• HikingVet@lemmy.caEnglish
    2·
    1 month ago

    And it was found the study ran the batteries in an unsafe manner, as in no one would use their vape like that because they had to go around the safeties.

    • HollowNaught@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      30 days ago

      This is a blanket statement that doesn’t really mean anything

      1. It is highly unlikely one study would do this (purposefully put their patients in danger)

      2. It is even more unlikely that this study would continue without being retracted

      3. It is unfathomably unlikely that all other studies on the matter would do the same thing and agree on the results

      I guess the biggest problem here is that I never mentioned a specific study, and neither did you.

      If you want a good report on the matter, check out: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; Health and Medicine Division; Board on Population Health and Public Health Practice; Committee on the Review of the Health Effects of Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems; Eaton DL, Kwan LY, Stratton K, editors. Public Health Consequences of E-Cigarettes. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2018 Jan 23. 5, Toxicology of E-Cigarette Constituents. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK507184/

      An interesting exert from it is the following:

      Compounds not listed on labels also have been identified in e-liquids. Several hazardous compounds have been found in liquids and in the heated aerosol produced by e-cigarettes, including formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, and acrolein, which are known carcinogenic toxicants.

      Edit: ah yes, the classic “I can’t think of any way to rebuke what they said so I’m just going to downvote them because I can’t add anything meaningful to the discussion, but I’m still convinced I’m right”