The explosion in the popularity of Vaping is having some interesting side effects… I’m personally fascinated by the way real science is being ignored by the health lobbyists and ‘virtuous corruption’ has completely taken over the argument.

‘Virtuous Corruption’ is when people become corrupt for the ‘right reasons’. For example a prosecutor may fabricate evidence to get a conviction against someone they ‘know’ is guilty, but is about to walk free. A politician may make up lies about their opponent and justify it as virtuous because they would be ‘really bad’ for the country, so a little lying is ok if it keeps them out of power.

The best book I’ve ever read on Virtuous Corruption is by Prof Ainsley Kellow, titled “Science and Public Policy: The Virtuous Corruption of Virtual Environmental Science.” Prof Kellow goes into great depth to show how most aspects of the environmental debate from climate change to species extinction to oil-spill pollution have been completely corrupted… by people who believe their corruptions to be ‘for the greater good’.

If you’re interested you can check out the book here.

But Vaping has brought ‘virtuous corruption’ to the front of my mind once more. Health lobbyists, politicians, and even many scientists are so sure that Vaping is bad that they’re stating it as fact even when the science clearly says otherwise:

Key Recommendations: [extracts only, click the link above for the full report]

E-cigarettes appear to be effective when used by smokers as an aid to quitting smoking…

However, the hazard to health arising from long-term vapour inhalation from the e-cigarettes available today is unlikely to exceed 5% of the harm from smoking tobacco.

[emphasis original]

Who made these outlandish claims? What kind of medical know-nothing, probably in the pocket of ‘big tobacco’ would say something as obviously wrong as ‘vaping is unlikely to exceed 5% of the harm’ of cigs? As you’ll see if you click the link, it was none other than the UK Royal College of Physicians.

Of course there’s still much noise-and-fury and new research and new studies coming out and many researchers looking… I would say hoping, to find proof that vaping is bad. Researchers in many cases aren’t researching vaping to see if it’s bad, but rather to prove that it’s bad. They’re coming into their research with their desired outcome in mind, because they already ‘know’ the outcome… and like the prosecutor who twists evidence to get a conviction because he ‘knows’ the accused is guilty, they fall victim to their own confirmation biases, they grasp at straws, and hey-presto they magically come up with the conclusion they were looking for:

The findings triggered warnings that electronic cigarettes may be “far more dangerous” than was thought.

Trials found that a typical session using a device caused similar effects to the main heart artery as smoking a cigarette.

Sounds serious! Hardening of the main artery! Like smoking a cigarette??? Shock Horror!

And it got breathless headlines:

• The Sun: VAPING BAD E-cigs are just as bad for your heart as smoking fags as they damage key blood vessels, say experts
• The Mirror: E-cigarettes are as bad for you as SMOKING, a new study has claimed
• The Mail: E-cigarettes are ‘as bad for the heart as tobacco’: Nicotine vapour damages blood vessels and raises risk of disease
• The Telegraph: Vaping as bad for your heart as smoking cigarettes, study finds
• The Times: Vaping risk is similar to smoking
• Independent: Vaping is ‘as bad as smoking cigarettes’ for damaging key blood vessels

So it’s no wonder surveys show that people are increasingly seeing vaping as harmful: [you’ll have to download the report to see it]

Perceptions of harm from electronic cigarettes have grown with only 15% of the public accurately believing in 2016 that electronic cigarettes are a lot less harmful than smoking. The lowest level than at any time in the history of the Smokefree Britain survey.

Here’s the catch… that ‘artery hardening’ that was so breathlessly plastered all over the front pages? It happens more than you think! A rebuttal from Prof Peter Hajek:

The study is reporting on a well-known short-term effect of nicotine – stiffening of arteries – that accompanies all types of stimulation. The same effect is generated by watching a thriller or a football match or sitting an exam. Drinking a cup of coffee actually produces a larger response of much longer duration. The key heart health risks of smoking are not caused by nicotine but by other chemicals in tobacco smoke that are not present in e-cigarette vapour.

[Note that I was unable to find a source document for the above quote, I understand it was said during a Q and A period following a speech and I’ve not been able to find a video of that. However it is credited to him, and you can hear his thoughts on e-cigarettes in speeches given here and here. In his talk at the second link he discusses ‘Virtuous Corruption’ in detail, although he doesn’t call it by that name.]

So whilst e-cigarettes are 95% less harmful than actual cigarettes, 85% of the population believe they’re as bad or worse. How can perception be so far removed from reality? Because of scare campaigns based not on facts… but rather based on virtuous corruption of the data.

A researcher with an agenda reported on a common and well known reaction to stimulation of all kinds as if it was an evil unique to e-cigarettes, and journalists failed to do the slightest bit of research before plastering it all over their front page.

This kind of corruption of the science does real harm to real people. e-cigarettes have shown themselves to be an effective aid to help smokers reduce their smoking, or even stop smoking cigarettes altogether. For those who don’t know, the main harm in cigarettes isn’t the nicotine, it’s the tar that is created from the combustion. So whilst an e-cigarette delivers nicotine (like a cigarette), it’s not known to contribute to cancer or have any of the other harmful effects of real cigarettes.

So demonizing e-cigs for ‘virtuous’ reasons has very real and un virtuous consequences.

Now before someone accuses me of being a vaper or nicotine addict, let me be clear that I’ve never vaped in my life, nor do I plan to, nor would I suggest a non-smoker take up vaping. If you’re not addicted to nicotine, you’re better off staying that way in my opinion. But if you’re a smoker and you’re concerned about the harm that burning tobacco is doing to your body, do yourself a favor and stop believing the lies about vaping. You can get your nicotine fix in a way that’s 95% less harmful than your cigarettes are, and you don’t have to go through any withdrawals or ‘quit’ to do it.

And for everyone, smokers or not, let this be a lesson on the dangers of ‘Virtuous Corruption’. People will do all kinds of wrong and dishonest things if they tell themselves it’s for the ‘right reasons’, but that doesn’t make their lies any less harmful.

Follow Topher:
Website: topherfield.net
Facebook: Facebook.com/topherfield
Instagram: @topherfield
Twitter: @topherfield
Youtube: Youtube.com/topherfield
Subscribestar: Subscribestar.com/topherfield