The plans are subject to a 12-week public consultation which starts on Friday.

The plans - which are subject to a 12-week public consultation - seek to prevent smoking, vaping and the use of heated tobacco in these settings across England.

      • deHaga@feddit.ukEnglish
        5·
        7 hours ago

        None of that says it’s worse than smoking. Smoking gives you cancer.

        • Furbag@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          2 hours ago

          Pretty sure the consensus in the medical field is that vaping is less bad than smoking and if switching to vapes helps you quit tobacco that’s a net positive, but ideally you should do neither.

          • deHaga@feddit.ukEnglish
            2·
            4 hours ago

            I can’t be bothered to explain it to you:

            The reality of the “delta” in harm between vaping and smoking is defined by the fundamental difference between aerosolisation and combustion. While vaping is not risk-free, major health organisations and longitudinal chemical analyses indicate that it is significantly less harmful than combustible tobacco.

            1. The 95% Harm Differential Public Health England and the Royal College of Physicians maintain a long-standing estimate that vaping is at least 95% less harmful than smoking tobacco.
            • Toxicant Exposure: Levels of key toxicants in e-cigarette aerosols are typically more than 99% lower than those found in cigarette smoke.
            • Chemical Complexity: Tobacco smoke contains over 7,000 chemicals, including 70 known carcinogens. In contrast, e-cigarette aerosol is composed of significantly fewer chemicals, primarily propylene glycol, vegetable glycerine, nicotine, and flavourings.
            • Biomarkers: Research shows that smokers who switch entirely to vaping have substantially lower exposure to harmful substances, with biomarker levels similar to those using medical nicotine replacement therapy (NRT).
            1. Combustion vs. Aerosolisation The primary reason for the harm delta is the absence of fire.
            • Combustion (Smoking): Burning tobacco creates tar, carbon monoxide, and a cocktail of oxidizing agents and poisons.
            • Aerosolisation (Vaping): Vaping involves heating a liquid to create a vapour without burning. Most health harms from smoking are caused by the products of combustion, not the nicotine itself.
            1. Potential Harms and Variables Despite the reduced risk profile, vaping introduces unique variables that can influence its safety:
            • Device Performance: Toxin formation, such as the production of dihydroxyacetone (DHA) or formaldehyde, is highly dependent on device design and temperature management.
            • Wicking Efficiency: Poorly saturated wicks (dry hits) or excessive wattage can cause the thermal degradation of solvents, leading to higher levels of harmful byproducts.
            • Emerging Risks: While long-term data (beyond 20 years) is still being collected, some studies suggest vaping may impact lung lipid homeostasis or cardiovascular function, though these effects are generally less severe than those caused by smoking.
            1. Public Misperception Recent data indicates a growing “misperception gap”:
            • In 2024, approximately 50% of adults incorrectly believed vaping is as or more harmful than smoking.
            • By 2025, this figure rose to 56%, despite continued scientific evidence of vaping’s lower relative risk.
            • Experts note that these misperceptions may prevent smokers from switching to a significantly less harmful alternative.
          • deHaga@feddit.ukEnglish
            8·
            7 hours ago

            Popcorn lung was discovered in popcorn factories, so those types of flavours are not used in vapes anymore.

            These food flavourings have also been tested by billions of people when baking.

            Of course, if you inhale nothing but flavoured vape juice, like the rat in the trial, then obviously it’s going to cause harm.

            Vaping is not worse than smoking on any level. It’s about 95% better.

            https://www.gov.uk/government/news/e-cigarettes-around-95-less-harmful-than-tobacco-estimates-landmark-review

            • SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.caEnglish
              3·
              4 hours ago

              A few UK MDs got behind vaping, with $$$ from Phillip Morris, who heavily invested in vapes. It’s not hard to find sellout MDs, especially in the UK - remember Andrew Wakefield?

              That “source” was before any research into vape compounds.

              BTW, it took decades before there was population evidence of tobacco smoke and cancer.

              There is not a pulmonologist on this planet that calls vaping safer than anything.

              • deHaga@feddit.ukEnglish
                3·
                4 hours ago

                There is not a pulmonologist on this planet that calls vaping safer than anything.

                Bollocks. Combustion mutates your cells and gives you cancer.

            • Cassa@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
              2·
              6 hours ago

              ah yes, the 1 source against the 4 I posted…

              edit: which is also over a decade old! you had to dig back to 2015 to find this.

              cool dude.

              edit 2: your actual source. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a8171a7e5274a2e87dbda91/McNeill-Hajek_report_authors_note_on_evidence_for_95_estimate.pdf

              says that the chemicals in vaping “have not been assosiated with any serious risk”. which means they have yet to be found harmful.

              most of the ways we figure out that stuff is harmful is later. and when we do stuff with chemicals. this is when they would use these “popcorn factory smells” you’re talking about. back in 2015, the ones you said we moved away from?

              yet it’s also so called “95% more safe”…

              • deHaga@feddit.ukEnglish
                2·
                5 hours ago

                Quality over quantity.

                The chemicals are used in food. We would know they are harmful, the same way we discovered popcorn lung…

                The risk is reduced by 95%. What don’t you understand?

                • Cassa@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
                  1·
                  4 hours ago

                  no, I think you misunderstand your source.

                  it says that the chemicals are not yet (in 2015) known to cause any harm. the big thing with vaping chemicals (as pointed out in my sources) is that you heat it up a lot and inhale it.

                  therefore the way these chemicals are used in vaping is very different than in food, and present different risks. so the research into vaping is it’s own risk.

                  If you really think your source is “quality over quantity” then please do read it again, and look at the dates of the studies ❤️

                  one of mine is a so-called cumulativte study that looks over a lot of studies to find broad trends, and that one points out that it is for certain dangerous.

                  back in the day tobacco companies said that smoking cigarettes was not harmful. they even funded research into saying that. I’d be sceptical of companies and the narrative that they profit from.

                  • deHaga@feddit.ukEnglish
                    2·
                    4 hours ago

                    Those food flavourings have been cooked in ovens, which are significantly hotter than vapes, in both commercial and home use for decades. The ones that caused problems got removed. They are safe to inhale, even in commercial high use areas. This is not some new area of science.

                    We’ve also been pumping disco ‘smoke’ into rooms with people in for decades, any risks would have been identified. It is safe, unless you vape a stupid amount. It’s like 95x safer, but if you then vape 95x more than you smoke, then Darwinism is fine.

                    Inhaling smoke is a far higher cancer risk.