The US seems to be in the process of legalizing recreational weed, which is often consumed by inhaling plant smoke. Relative to that (or alcohol), I wouldn't worry too much about vaping nicotine. It doesn't appear to have any significant harmful effects other than being addictive (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicotine#Adverse_effects).

That being said, not chronically inhaling anything other than air is definitely the right way to go if you're taking long term health effects into consideration.

Yeah I'm sure inhaling weed smoke isn't healthy, but at least with weed, very few people inhale it as regularly as cigarette smokers do cigarette smoke.

But if someone doesn't have plans to cease smoking should they continue to smoke cigarettes instead of switching to vaping?

My personal opinion is yes.

What mean to say is, if you are a purveyor of nicotine products in a professional manner, probably best to not recommend nicotine containing products outside the context of smoking cessation.

Though this line of inquiry rapid segues in to a philosophical debate.

Just curious.

But is this because you think vaping is more dangerous than smoking?

Or because you think enabling a harmful activity, even if it's a less harmful than the activity it's being substituted for makes you morally culpable? So providing methadone would be a moral wrong?