And my argument is that of course more research is needed, but it's to prove what we already know. Inhaling properly manufactured vape juices is less harmful than smoking cigarettes by a large degree.
If you see a house billowing with smoke you don't have to wait for firefighters to tell you the house is on fire.
You're clearly not cherry picking. If you were, you might have some articles that at least hint that ECs might be more harmful than cigarettes, but none of them come close. The first link you posted gets the closest, but it's also just an article about one experiment, using 4 liquids that are not recommended in EC communities.
The rest of the actual studies you posted are not about safety. They do not compare disease or illness or death between the two. One of them does compare the amount of toxic chemicals in ECs to cigarettes and finds ECs to have zero. Until there are long term studies comparing the rate of death and disease, no journal is going to publish any definitive answer that ECs are safer than cigarettes. Until then, we will just have a bunch of studies comparing chemical composition, rates and particle sizes. And if it isn't obvious, chemical composition and their rates are a bit more worrisome than the latter.
If you read through these studies and still think vaping is more harmful than cigarettes, then by all means wait the 50 years it will take the scientific community to out right say the obvious "vaping isn't healthy, but it is significantly less harmful than traditional tobacco smoking."
Ignorant take. When vape products contain, at most, 6 ingredients, all of which have been individually extensively studied, none of which are carcinogenic, and 5 of them are FDA approved for food and pharmaceuticals, theres a pretty obvious harm reduction to inhaling thousands of compounds with at least 70 being carcinogens. So much so that every study you can find will conclude the same.
Here's a quote from a source I would call a qualified institution on the matter: "In its 2016 assessment, the Royal College of Physicians of London stated: “Although it is not possible to precisely quantify the long-term health risks associated with e-cigarettes, the available data suggest that they are unlikely to exceed 5% of those associated with smoked tobacco products and may well be substantially lower than this figure.”
That isn't pseudoscience. It's easily found by a quick Google search.
Conclusively, we're going to find that the tobacco industry makes far less money off of refined nicotine than it does from tobacco. There's a reason Phillip Morris bought a 30% stake in Juul, ran their advertising into the ground, and now also exclusively funds anti vaping ads rather than anti tobacco product ads.
They hooked a new generation on nicotine with Juul and are trying to ban vaping to sell their higher profit margin cigarettes.
Whether my conspiracy conjecture is found to be true or not, studies comparing vaping to smoking keep coming to the same conclusion, vaping is less harmful than smoking. If you have a study or information to the opposite I would love to read it.
Or just use your aging sponges in a rotating lifecycle. I have 4 stages/sponges at one time that slowly get demoted as they age.
New sponge only gets light jobs. Scrapped clean dishes, pans that just need the oil washed off.
Middle stage wear is used for stuck on foods and generally more gross dishes.
Not usable for dishes, but good for counter/stove tops.
Dirty jobs. Nothing food related. Floors, bathrooms, use with disinfectants.
Next is that pesky porn problem that makes up most of the traffic.
Either that, or send a ton of bots that like the stock for a bunch of reasons as written by chatgpt.
Training modules pretend SAP makes sense, and treat you as if you are a robot. I blazed through them too quickly and they didnt like that. They asked me why, and i told them I had already been using the software access for 6 months because of a mistake they made, and the training was pointless. If i agreed in writing that i was competent and trained, then there is no difference.
Honestly I was positioning myself to be the irreplaceable SAP expert at my company because the software is so garbage that not many people knew or wanted to learn how to use it, and I wanted a foot in the door in the supply chain department.
Turns out when you tell your corporate bosses that their ideas don't work, don't work an added 20 hrs a week to compensate for their bad ideas and poor communication, and complain of harassment and treatment bias, they will just fire you. Without severance.
Those trainings were included as reasons for my firing. The ultimate reason for my firing? "Timeliness" because I used 2.5 days of my sick time over the course of 6 months.
They didn't show up for my unemployment hearing. The hearing officer was so confused by my situation he told me to stop answering as if it was a hearing, and just tell him why I think they fired me.
8 months later, I'm doing just fine. Raising my kids, running a business with my wife, and not worrying about being harassed by psychopathic ladder climbers while using the world's worst software.
Sorry for the book I just wrote. I'm known to rant and ramble like a senior citizen sometimes.
It's of my own opinion that they are absolutely avoiding the WARN act, while also trying to dump a ton of workers into the market to raise unemployment rates, lower the wage demand power of prospective employees, thereby decreasing job mobility.
Its quite telling when every CEO sounds off like a mocking bird about trivial shit like returning to office after making record profit for 3 years.
I badly want to write a rant but I've already met my quota for today.
Sorry I ranted a bit anyway.
SAP, the most forcedly convoluted and horrid amalgamation of acquired software, held together by a support team that barely know how it works, is forcing their workers to go back to the office, where they will communicate with everyone remotely.
Color me shocked.
I used to be able to email their support staff and say "I need access to XYZ" and they would respond "Who's access would you like to copy?" And I could have told them any name I would like and they would just give it to me.
At one time my boss gave me approval to do all the ordering for our department and gave me access to financial transactions. 6 months later, and a half million dollars spent, they realized I was never given the training that the access required. Guess who had 20 one hour trainings to complete in 2 weeks? Management blamed me.
That is an outrageously long time to wait for a laptop without updates. From the prices I just looked up, it also is outrageously expensive.
I would have sought a refund before now already, but that's just my opinion.
I think that the scariest part is that either the AI wrote a decent special, or will Sasso did.
Does anyone know the best lemmy community to ask about SEO and web/finance tech in relation to a small business? I have a small business that is doing very well, but SEO and word of mouth is a direct contributor to its success, and I think I'm getting screwed over in cost by the company I've been paying to run my site building, hosting and, SEO.