Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Vaping Can Damage Vital Immune System Cells, Researchers Find (bbc.co.uk)

Posted by msmash on from the in-public-interest dept.

Vaping can damage vital immune system cells and may be more harmful than previously thought, a study suggests. Researchers found e-cigarette vapour disabled important immune cells in the lung and boosted inflammation. From a report: The researchers "caution against the widely held opinion that e-cigarettes are safe." However, Public Health England advises they are much less harmful than smoking and people should not hesitate to use them as an aid to giving up cigarettes. The small experimental study, led by Prof David Thickett, at the University of Birmingham, is published online in the journal Thorax. Previous studies have focused on the chemical composition of e-cigarette liquid before it is vaped. In this study, the researchers devised a mechanical procedure to mimic vaping in the laboratory, using lung tissue samples provided by eight non-smokers. They found vapour caused inflammation and impaired the activity of alveolar macrophages, cells that remove potentially damaging dust particles, bacteria and allergens.

16 of 137 comments (clear)

  1. Cmon life by Ryanrule · · Score: 2

    Give us a damn break

    1. Re: Cmon life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm sure smoke does the same thing. It is also hot and contains contaminants.

      When will the media learn that "safer than smoking" is not saying it is completely safe and stop conflating the two?

    2. Re: Cmon life by AvitarX · · Score: 3, Informative

      A lot of vapors seem to think it's "completely safe", and the ways that it isn't completely safe are not understood.

      I never assumed it was, and tell people it's a lot safer. I assume that inhaling 400 (f) air is likely to cause subtle harm. I'm also not certain that a coating of oily solvent type stuff is good for the lungs.

      Still, I smell better, save massive amounts of money, am likely healthier, and have cut my nicotine consumption by about 90%, I assume I'll be quit in a few more months and save even more money.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  2. Nicotine was prove not to damage lungs.. by snapsnap · · Score: 2

    so is this the fault of PG in the liquid?

    1. Re:Nicotine was prove not to damage lungs.. by BlueStrat · · Score: 2

      so is this the fault of PG in the liquid?

      Likely from running their test vaping rig at extremes of coil temperature, wattage, and draw-times that no normal person would normally experience. I suspect that most of these types of studies look at the specs for a given device such as "coil wattage 30 to 65 watts, maximum recommended draw time 5 seconds" (which nobody would do as it would be horrible) and set their test rig for 65 watts at 5 seconds.

      Vaping is not good for anyone. I wouldn't advise anyone take it up that is not a tobacco smoker. However if you are a tobacco smoker I highly recommend switching to vaping as it helped me become tobacco free and I feel so much better that there aren't sufficient words. I thought my doctor was going to do cartwheels as well over the improvements to my overall health that switching brought.

      The biggest problem with vaping is that it hurts the cash flow of Big Tobacco, government, medical equipment, makers/sellers, the healthcare system, and medical insurance companies and all the political lobbyists that all of them employ.

      Follow the money. If the study is/was associated with or funded by anyone in that list above, the conclusions it makes are suspect before reading the first sentence

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
  3. oh did they? by Kwirl · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What vaping devices did they test? What materials were the coils built of? What type of cotton was used? Was it a VG or PG mix? I mean I realize that they ran these tests for 48 whole hours, but really, who pays for this garbage to get published? a 48 hour research study is about as reliable as using flatulence to measure climate change.

    1. Re:oh did they? by ichimunki · · Score: 2

      Who cares? I'd say that vaping is obviously NOT better than just breathing clean air. But as far as nicotine delivery systems go, it's certainly healthier than cigarettes and way more fun than gum or patches or whatever. But I have to say that vaping, as a nicotine delivery system, has actually been helping me lose weight by providing me with a sugar-free way to enjoy a sweet flavored treat and suppressing my appetite.

      My own health has been far more impacted by the ready availability of way too much sugar, especially soda and sugary cereal (used to work at a place that had all you can drink/eat supplies of both). Combined with an increasingly sedentary lifestyle, my weight has been out of control. I'll take some chances with vaping until I see that it's no longer helping me control my weight.

      But the vaping is hardly without some negative throat/lung effects... It's been 20+ years since I smoked even occasionally and tobacco smoke disgusts me, so I can say for sure that anything I'm noticing is all vape-related, and I'm noticing it. So to me this study is basically: water is wet.

      --
      I do not have a signature
  4. Re:uhhhhh by richy+freeway · · Score: 3, Informative

    inhaling anything other than oxygen is bad for your lungs

    Air is about 80% nitrogen, 20% oxygen...

  5. Re:Just a drug delivery device by sjames · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A coffee cup could also be considered a drug delivery device, so what?

  6. Re:uhhhhh by sjames · · Score: 2

    Actually, the researchers agreed and, in fact, recommended that all smokers should switch to vaping immediately.

    Somehow, that part didn't make it to the headline.

  7. FUD by YouGotTobeKidding · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Im sorry but this is pure FUD. From the study... they didnt use a vaporizer. They took healthy cells and BATHED it in a PG/VG + nic solution (aka ejuice). Sorry but that is not a legit way of study. Vapers dont snort ejuice. They vaporize it. Inhale the vapor and EXHALE. Usually in short 2-3 second bursts.

    Bath healthy cells in water and there will be damage too.

    All for science and finding out how to make vaping safer... but FFS study it and do legit science. Not paid for shilling.

    1. Re:FUD by YouGotTobeKidding · · Score: 2

      Oh and just for shits and giggles... they used nic concentration of 31mg (the legal levels for sale are low 20mg lelves at most and most vapers use 3-6mg. Im down to 1.5mg and thinking on going lower). The LD50 of pure nic is 50mg. Gee I wonder if you use a concentration NO ONE would vape the results may be skewed.

  8. Read the Paper, Cow Flatulence by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 2

    These details are in the paper. In particular, they did not test any device but just exposure to the chemicals which they note may not provide the same levels seen by actual people who vape. I think it's unreasonable to expect this level of detail in a popular news site given that they are writing a few paragraphs for a general audience. The paper is there for those who want this level of detail.

    Also, somewhat ironically, cow flatulence actually is important for determining climate change!

  9. Re:To quote Mr. Burns: Excellent! by swb · · Score: 4, Informative

    Are you really bothered by the fact that people might be doing something vaguely harmful to themselves, or is it some other stylistic aspect of "vapers" that you don't like?

    I mean, I watch people consume known toxin ethyl alcohol all the time and despite their occasionally destructive and violent behavior, I don't get quite as angry as you seem to be at vapers.

    I don't really care about vapers, it looks fairly silly in practice but I can't think of a reason to be mad at them. But boy, a lot of people seem to heap hate on vapers.

  10. Re:uhhhhh by CaptQuark · · Score: 2

    Pure oxygen is NOT poisonous, unless you are underwater below 40 feet. Hospitals, ambulances, and EMTs all carry oxygen masks to provide 100% oxygen (unpressurized). Scuba divers will not dive deeper than 30 feet on pure O2. Deeper dives can be done on normal air mix, Nitrox, or Trimix.

    ---

  11. Re:To quote Mr. Burns: Excellent! by mjwx · · Score: 2

    Are you really bothered by the fact that people might be doing something vaguely harmful to themselves, or is it some other stylistic aspect of "vapers" that you don't like?

    I mean, I watch people consume known toxin ethyl alcohol all the time and despite their occasionally destructive and violent behavior, I don't get quite as angry as you seem to be at vapers.

    I don't really care about vapers, it looks fairly silly in practice but I can't think of a reason to be mad at them. But boy, a lot of people seem to heap hate on vapers.

    B-B-B-B-but Big Vape or whatever nonsense they've created.

    Vape fluid MAY have some negative side effects we don't know about, lets compare that to burning tobacco. Whatever nebulous effects the fluid might have its got to be better than the confirmed highly cancerous substance it's meant to replace. I've switched two of my relatives from being life long smokers to being vapers. They can now sit inside with relatives, taste food and realise how bad other smokers smell and they now have a smaller chance of dying from a horrible cancer.

    Sure some vapers are knobs but they're not as bad as regular smokers. I'd rather walk through a sickly sweet smelling cloud than acrid tobacco smoke.

    I've read the entire thing as "we wanted to get our names in the paper".

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.