A rebellious week of anti-vape news

Article published on Vapingpost - Author: Fergus Mason - Translator: The Vape Club

Vaping is back in the news this week, and as always, the press doesn't get its good points across.

The reason vaping is in the news this time is because it has added to the false narrative based on anecdotal evidence. In Nevada, the public health organization has launched an attack on the industry for claiming it poses a cancer risk. On the positive side, a new study on the effects of vaping vapor has found it to be no different from air—and a court in Northern Ireland has dismissed claims that e-cigarettes caused a drunk driver to fail a breath test.

Vaping allegations send British media into crisis

The UK media was once again thrown into a panic over anti-vaping headlines on Tuesday following comments at a cardiology conference in Rome. The most egregious example appeared in The Sun, with the headline “vaping as bad as smoking”, but similar articles appeared in The Mirror, Daily Mail, Daily Telegraph and even the Times. A subsequent article in the Times on Wednesday clarified the earlier falsehoods, but it was too late – most major UK newspapers had already shown readers the misleading headlines.

The reason for all the commotion is a study by a Greek researcher on the effects of vaping on coronary artery hardening. Based on his conclusion that 30 minutes of continuous vaping is equivalent to 5 minutes of smoking, Professor Charalambos Vlachopoulos concluded that using e-cigarettes causes coronary artery hardening just like smoking.

On the surface, this conclusion may seem plausible, but Clive Bates and others have pointed out that this is not a new finding, as nicotine is already known to cause temporary hardening of the arteries. Other factors that cause temporary hardening of the arteries include caffeine, exercise, watching movies, listening to music, and head movements. Compared to drinking coffee, the degree of hardening of the arteries caused by e-cigarette use is relatively mild.

Professor Vlachopoulos knew this too (his previous research has included the effects of caffeine on arteries) but he failed to mention it in Rome. He also failed to mention that the effects of vaping after 30 minutes wear off after a few minutes, whereas the effects of smoking last for an hour or more, and over time cause permanent damage to arteries. And unfortunately, the media didn’t read the story before rushing to throw out “crazy” headlines.

Nevada Tobacco Control Association attacks vape industry over misinformation and cancer claims

Also on Tuesday, one of America’s most permissive public health agencies took a public shot at e-cigarette companies. Maria Azzarelli, the tobacco control coordinator for southern Nevada, told the Las Vegas Sun that the e-cigarette industry is spreading misinformation. Azzarelli contradicted one statement by saying you can buy e-cigarettes in a grocery store, and then saying they can only be purchased online. She also claimed that “e-cigarettes produce a vapor that everyone knows causes cancer.”

Azzarelli has made a number of such inaccurate statements, telling the same newspaper in 2013 that studies needed to be done to determine whether e-cigarette vapor contained fewer “chemicals and carcinogens” than cigarettes, when that information had been widely known for years. And based on Azzarelli’s most recent comments, she’s way behind modern science.

New study finds “no cytotoxic substances” in vape vapor

At the same time, a study was published on the effects of vaping on lung cells. Previous studies on this topic were quite rudimentary, using essential oils on fragile and easily killed cultured lung cells. The new study used more sophisticated techniques, using them on lung tissue that mimicked human lungs to get a more accurate view of the effects of vaping. And the results showed that vaping had no effect on them at all.

Despite being exposed to vape vapor from different brands for six hours, the lung model showed no damage, just like the model that was exposed to air. While the same model when tested with regular cigarettes suffered severe damage and cell death.

This new study, conducted by BAT and the company MatTek, will likely be criticized for being biased and unbiased, but the researchers have also published how they conducted their research. Those who are skeptical of the results are welcome to replicate the study themselves.

Allegations of “drink driving” due to e-cigarettes have been dismissed.

Finally, a Belfast man has claimed that his positive breath test was due to the smell of alcohol from the e-cigarette he was using, leading to a drink-driving conviction. Aaron Galbraith, 35, was breathalysed by police in late December after his car spun out of control. Galbraith, who police said was staggering and slurring his speech, failed the test and was taken to a police station. However, he denied having been drinking, despite having a blood alcohol level twice the legal limit.

Galbraith's argument is based on scientific evidence that some essential oils contain small amounts of alcohol for flavoring, and that this amount was in his respiratory tract for fifteen minutes before the test. When asked, consultant Michael Walker replied that this possibility was highly unlikely.

Galbraith was charged with drink driving, had his licence revoked for three years and was ordered to pay a £300 fine.