiction for the 14 days we were ill. I definitely didn't draw any conclusions about vaping being good for me. If this hypothesis does turn out to be correct... I just don't even know. God has a sense of humor or something.
    - gridlockd 6y ago
      Out of curiosity, did you have any risk factors such as (pre)diabetes/obesity?
      - stuntkite 6y ago
        No
kerkeslager 6y ago
I've always thought of smoking as a tradeoff: Pros: * Bumming/offering a cigarette is a low-key entrance into social groups, which is a big deal for people with social anxiety like me. * Productivity: nicotine is absolutely the most effective nootripic I've found, and doesn't seem to lose this effect with time like coffee. Cons: * Health: even just nicotine from the patch is associated with heart and vascular issues--other methods of administration have worse effects (snuff seems to be actually the worst, as mouth cancer sets in faster/earlier than lung/throat cancer does from smoking, with similar mortality rates). * Cost. * Addiction. The tradeoff never seemed worth it to me so I've never smoked beyond a cigarette/cigar here and there, but I can totally see why people do it.

stronglikedan 6y ago

Isn't it pretty much established science, not confirmation bias, that smoking is indeed universally bad? I mean, even if a handful of good things may come from it, it's still overwhelmingly bad for overall health. To be clear, I'm talking about the act of inhaling a combusted substance, smoke, not vapor.

gridlockd 6y ago
The fact that there's so much data on the dangers of smoking causes confirmation bias. However, science is never complete. It's not inconceivable that, say, smoking causes some changes that are protective/hormetic in some cases. That doesn't imply it's a worthy tradeoff to be a lifelong smoker, of course. The question is, what are the fact that we aren't trying to find, because it goes completely against our expectations?

intpx 6y ago

The USS Roosevelt data would be an amazing sample set-- vape and snuff use is very prevalent among sailors.

stuntkite 6y ago

My girlfriend and I vape and caught the bug in March. I had no idea the phat cloudz were what saved us. Honestly, neither of us much felt like vaping when the fever was bad. But I had to read this paper twice to make sure it wasn't saying the opposite. This is interesting because the news and politicians have been reporting that smokers and vapers are at risk. I never say any information to back that up, especially vaping. I think I saw one study recently where they concluded that vaping had basically no effect on outcome. I should take a look at that study again if I can find it.

kerkeslager 6y ago
> My girlfriend and I vape and caught the bug in March. I had no idea the phat cloudz were what saved us. That is not a conclusion I would draw from this study, or any study I've come across. I do agree, however, that the conclusion that vaping is a risk factor is also not backed up by any literature I've seen.
- stuntkite 6y ago
  I was being glib about the vaping. Getting sick was awful and honestly I didn't even think about my nicotine addiction for the 14 days we were ill. I definitely didn't draw any conclusions about vaping being good for me. If this hypothesis does turn out to be correct... I just don't even know. God has a sense of humor or something.
  - gridlockd 6y ago
    Out of curiosity, did you have any risk factors such as (pre)diabetes/obesity?
    - stuntkite 6y ago
      No

kerkeslager 6y ago

I've always thought of smoking as a tradeoff: Pros: * Bumming/offering a cigarette is a low-key entrance into social groups, which is a big deal for people with social anxiety like me. * Productivity: nicotine is absolutely the most effective nootripic I've found, and doesn't seem to lose this effect with time like coffee. Cons: * Health: even just nicotine from the patch is associated with heart and vascular issues--other methods of administration have worse effects (snuff seems to be actually the worst, as mouth cancer sets in faster/earlier than lung/throat cancer does from smoking, with similar mortality rates). * Cost. * Addiction. The tradeoff never seemed worth it to me so I've never smoked beyond a cigarette/cigar here and there, but I can totally see why people do it.