Tangled Metal wrote:As I said it is early days in proving this link conclusively to one particular thing. At the moment there is a proven link to vaping in a number of cases across several states. Other cases are also being investigated. The other issue is the link to vaping hasn't fixed what in the vaping is causing it. The reason is they haven't had samples of what those saturn proven links have vaped in enough cases yet.
The link is a fact just not what is the chemical that's causing the disease. In some ways it's like tobacco but the difference is that tobacco is basically similar in terms of what chemicals it introduces to your body. Vaping products are more varied.
I always thought that the history of tobacco should have been thought about when vaping first got developed for pleasure use. They should have treated every product produced and sold for vaping as a drug. The manufacturer only being allowed to produce and sell once all clinical trials prove it is safe. Instead we've got a potential tobacco situation.
The BHF report, and the experience of myself and many others, shows that vaping has been a crucial help in giving up smoking.
If we had waited, presumably for many years, for the results of tests, I think there would have been a net reduction in public health.
J. Adams' book Risk has a black cover which represents all the possible carcinogens we have introduced. On it there is a centimetre square representing those which have been tested for carcinogenicity. A tiny white dot represents those found carcinogenic.
The point is that if we demand certainty in our attempt to eliminate risk, we will get nowhere.
The Daily Mail crusade to identify all the things which cause cancer and all those which cure it is justly laughed at.