“The take home is we don’t have the data”
Important line in the article.
More data are needed. Specifically what needs to happen is studies comparing different vape liquids and different devices, with different settings. This hasn’t happened much that I’ve seen, and it’s important.
While the studies I’ve seen come up so far do seem fairly unanimous in saying that e-cigs aren’t as harmless as e-cig companies want you to think, I haven’t seen anything that really says more dangerous than regular cigarettes- especially not when looking at overall risk.
And the risks will vary- different liquids have different chemical makeups, different devices have different stuff that might leech into the liquid, different temperatures can affect the chemical reactions and thus what the user inhales.
We need good studies comparing different devices and liquids to figure all this out. With that, sensible regulation might be possible that mitigates the risks with minimal intrusion on the freedom of e-cig users and makers. Maybe a bit of intrusion, but if we have to go on the fairly limited studies that exist now it would be much worse if we want any useful amount of mitigation.
And this headline really isn’t justified IMO. Yes, it’s possible that under some circumstances they could be, but that’s not established and the headline implies that this is fundamental to the concept of e-cigs, not an implementation specific detail like the actual information in the article suggests. This is kind of a big deal sort of distinction.