What you say is common sense. Like the earth being flat and the sun revolving around the earth, though, it just happens to be completely wrong.
My post with statistics, while downvoted, is correct.
While you're probably right about primary carcinogens, the tobacco plant pulls radioactive isotopes like Po-210 and Pb-210 out of the soil and air, and those concentrations have been growing as Polonium levels rise in soil from years of fertilizer use[1]. So to say 'it's not the tobacco' is a very dangerous comment.
Moreover, cardiovascular disease is the primary cause of death for smokers, not lung cancer, and while extracting nicotine from tobacco and vaporizing it in a PG/VG solution might mitigate risk of the latter there's no reason to believe it'll do anything for CVD. If anything, without the MAOI in tobacco that increases the nicotine's effect, on average folks vaping probably have higher levels in their bloodstream than folks that smoke.
that alone tells nothing, cardiovascular disease is the primary death cause for general populace, that why you need to work out incidences, and guess which one has greater variation?
cardiovascular disease: 4x more likely
Cancer: 23x the risk compared to general populace
respiratory disease: 17x the risk
https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/heal...
funny how you had to cherry pick stats to present your point while accusing people of being shills.
smoking is bad, we get it. not everyone that can see a larger picture are part of God knows what conspiracy.
and I specifically did not say "tobacco without the other stuff is fine" so go grind your axe somewhere else
This is not a thing that's true, it's a thing you assume. Having different smokes or vapors in your lungs can have different effects, just as drinking different liquids can have different effects. Tobacco smoke causes cancers. The more elements in another smoke that are shared with tobacco (or other plants that cause disease) the more the new smoke should be suspect, and it suggests a direction for initial testing. We can't just treat all odors as cancer-causing; vaping doesn't even involve burning vegetable matter, so even if burning some chemicals common to all plants causes cancer, that wouldn't make vaping suspect.
Actually the substrates are PG or (more popularly) VG. That’s propylene glycol or vegetable glycerin. The latter is obviously plant based and studies have even measured the concentration vapers breathe as meeting OSHA standards.
The real dangers of vaping are: the vasoconstriction of nicotine, the flavoring (which famously caused issues when a substance that was safe to consume but not inhale was used), and the free radicals from burning cotton or oxidizing metal in the coils.
Low quality coils can be very dangerous.
That is why open and free access to products consenting adults want to use is important.
Most quality vaping is done with ceramic coils.
There are facts and nuance and reason. Or reactionary emotive perspectives that only hurt everyone involved. The choice is yours.
It's like they want it both ways.
Tobacco: 500,000
Alcohol Deaths: 88,000
All Non Alcohol Drug Overdoses (including prescriptions): 64,000
Marijuana Deaths: 0
Yearly statistics for the USA. Seems your 'obvious' might not be so obvious for the rest of us.
But then again, I think many 'obvious' things for you are not obvious to the rest of us. Like the muddled thinking related to children: 1st, it's already illegal to sell them to kids 2nd, will kids get them less if they are removed from local retail locations that check ID? Will driving it underground reduce consumption or only increase the dangers of use?
For some, it's obvious that they see it obviously. Others... we see nuance and no clear cut answers. Though many of us dislike such strong and rash positions backed by emotive, reactionary, broad stroke arguments and so little data.