As far as I can tell, the videos encourage smokers unwilling to stop, to vape instead. " Two planned videos on the topic of tobacco harm reduction (THR), the practice of delivering nicotine in safer ways through lower-risk products such as e-cigarettes and smokeless tobacco....The videos would show why THR is an answer to combustible tob…
As far as I can tell, the videos encourage smokers unwilling to stop, to vape instead. " Two planned videos on the topic of tobacco harm reduction (THR), the practice of delivering nicotine in safer ways through lower-risk products such as e-cigarettes and smokeless tobacco....The videos would show why THR is an answer to combustible tobacco (aka cigarettes), for people unable or unwilling to quit smoking using FDA-approved cessation tools, such as nicotine patch or gum." Unless my command of the english language is somehow deficient, THR being an "answer" to smokers not willing to use FDA approved cessation tools, means the would have to start vaping. Maybe you can derive a different meaning from that statement. Physicians making videos to tell people to vape instead of smoke seems ethically tenuous, especially in light of the lack data on the long term effects of vaping.
I take it you're now admitting that the videos encourage people that don't vape to vape. Congrats on that. Doctors used to recommend people smoke before they understood the long term consequences of that. So yes, it is ethically tenuous for them to recommend vaping without understanding the long term consequences. Really not that hard a concept.
The videos do not, as far as I am aware, recommend people already using nicotine to start vaping.
All the bench stuff amounts to biological plausibility. I'll suggest something else biologically plausible: Not inhaling smoke is hella better for you than inhaling smoke.
Trying to understand this. Do you consider smokers as "people using nicotine" or not? The videos encourage smokers to vape instead of smoke. You are making some weird distinction if you are saying smokers are not nicotine users. Unless you don't understand what smoking is? Regardless, no one knows that vaping is less harmful than cigarettes in the long term. They may be worse. We need real studies, not anecdotes.
Given the sequence of this exchange I honestly have no idea what you are trying to say. Did someone claim that vaping involved inhaling smoke? You seem to think vaping is safer than smoking despite there not being any long-term data to support this. I don't accept this as we know there are significant problems that can occur in some people that vape, and there is no clear explanation. Not all people that smoke get cancer or COPD. We don't even clearly understand why that is. Telling one of those people to vape instead of smoke, may be causing more harm if they are susceptible to a vaping injury. The point is WE DON"T KNOW. So pretending like there is total harm reduction from vaping with the current data is not unlike the doctors in the 50's that supported smoking for anxiety or weight loss or whatever.
As far as I can tell, the videos encourage smokers unwilling to stop, to vape instead. " Two planned videos on the topic of tobacco harm reduction (THR), the practice of delivering nicotine in safer ways through lower-risk products such as e-cigarettes and smokeless tobacco....The videos would show why THR is an answer to combustible tobacco (aka cigarettes), for people unable or unwilling to quit smoking using FDA-approved cessation tools, such as nicotine patch or gum." Unless my command of the english language is somehow deficient, THR being an "answer" to smokers not willing to use FDA approved cessation tools, means the would have to start vaping. Maybe you can derive a different meaning from that statement. Physicians making videos to tell people to vape instead of smoke seems ethically tenuous, especially in light of the lack data on the long term effects of vaping.
Ethically tenuous? England's NHS recommends it.
https://www.nhs.uk/better-health/quit-smoking/vaping-to-quit-smoking/
I take it you're now admitting that the videos encourage people that don't vape to vape. Congrats on that. Doctors used to recommend people smoke before they understood the long term consequences of that. So yes, it is ethically tenuous for them to recommend vaping without understanding the long term consequences. Really not that hard a concept.
The videos do not, as far as I am aware, recommend people already using nicotine to start vaping.
All the bench stuff amounts to biological plausibility. I'll suggest something else biologically plausible: Not inhaling smoke is hella better for you than inhaling smoke.
Trying to understand this. Do you consider smokers as "people using nicotine" or not? The videos encourage smokers to vape instead of smoke. You are making some weird distinction if you are saying smokers are not nicotine users. Unless you don't understand what smoking is? Regardless, no one knows that vaping is less harmful than cigarettes in the long term. They may be worse. We need real studies, not anecdotes.
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/hsph-in-the-news/double-lung-transplant-performed-on-patient-with-vaping-illness/
I misspoke. I meant to say people not ALREADY using nicotine.
Which I think someone having an honest exchange would have been able to discern from context, given the sequence of this exchange.
And you clearly don't understand the subject anyway. Vaping does not involve inhaling smoke.
Given the sequence of this exchange I honestly have no idea what you are trying to say. Did someone claim that vaping involved inhaling smoke? You seem to think vaping is safer than smoking despite there not being any long-term data to support this. I don't accept this as we know there are significant problems that can occur in some people that vape, and there is no clear explanation. Not all people that smoke get cancer or COPD. We don't even clearly understand why that is. Telling one of those people to vape instead of smoke, may be causing more harm if they are susceptible to a vaping injury. The point is WE DON"T KNOW. So pretending like there is total harm reduction from vaping with the current data is not unlike the doctors in the 50's that supported smoking for anxiety or weight loss or whatever.
You think smokers should switch to vaping? If so, you have no beef with the videos.
Have a nice weekend.
Google translate may help if english is not your first language. It won't help if you are 10 years old. Given you post, it could be either.
But do you think that or not? I'm apparently very dumb. So spell it out for all of us.