Health Related Facts About Electronic Cigarettes

Very sad news. However, one must keep in mind that vaping is a Risk Reduction tool, not Risk Elimination. There are risks involved in vaping, but so far shown to be far lees than smoking.

There will always be sensitivities and allergies, but this affects a very small minority of the population.

If vaping in its entirety were to be banned because of this low level people presenting with adverse reactions, they might as well ban all medication as all medication carries sensitivity and allergy warnings.
We have to be careful to not renounce every negative report just because we support vaping. Who's to say they're not on to something? I just wish the media would stop reporting every single negative research.

I have stopped reading every article. It just makes me angry and sad of the whole corruption of the whole media. Not saying that they are bought or anything. But the journalists are distorting the truth just to make their click quota for the month. The more people who read their articles, the better it looks for the bosses. Regardless of the contents.
I have been vaping now for 7 years. I have to have a pretty full on medical for my job every 2 years. The last one was last month. Im 43 years old. Resting heart rate 47, cholesterol 4.2, blood sugar 2.8, blood pressure 117/75. Doc says I should hit triple digits lol.

I train a few days a week and generally try to eat fairly healthy. Never cough or short of breath.

It will take a lot to convince me that vaping is in any way comparable to smoking cigarettes as far as health goes.
We have to be careful to not renounce every negative report just because we support vaping. Who's to say they're not on to something? I just wish the media would stop reporting every single negative research.
I agree @Hooked , and with @Adephi and @Tai as well, we know it’s not 100% safe. Even the Specialist Physician and Neurologist could not fault me vaping while hospitalized, after hourly checks vaping one day and not the next. No definitive difference in vitals detected, so both happy. Went from not being able to climb 14 stairs without resting half way up, to 87% lung capacity, almost same as “ normal “ person, although my lungs are “older” than me due to smoking.

What gets me however is the following quotes:
  • from "very preliminary studies" , (understandable, but speculation then)
  • a "very small sample size", (could be)
  • while the cholesterol study couldn't draw a direct cause-and-effect relationship. (So utter speculation)
  • It's an association, but you can't say which is coming first," (So utter speculation)
If it’s not been proven to be so, why start of with a headline like this article has, it’s pure speculation. It just seems to me that every doctor on this planet now wants to be in the news and linked with how bad vaping is, and I cringe because of some of the statements made. Heck, just read the info sheet on some of the pills that are prescribed if you want a sleepless night, but at least that is factual, at least I hope so.

I’m starting to also skip these articles, never seen so many supposed intellectuals shovel so much sh1t in such a short time, and some/most of them are clueless on the subject.
Comparing the traditional cigarette, Vaping is Healthy. that is sensible.
A Comprehensive Analysis of Nicotine Product Use During Pregnancy


Hey Vapers! I recently came across a fascinating study that delves deep into the effects of using electronic cigarettes (EC) and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) during late pregnancy. Now, I know this might not be the most thrilling topic, but trust me, the findings are worth exploring.

Cotinine Levels:

Let's kick things off with salivary cotinine levels. Abstainers using EC at the end of pregnancy experienced a notable 45% reduction in cotinine levels compared to baseline. On the flip side, dual users (smokers using nicotine products) saw a 19% increase, and reducers (those cutting down on cigarettes) using nicotine products at EOP showed a 9.8% increase. Unexpected, right? It's got me curious about the intricacies of nicotine metabolism during pregnancy.

Birth Weight:

Now, onto the baby stuff. Birth weight is a critical factor, and here's the scoop: Infants born to abstainers regularly using nicotine had a higher birth weight than smokers, and no different from abstainers not using nicotine. Dual users didn't differ from smokers. So, is there a sweet spot for nicotine use during pregnancy? The study seems to suggest it might not be as straightforward as we think.

Pregnancy Outcomes:

Now, let's talk about potential risks. The study suggests no major risks associated with EC and NRT use during late pregnancy. No significant differences in adverse maternal and pregnancy outcomes between nicotine product users and non-users were observed. That's reassuring, but it's essential to stay critical and await more research on the topic.

Respiratory Symphony:

Switching gears to respiratory health, EC users reported better outcomes for cough and phlegm compared to non-users. Could it be that the propylene glycol and glycerine in EC aerosols are doing wonders for bacterial infections? This finding sparks my interest, and it might open avenues for further investigation.

Relapse Rates:

Finally, let's touch on the issue of relapse. For those who managed a 4-week abstinence from smoking, relapse rates at 6 months were quite similar, whether they used EC, NRT, or nothing at all. This piques my curiosity about the long-term impact of post-cessation EC use.


In conclusion, this study provides a comprehensive look at the intricate dance between nicotine product use and pregnancy outcomes. While it hints at some positive aspects, the non-randomized nature of the study calls for cautious interpretation. There's still much to uncover, and as the vaping community, we should stay tuned for more research on this intriguing subject. Stay informed, stay curious, and let's keep the conversation going!