Here we take a look at busting myths and debunking junk science about nicotine or products containing nicotine.

ENDS - Cancer Caused by Vaping or Smoke Free Nicotine

See also:

Doctors and Medics Nicotine Misperceptions

Public and Media Nicotine Misperceptions

2016: Truth Article - This Study Is The Last Thing Anti-E-Cig Crusaders Want To See

The Roswell Park findings run counter to what lead author of a University of California, San Diego (UCSD) study, Jessica Wang-Rodriguez, told The Daily Mail.

The study found e-cigs are as effective as conventional cigarettes at delivering nicotine to the user, but e-cig users showed a decreased rate of exposure to specific carcinogens and toxins

The DCNF reported in December that not only were the cells used in the UCSD study “not completely comparable to cells within a living person,” but the dosage was comparable to someone smoking “for hours on end,” so it wasn’t representative of real world e-cig use. Further, the cell cultures already had “squamous cell carcinoma,” meaning the cells already had cancer.

"All this study is highlighting is the fact that exposing already cancerous cells to cigarette smoke, nicotine or vapor may accelerate cell death, but of course, only if you swim in it,” Paul Barnes of Facts Do Matter told The DCNF in December.

Truth Study 2016: Exposure to Nicotine and Selected Toxicants in Cigarette Smokers Who Switched to Electronic Cigarettes: A Longitudinal Within-Subjects Observational Study

After switching from tobacco to e-cigarettes, nicotine exposure remains unchanged, while exposure to selected carcinogens and toxicants is substantially reduced.

Debunked study 2015: Electronic cigarettes induce DNA strand breaks and cell death independently of nicotine in cell lines
Debunked article 2015: E-cigarettes are NO better than regular smoking: Devices can 'cause cancer even when they're nicotine FREE'

ENDS - COVID / EVALI / Respiratory Disease

See Also:

ENDS - Popcorn Lung below

EVALI Page

COVID Page

2020: Truth E-Cigarettes and Respiratory Disease: NO EVIDENCE

The re-analysis by Kenkel and colleagues should prompt the American Journal of Preventive Medicine’s editors to revisit their decision to publish Bhatta and Glantz’s latest study.
Cornell University researchers, led by economics professor Don Kenkel, have published a comprehensive re-analysis of the study "Association of E-Cigarette Use With Respiratory Disease Among Adults: A Longitudinal Analysis", concluding: “We find no evidence that current or former e-cigarette use is associated with respiratory disease.” Their paper on the topic: E-Cigarettes and Respiratory Disease: A Replication, Extension, and Future Directions
Debunked study: Association of E-Cigarette Use With Respiratory Disease Among Adults: A Longitudinal Analysis
Debunked press release: E-Cigarettes Significantly Raise Risk of Chronic Lung Disease, First Long-Term Study Finds

2019: Research Notes Minnesota Smoke-Free Alliance THC Cutting Agents

Research on the products use to cut THC containing liquids that led to the outbreak of EVALI / VALI / THCVALI. This outbreak was falsely blamed on the nicotine vaping industry (ENDS).

2018: Truth Dr. Farsalinos Disputes Wet Lung Linked to Vapor

There is no such thing as a 'wet lung.' This is neither a scientific term nor a medical condition. The case report that was accompanied by a press statement refers to hypersensitivity pneumonitis. This is a condition caused by a form of an allergic reaction that results in an inflammatory response.
Debunked article: Teen develops "wet lung" after vaping for 3 weeks

2016: Truth New Study on E-Cigarettes and Bronchitis: An Example of Scientific Dishonesty and Deception

The rest of the story is that essentially what we have here is an example of scientific dishonesty and apparently intentional deception of the journal readers and the public. For a movement that has devoted so much attention to attacking the tobacco industry for its deception and scientific dishonesty, I believe that we need to adhere to the highest standards of honesty and transparency in our scientific reporting. This is not happening in our reporting of the health effects of vaping, and it is certainly not happening in this study and the dissemination of its results.
Debunked Abstract of: Electronic Cigarette Use and Respiratory Symptoms in Adolescents
Debunked Press Release: E-cigarette use linked to risk of respiratory symptoms among adolescents

ENDS - Exhaled breath (e.g. secondhand vapour) contains toxic chemicals and VOCs

2015: Truth New study proves there is no second-hand vaping: e-cigarette aerosol contains less volatile compounds than normal exhaled breath

Obviously, smokers or vapers do not hold their breath for 20 seconds before exhaling the breath. Thus, the study probably overestimated the absorption rate of VOCs present in cigarette smoke or e-cigarette aerosol.
The results of the study basically showed that indoor air and normal exhaled breath contains more VOCs that the e-cigarette aerosol.

ENDS - Formaldehyde

2017: Truth E-cigarettes emit very high formaldehyde levels only in conditions that are aversive to users: A replication study under verified realistic use conditions

In realistic conditions, formaldehyde in e-cigarettes is lower than cigarette smoke.
High levels of formaldehyde in e-cigarettes are produced in unrealistic (dry puff) conditions and should be avoided in the laboratory setting.

ENDS - Gateway to smoking

2018: Truth Expert Debunks Vaping ‘Gateway’ Myth, Ripping ‘Bad Science In Service Of Bad Theories’

2018: Truth Tobacco Gateway Report Omits Important Information

The Chaffee article emphasizes odds ratios but omits or obscures important contextual information. While teens who try one tobacco product are more likely to try another, the dominant gateway in the PATH survey was from no previous tobacco use to cigarettes.
Debunked Study Association of Noncigarette Tobacco Product Use With Future Cigarette Smoking Among Youth in the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study, 2013-2015

2017: Vaping Study Sinks Claims E-Cigarettes Are Hooking Teens On Tobacco

The hysteria over vaping allegedly serving as a gateway to smoking for teens is unfounded and goes against scientific evidence, according to a new study.

2015: Gateway Effects: Why the Cited Evidence Does Not Support Their Existence for Low-Risk Tobacco Products (and What Evidence Would)

The simple counts of when subjects first tried a cigarette show earlier smoking among those who had tried e-cigarettes as compared to those who never tried e-cigarettes, which by itself is enough to favor the THR interpretation over the gateway interpretation.

ENDS - Heavy Metals

2018: Heavy Metal

Studies like the 2018 one from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health claimed they found substantial levels of toxic heavy metals in eliquid and vapour. The results have then been used as part of overexcited lectures to the media by the likes of the lamentable Bonnie Halpern-Felsher. A study from researchers at West Virginia University pours cold water over the argument by finding that vapers’ blood and urine matches those who neither vape or smoke.

ENDS - Heart Disease

Retraction 2020: Retraction to: Electronic Cigarette Use and Myocardial Infarction Among Adults in the US Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health

Given these issues, the editors are concerned that the study conclusion is unreliable.
The editors hereby retract the article from publication in Journal of the American Heart Association
News items regarding the retraction

USA Today A study claimed vaping doubles risk for heart attacks. It's been retracted for being 'unreliable'

USA Today Study linking vaping to heart attacks muddied amid spat between two tobacco researchers

Vaping 360 Journal Retracts "Unreliable" Glantz Study Tying Vaping to Heart Attacks

Truth 2019: E-cigarette use increases the risk of stroke and heart attack: conclusions that constitute epidemiological malpractice
Dr Farsalinos: “Increasing the risk” means that someone is FIRST exposed to a condition (in this case, exposed to e-cigarette use) and THEN, BECAUSE OF THIS EXPOSURE, he/she develops disease. Both studies CANNOT provide any of this information to substantiate an increased risk. Both are cross-sectional surveys, meaning that they asked participants if they have heart disease and if they use e-cigarettes. The studies provide no information on whether e-cigarette use was initiated before (and how long before) or after the development of disease. What if participants used e-cigarettes after they developed the disease in order to quit smoking?
Truth 2019: Association of Electronic Cigarette Use With Myocardial Infarction: Persistent Uncertainty.
According to their results, MI risk is lower in daily EC users compared with daily TC smokers, although both are worse than nonsmokers. Perhaps this is another message of the study, and TC smokers, if unable or unwilling to quit entirely, should be encouraged to switch to ECs, potentially saving thousands of lives.4 This harm reduction strategy has been embraced successfully in England,5 and we would argue, should be considered more widely
Debunked study: Association Between Electronic Cigarette Use and Myocardial Infarction
Debunked conference abstract: E-cigarettes linked to higher risk of stroke, heart attack, diseased arteries
Debunked Medical Xpress article: E-cigarettes linked to higher risk of stroke, heart attack, diseased arteries

2016: Response to stories suggesting that vaping is as bad for the heart as cigarettes

Professor Peter Hajek: “The study is reporting on a well-known short-term effect of nicotine – stiffening of arteries – that accompanies all types of stimulation. The same effect is generated by watching a thriller or a football match or sitting an exam. Drinking a cup of coffee actually produces a larger response of much longer duration. The key heart health risks of smoking are not caused by nicotine but by other chemicals in tobacco smoke that are not present in e-cigarette vapour.”

ENDS - Multiple Myths

Multi-Year Research Notes Mysterious illnesses and symptoms are often blamed on "vaping"

Using the word "vaping" often makes people assume that it means ENDS and the use of nicotine products. The media, public health, and law makers compound the issue by not being clear on what they're talking about. Very often, these problems are not caused by nicotine products, but the use of drugs in electronic inhalation devices. This research project gives several examples of mystery illnesses and the causes.

2020: Vaping Nicotine Is Far Less Harmful Than Smoking Tobacco

Comments on several misperceptions from a study

2020: 8 Things to know about Ecigaretes

8 Things that you should know, Covers myths around EVALI etc.
Not surprisingly, there are lots of inaccuracies and misconceptions about e-cigarettes and vaping. This blog looks at some of the most common myths and provides the facts.

We read with serious concern the position article by Reynales-Shigematsu et al. about combustion-free nicotine delivery products and public health [1]. The authors not only fail to present a balanced overview of the risk-benefit ratio of these new technologies, but grossly misrepresent the existing evidence and ignore the broad consensus that Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS), Alternative Nicotine Delivery Systems (ANDS), and E-Cigs (electronic cigarettes or vaporizers) use is considerably less harmful than continuation of smoking [2-6]. By placing a greater emphasis on potential risks and disregarding possible benefits the authors fail to consider that ENDS, ANDS and E-Cigs use may represent an opportunity for public health.

2019: Association of E-Cigarette Use With Respiratory Disease Among Adults: A Longitudinal Analysis

2019: vapers beware new study does not show.....

This study is deeply flawed because it fails to consider the most likely explanation for the study findings: that people who use e-cigarettes more likely have a history of more intense smoking than people who do not use e-cigarettes. For example, one study found that while only 21% of adult smokers who did not vape were heavy smokers, 68% of adult smokers who did vape were heavy smokers (or had been heavy smokers).

In this blog, I examine an extraordinary claim by Professor Stanton Glantz of the University of California at San Francisco. Professor Glantz claims that the US public is right to believe that vaping is as harmful as smoking and that science is now catching up with public opinion.

2019: Bloomberg’s Hitjob

2018: Clearing up some myths around e-cigarettes

ENDS - Popcorn Lung

2019: Cancer Research UK: Does vaping cause popcorn lung?

No. There’s no good evidence that e-cigarettes could cause the lung condition called popcorn lung. There’s been no confirmed cases of popcorn lung reported in people who use e-cigarettes.

2019: RE: Vape related "Popcorn Lung" debunked years ago

There is 750x more diacetyl in a pack of cigarettes than there is in a days worth of vaping nicotine fluid, and to date we have no confirmation that smokers are getting popcorn lung.

2015: Medical journal MISPRESENTS a case of hypersensitivity pneumonitis as popcorn lung disease caused by e-cigarette

It was shocking to see a public statement reporting a case of popcorn lung disease in a patient using e-cigarettes. The title of the public release is: “Case report finds 'popcorn lung' in patient using e-cigarettes. Report points to possibility of diacetyl, a flavoring agent in e-cigarettes, to bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome”
The case report is NOT about popcorn lung disease (bronchiolitis obliterans) but about a case of acute hypersensitivity pneumonitis. The article then goes on to explain why it can’t be popcorn lung.
Debunked Case report finds 'popcorn lung' in patient using e-cigarettes
Debunked Case report finds acute hypersensitivity pneumonitis in patient using e-cigarettes

2015 New Study Finds that Average Diacetyl Exposure from Vaping is 750 Times Lower than from Smoking

There's just one minor fact that is omitted completely in the article, as well as in all the media coverage.
That fact: All conventional cigarettes produce tobacco smoke that contains diacetyl, and the levels of diacetyl in cigarettes are a lot higher than those produced by e-cigarettes.

ENDS - Youth

See also Youth Epidemic

2020: Canada takes a wrong turn after a flawed paper induces moral panic about youth vaping and smoking

Nicotine

2015: The Great Nicotine Myth

There are four nicotine myths perpetuated in modern culture that have no basis in fact.

2011: If the data contradict the theory, throw out the data: Nicotine addiction in the 2010 report of the Surgeon General

As a result, the present SG's chapter on nicotine addiction, which purportedly "documents how nicotine compares with heroin and cocaine in its hold on users and its effects on the brain," is remarkably biased and misleading.

THR - Articles

2020: Public Health Experts Outraged by Bloomberg-Funded Biased Study

A number of consumer groups and public health experts, have raised serious concerns about the bias and false claims made by a recent University of Bath study, which explored the Twitter activity around the eighth meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the World Health Organisation (WHO) Framework Convention on Tobacco Control.

Video

Long video with evidence on vaping myths!

Shorter video with less evidence presented, but more common sense!

Bell jar experiment by Public Health England!

To Do list

To do:

https://twitter.com/ChaunceyGardner/status/1300121610448441347

More Information

Click on the category link below for more studies by topic on ENDS and Nicotine.

Myth Busting