One of the main reasons for the rise of vaping and the slow decline in tobacco smokers is it’s theoretical curbing of the dangerous chemicals we inhale. Now studies recently published by St Andrew’s University have shown strong evidence that vaping can be 99% less dangerous and more specifically, less carcinogenic than smoking tobacco.
How it worked
Using already published material, Dr William E Stephens and his team began delving through the many articles, studies and data about the by-products of nicotine enhance aerosols. This data and research was subsequently compared to the chemical emissions of smoking tobacco and the risks concerning those. After this, they analysed and cross referenced with vaping technology now on the market in the form of vaping devices and e liquids. After all this work, the study is readily available to be viewed on the British Medical Journal website. The study with the cumbersome title of “Comparing the cancer potencies of emissions from vaporised nicotine products including e-cigarettes with those of tobacco smoke” were based on subjects smoking 15 cigarettes a day and compared to subjects vaping 30 litres of vapour a day. The life time risk of cancer is found through potencies of their daily consumption estimates.
It was also found that these numbers depended upon the proper use of vaping technology alongside the vapers habits, as well as the e-juice which is being used in the process. A lot of variables to keep in mind then, but one constant is in the amount of carcinogens being produced. For those who don’t know, carcinogens are any type of chemical which can increase the risk of cancer and can be anything from plutonium to wood dust.
What the results show
To stop any biases, the St Andrew’s study makes very clear through their evidence that they analysed the temperature at which the vapour in their studies were heated. This is because in the past it has been found that higher levels of carbonyls, a form of carcinogen is produced in a greater quantity when people vape at a drastically higher temperature than normal. This could work in the favour of those against vaping and some believe that previous studies may have vaped at higher temperatures than normal to sway to the side of anti-vaping. The study made sure that excessive power on the vapes was not used whilst also comparing tobacco and e-cig vapour with smoke produced by heat not burn technology, which is still a young form of technology. The HnB tech still produced more carcinogens than optimum level e-cigarettes, whilst tobacco smoke fared the highest amount.
Another benefit of the St Andrew’s study was that it supported the evidence recently presented by Cancer Research UK in February, trumping their news of vaping being 97% less carcinogenic by an extra 2%. This can mean only good things for the future of vaping, as more and more people realise that it’s a far safer option than smoking regular tobacco.