People who want to ban e-cigs are the useful idiots of Big Tobacco

[yellowcanine]

223. The study you cited was a selective review of the topic. A proper review cites all of the studies,

not just the ones supporting a particular viewpoint. Readers are not supposed to have to go to the original studies - they should be able to trust the reviewer to accurately summerize the relevant research. I knew there were other studies which should have been cited so it raised questionns about the author and the sponsor of the study. Turns out that the sponsor was an advocacy group for e-cigs and smokeless tobacco (snuff) - very suspicious because this is the kind of group which is often a front group for industry - in this case likely the tobacco industry. Also the author was in fact the president of the board of CASAA and it turns out that at least one of the newest studies they are touting on their website was commissioned and paid for by CASAA - another red flag because the tobacco industry has a history of sponsoring research and selectively releasing data which downplayed the dangers of tobacco use. Sorry - too many red flags there I am not going to chase down all of the original studies when there clearly is a dead rat stinking up the place.

When you posted this clearly suspicious study as the basis of your argument and then followed up with another link when I shot it down - well, the thought "Gish Gallop" popped into my mind. In fact I did read the second link you posted and it was not definitive about the safety of second hand e-cig vapor so I am not sure how it supports your case.

I honestly don't know if there is a health risk from second hand e-cigs but it is certainly way too early to rule out the possibility and cherry picking data will not help the advocates of e-cigs.