1. Dear Drugs-Forum readers: We are a small non-profit that runs one of the most read drug information & addiction help websites in the world. We serve over 4 million readers per month, and have costs like all popular websites: servers, hosting, licenses and software. To protect our independence we do not run ads. We take no government funds. We run on donations which average $25. If everyone reading this would donate $5 then this fund raiser would be done in an hour. If Drugs-Forum is useful to you, take one minute to keep it online another year by donating whatever you can today. Donations are currently not sufficient to pay our bills and keep the site up. Your help is most welcome. Thank you.
  1. 5-HT2A

    Millions of Americans use e-cigarettes to break their addiction to tobacco. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that about half of all current cigarette smokers had tried e-cigarettes, and that more than half of people who had recently stopped smoking tobacco had tried e-cigarettes.

    Many of those who smoke e-cigarettes were relying on early studies that suggested they were up to 99 percent healthier than traditional cigarettes. But recent studies have found that electronic cigarettes may not be safe at all, and researchers from West Virginia University found that the vapor from a single e-cigarette may be enough to damage vascular function.

    In an animal study, they found that arteries narrowed by 31 percent within an hour of being exposed to vapor from electronic cigarettes. Long-term exposure caused aortic stiffness to increase two-and-a-half times when compared to the control group which was exposed to normal room air. In short, the vapor caused premature aging, an indicator of cardiovascular disease.

    The study concluded that e-cigarettes should not be considered safe.

    Other recent studies have also found that electronic cigarettes are harmful.

    Greek researchers found that e-cigarettes have an immediate effect on pulmonary function. They studied 54 young cigarette and e-cigarettes smokers; 27 had mild controlled asthma and the others were healthy. After smoking e-cigarettes, measurements of airway obstruction and inflammation were worse in both groups, but were more severe in asthmatics.

    A study from the University of Rochester Medical Center found that electronic cigarettes damage gums and teeth just as much as conventional cigarettes. Researchers found that vapors from e-cigarettes cause cells to release inflammatory proteins, which could lead to oral diseases.

    The study, which was published in Oncotarge, also found that the flavorings added to e-cigarettes made the damage worse, some more so than others. In addition, e-cigarettes also contain nicotine, which is known to harm gum tissue.

    Other studies have found electronic cigarettes to be just as dangerous as traditional cigarettes. A Harvard study found that of 51 e-cigarettes tested, at least one toxin was found in 47 of them, and 75 percent contained diacetyl, a chemical linked to a severe respiratory disease called bronchiolitis obliterans or "popcorn lung." Even more frightening, the amounts of diacetyl found in 39 of the e-cigarettes contained amounts higher than the laboratory was capable of measuring.

    A 2016 study found that e-cigarettes contain high levels of a cancer-causing substance called polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). The researchers found that levels of PAHs, a byproduct of burning petroleum, were at least 1 million times higher than found in heavily polluted Hong Kong air.

    Original Source

    Written by: Sylvia Booth Hubbard, Aug 14, 2017, E-Cigarettes Accelerate Cardiovascular Aging, NewsMax

Recent User Reviews

  1. Alfa
    "Simply fake news"
    1/5, 1 out of 5, reviewed Aug 17, 2017


  1. detoxin momma
    Im curious what research will show once people have been using these devices for years and years, like we have available with traditional cigarettes.

    "1 million times higher than polluted hong kong air"...yummy
  2. Alfa
    This article seems to cherry pick studies that are negative while leaving out the nuance and positive studies. It makes me wonder about the trustworthiness of Newsmax.
    1. aemetha
      It does worse than cherry pick negative studies. It cherry picks mentions of negative outcomes out of context from negative studies. This article is basically one huge misrepresentation of research.

      "ECS causes acute pulmonary function impairment, lasting for less than 30 minutes after smoking" - not quite as terrifying as what the article states.

      "Levels of total nicotine and some polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon metabolites did not change after switching from tobacco to e-cigarettes. All other biomarkers significantly decreased after 1 week of using e-cigarettes (p < .05)." - Very misleading result reported by the article.

      "Therefore, it is hypothesized that the outcomes of periodontal surgery are compromised in e-cig users compared with non-smokers/non-users through the mechanisms comparable to those stated above. However, further studies are needed to test this contention in a clinical cohort of users and non-users of e-cigs vs conventional smokers." - As indicated by this comment, the study did not compare e-cigarettes to conventional cigarettes so it can't properly draw conclusions about the relative risks between the two despite what the article here says.
      mess clean and Alfa like this.
    2. TheBigBadWolf
      for me the seriousity of the article was gone when Iread they used smoke and vapor as synonyms.
      give me a google and half an hour and I'll write a negative article with sources about anyhing you like.
      backintheday journalists researched, today they copy&paste - and even that they do badly.

      fuckers. thats not working for your money.
      detoxin momma likes this.
  3. Chemical Lawyer
    I´ve always thought its unfounded to say e cigarrettes are more nocive than normal cigarrettes, since one of the main causes of lung cancer is the exposure to carbon monoxide and tarr, which you can avoid completely by smoking electronic cigarrettes. Still, and to my surprise, i´ve read more studies suggesting its worse, than studies suggesting is safer. It may be that traditional tabbaco companies are behind these negative studies, since it would be really bad for their buisiness if the advantages of smoking electronic cigarretes were irrefutable.
      TheBigBadWolf, detoxin momma and Alfa like this.
  4. detoxin momma
    just curious if anyone knows the year these e cigs became popular...it hasnt even been 10 years yet i dont believe...may have to google that later.
    how much can people really know in so few years?
    1. aemetha
      1963 for the first one, but they only become popularly used after 2003. The studies available are on the short term physiological effects. It's also possible to measure the toxins released by an e-cigarette and draw conclusions from the known effects of those toxins. The toxins associated with harm in tobacco smoke are found only in trace amounts from a properly used e-cigarette, but it has been found that there can be other toxins introduced to the e-liquid in some formulations. Getting a good e-liquid is very important.
      detoxin momma likes this.
  5. detoxin momma
    no shit, i had no idea, that is a pretty long time. i had to click over and find an image of one....heres what i found, pretty cool.. history-of-electronic-cigarettes-1963.jpg
  6. Chemical Lawyer
    WTF!!!! 1963???? you just blew my mind hahaha
To make a comment simply sign up and become a member!