It?s not clear yet if the fibroblast damage that Rahman showed in the lab signals that wounds will heal more slowly in people who vape After all in the lab scientists can manipulate one variable at a time while holding other factors constant But in the body many processes will be at work all at once This can make it harder to tease out whether such lab tests mimic well what would happen to an otherwise healthy person
Some e-cigarette users were dependent on nicotine-containing e-cigarettes but these products were less addictive than tobacco cigarettes Etter and Eissenberg said E-cigarettes may be as or less addictive than nicotine gums which themselves are not very addictive
Farsalinos and Polosa concluded Currently available evidence indicates that electronic cigarettes are by far a less harmful alternative to smoking and significant health benefits are expected in smokers who switch from tobacco to electronic cigarettes
There are several studies that find no harmful effects of vaping on the lungs One of the most impressive is Dr Polosa?s discovery that in asthmatic smokers switching to vaping ? or even just using vaping to reduce smoking ? improved lung function
In their wound-healing form fibroblasts at the edges of a cut will shrink This causes the wound to close up This squeezing or contraction of the skin takes a lot of energy Fortunately fibroblasts are powered by cellular engines Called mitochondria (My-toh-KON-dree-uh) these tiny powerhouses turn food (sugar) into fuel
You need ammunition to fight back Most of those stories are based on a single poorly done study that proves nothing What if you had serious robust studies about every anti-vaping talking point that you could use to answer Aunt Ruth?