Growing numbers of adult smokers are deprived of (or face obstacles) to much safer nicotine products because of moral panic on “young people” not justified by evidence. Vaping not epidemic among youth.

Thanks for reading my Substack Post 4 (Lab testing of #vape devices) robertosussman.substack.com/p/a-full-guide…. There is a typo in the equation before Figure 2. The term "AR" should be "Ra". This is the correct equation:

Interesting discussion on chemical kinetics of the nicotine and caffeine molecules. substack.com/home/post/p-16…

Serious newspaper Mail+ warns: #vapes cause #PopcornLung & creates #YouthHealthCrisis. This claim is based on #SolidScienceSources

A full guide to vape aerosols. Post 5: metals open.substack.com/pub/robertosus…

My new Substack post #5 is available robertosussman.substack.com/p/a-full-guide… I explain and demystify the presence of metals in #vape aerosols, one of the favorite soundbites of disinformation.

Authors of doi.org/10.1038/s41598… (RCSI | X) recognize (as small detail) that a #vape device "is not a laboratory pyrolysis apparatus". It's NOT a small detail, but a BIG problem that renders their "forecast" of flavor pyrolysis practically unapplicable to real life vape

Well put Kurt Yeo #vapes are life & life quality savers for smokers. You faced an ignorant counterpart whose only argument was the “adolescent brain damage” whose only supporting evidence is a few mouse studies.

In UC Davis study pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/ac… disposable #vapes were puffed every 30 s for 500 times (500 puffs in 4 hs). Totally unrepresentative of human #vaping. Takes 48-60 hs for real life vapers to do 500 puffs (average 200-250 daily). Its toxicological results = irrelevant

rosa rosa wrote: "Aerosol samples were collected in sets of 200-300 puffs per day for the first 500 puffs". OK, I stand corrected, but w/out this info visible in the main manuscript it's natural to infer from its narrative 500 contiguous puffs. Still, emissions from all

Se publicó nuestra crítica al estudio de Alex Svarch COFEPRIS mdpi.com/1660-4601/22/7… Difícil encontrar un artículo con tantas deficiencias y errores técnicos elementales. Debe ser retractado.

Mi new Substack post #6 ia available open.substack.com/pub/robertosus… Enjoy reading.

There are more problems & inconsistencies in the UC Davis study doi.org/10.1021/acscen… Authors overestimated risks. Instead of urgently calling U.S. FDA to regulate authors pushed tendentious fear narrative to feed disinformation vultures, the The New York Times pamphlet and others.

Post # 7. In vitro and in vivo systems exposed to aerosol generated by high powered vape devices open.substack.com/pub/robertosus…

A full guide to vape aerosols: Post 8, environmental aerosols (part 1) open.substack.com/pub/robertosus…

Recently publication pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40829784/ exemplifies questionable NIH funded studies searching harms in #Vapes from extrapolating cell/mice studies to humans, exaggerating #Vape toxicity, misrepresenting "particulates", ignoring contrary evidence. I attach text for detail

A full guide to vape aerosols: Post 9, environmental aerosols (part 2) open.substack.com/pub/robertosus…

Janine, ignore them and do stealth vaping. Vaping in open outdoors poses ZERO risk to bystanders. These bylaws are not “protecting” anyone, their purpose is to shame vapers and create public disgust on vaping. Authorities did the same “denormalization” in the past to dark skinned

People (whether supporting THR or not) must read the article "The Courage to Embrace the Science Around Nicotine Addiction" jacc.org/doi/epdf/10.10…. Health professionals hesitant to support #Vapes in smoking cessation must read it. Some extracts

A full guide to vape aerosols: Post 10, environmental aerosols (part 3, the "particles") open.substack.com/pub/robertosus…