This story is either poorly researched or deliberately written as clickbait. The ‘study’ does not reveal how the vapor was generated, and flies in the face of other, well designed, peer-reviewed studies showing vaping has a much lower risk for cancer. Whatever the case, this story is misleading, fails to present the fact that it’s conclusions are not supported by other reserach and fails to note the financial interests of the ‘researchers’ – a journalistic failure all around.
This story is either poorly researched or deliberately written as clickbait. The ‘study’ does not reveal how the vapor was generated, and flies in the face of other, well designed, peer-reviewed studies showing vaping has a much lower risk for cancer. Whatever the case, this story is misleading, fails to present the fact that it’s conclusions are not supported by other reserach and fails to note the financial interests of the ‘researchers’ – a journalistic failure all around.
(http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1383571816301711?via%3Dihub, http://annals.org/aim/article-abstract/2599869/nicotine-carcinogen-toxin-exposure-long-term-e-cigarette-nicotine-replacement}
Comments scientists to buzz about cancer risks and vapotage [Update] https://vapolitique.blogspot.fr/2018/01/commentaires-de-scientifiques-au-buzz.html