Vaping
Vaping uniquely satisfies the ritualistic behaviour of smoking, without the health consequences.
VAEP Shareables are images utilizing graphics, colour and text to quickly teach people about vaping. Click the Shareable to enlarge and save to your phone or harddrive. Share through text, email and social media.
Everyday we practice harm reduction such as using a seat belt to prevent injury. We still take a risk by getting into a vehicle but we lower the chances of negative outcomes.
Vaping is a fraction the risk
Citizens have a right to life which means they have a right to all the information to make informed decisions about preserving health. They also should have access to and be able to effectively utilize harm reduction to protect health such as condoms.
Top 9 toxins
“People smoke for nicotine but they die from tar.” -M. Russell WHO prioritized the 9 most toxic chemicals found in tobacco smoke for reduction. Vaping significantly reduces or eliminates these toxic chemicals! As to formaldehyde, it is naturally occurring in exhaled breath.
Science indicates vaping is 5% the risk
Scientific evidence is universal, so why does Britain promote vaping and Canada and the USA have a war on harm reduction? The British health agencies got to the science before the narrative got to them. They even have vape shops in their hospitals!
Relative risk of nicotine sources
The standard scientific tool for measuring the harm from drug use is the MCDA (multi-criteria decision analysis). Experts compared 12 different sources of nicotine using the MCDA. The most harmful source were cigarettes so they were given the value of 100%. The other 11 sources show the relative risk of harm compared to smoking.
Reduced toxicity
Anyone who suggests that vaping is not safer than smoking does NOT know what they are talking about! Whoever it is, your physician, a nurse or a representative from a health-related nonprofit, question EVERYTHING they say after that… And send them to VAEPworld.com
Cancer risk under 0.5% that of smoking
The Canadian Cancer Society (CCS) estimates 1 in 2 will get cancer. Cancer is profitable for big businesses that donate to CCS. Citizens also donate because their loved ones get cancer. CCS has made it clear that they are anti-tobacco harm reduction.
No legitimate scientific debate
For those of us who know the truth about vaping, it is frustrating to watch authorities deceive the public about tobacco harm reduction. Are they knowingly lying or are they just repeating the false narrative? If so, who is dictating the narrative???
Types of people that vape
1% of people that never smoked vape. 15% of smokers and 13% of ex-smokers vape. The data illustrates that SMOKERS are vaping to either quit smoking or stay quit. ? The focus ? needs to switch to harm reduction and away from the 1%.
harm reduction reduces risk
Most of us are familiar with and support harm reduction such as seat belts or bike helmets. Smoking is the most preventable cause of disease and death in North America! It’s hard to quit smoking, so maybe harm reduction is the answer. ?
Vaping is a small fraction of the risk
Smoking has over 7000 chemicals; 1500 of them we know cause diseases and 69 cause cancer. Vapour has very few constituents and all of the disease/cancer causing chemicals are virtually eliminated. This is why vaping is a fraction the risk of smoking.
Scaring smokers away from harm reduction
Science has tested & cataloged 1000’s of known substances & how they effect health. Eliquid and vapour have been analyzed & assessed as a fraction the risk of smoking. Why is our tax dollars spent on focusing on the small risk instead of harm reduction?
