health

WHO sounds alarm on 'harmful' e-cigarettes

11 Comments
By Christophe VOGT

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2021 AFP

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.


11 Comments
Login to comment

WHO would have thunk it?”- Now, that ‘a new form of addiction’ has been both commercially & successfully grown since 2003, WHO decides to now “sound the alarm”?

Once again, please note, it’s AFTER the problem has reached worldwide “pandemic” proportions!

1 ( +3 / -2 )

As with other global issues, after the presumed plan for ‘commercialization & profits’ FIRST, the origin of the problem is identified, yet strangely, not mentioned in the article? (Hint, … it’s an ‘old friend’ of WHO.)

*- “2003 - the 1st commercially successful e-cigarette is created in Beijing, China by Hon Lik, a 52 year old pharmacist, inventor & smoker, who created the device after his father, also a heavy smoker, dies of lung cancer.” - *

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Yes. The 1st U.S. patent applied for 1963 was issued in 1965 to Am. Herbert Gilbert was for a medicinal inhaler and never introduced the idea of using nicotine. Big tobacco companies passed on the tech choosing t wait the patent out to expire, then they would introduce their own products & marketing.

Ahead of their ‘game’, Golden Dragon Holdings, the co. Lik worked for, developed their device & changed its name to “Ruyan”, meaning "like smoke." It’s not clear the extent to which his was a de novo rederivation of the technology and to what extent he was drawing upon. Lik failed to cite much prior art in his patent applications.

Source: https://casaa.org/education/vaping/historical-timeline-of-electronic-cigarettes/

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

This is like the full bingo card of disingenuous anti-vaping arguments to try to get people back on cigarettes for that sweet tax revenue.

A page should be taken from the UK in regards to vaping policy, as they have recognized it as a massive health boon, and embraced it rather than try to force people away from it.

It is easily the most (only) effective way I have quit smoking. I moved from cigarettes to vaping years ago, and my health improved immeasurably. Lungs are as good as before I started smoking, and zero adverse health effects from the habit itself, at least according to my doctors. No desire to ever go back to smoking again.

The U.N. health agency's eighth tobacco report said ENDS manufacturers often target youths with thousands of tantalising flavors -- the document listed 16,000 -- and reassuring statements.

This just in, only kids like things to taste good. Adults want everything to be bland and flavorless apparently and hate the taste of strawberries or mangoes. Please take no heed at the entire section of alcohol stores devoted to things like watermelon vodka with cartoonish labelling, those are totally different and absolutely marketed only to responsible adults.

The U.N. health agency is particularly concerned by people under 20 using e-cigarettes due to the harmful effects of nicotine on brain development.

So continue to not allow under 20s to buy them and target stores that sell them to underaged. Don't punish adults because you have bad regulatory law. I know a lot of people who would probably end up going back to smoking if vaping and similar products were banned. Basically everyone who vapes nicotine always tells people not to start vaping if you aren't addicted to nic already, or to vape 0 mg if you really must.

"Distinguishing the nicotine-containing products from the non-nicotine, or even from some tobacco-containing products, can be almost impossible.

It's...on the bottle. Generally big warning label telling you if it has it, along with the exact measurement of nicotine in the liquid.

Krech said that while the evidence on e-cigarettes was not yet fully conclusive, there was enough evidence to conclude that they were harmful.

What evidence? Are we just guessing here because they don't have conclusive data? For the average adult, nicotine itself is not a particularly harmful stimulant. Not much worse than caffeine. It got a bad reputation for being associated with cigarettes, but itself is not the problem. It is the other substances in cigarettes (which e-cigarettes avoid) that are dangerous. Or are they going to trot out the popcorn lung bit again?

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Just as I know it will come up, to pre-empt the popcorn lung argument.

-Nobody has ever got popcorn lung from vaping, not a single case.

-The amount of exposure to diacetyl required to develop the condition is something that is basically impossible to achieve from vaping alone, unless you have a daytime job in a popcorn factory too.

-Diacetyl is virtually unused in flavours specifically because of the hysteria over it. I make my own liquid and have never needed it for any of my flavours.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Stick to good old traditional tobacco. Or take up smoking weed - way less restrictions on that in many countries

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

They are of course right with those e-cigarettes if those contain too much nicotine. There are other dangers too with those products. On the other side, nicotine might reduce COVID reception and last but not least they also force themselves a similar quasi addictive process in form of still rather unclear vaccination cocktails and their regularly boosting. They are not completely wrong, of course not, but they are too loud and take the mouth a bit too full, don’t they? They’d now better go for that corona sources, that’s something where they can shine and bring merits to the planet, if they like.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

The Who: Won’t get Fooled Again.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Are you quoting Pete Townsend *@Doc 9:21p **or, *Lt. Horatio Caine as he puts on his shades? -

- “ … won’t get fooled again.” -

"govts should adopt appropriate policies to protect their populations.”

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"WHO Doesn't CARE" they should have sounded the alarm on Covid almost 2 years ago

0 ( +0 / -0 )

E-cigs are harmful because they utilize nic which is addictive, period. Nicotine has no qualities whatsoever, all it does is kill. And it's worse when teenagers get hooked on it and they do.

Yet too many cretins keep howling their lies with that 'Reefer Madness' crap. Weed is not addictive, and it doesn't cause cancer, COPD or the other maladies.

It's 2021. Time to go forward, move ahead.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites