Ok, so a quick google scholar search will have you believing that e-cigs and vaping are the best thing since sliced bread one minute, and the devil incarnate the next. How are scientists able to produce such conflicting results, if they're all meant to be using evidence-based approaches? And more importantly, how are you supposed to know who and what to believe?
1. Who funded the study?
Do some research on who the ultimate beneficiary of the study would be.
2. Is the study promoting anything?
Watch out for hidden promotional messages in a study. Is the study trying to push you one way or another?
3. Is the source a reputable one?
We prefer reading studies conducted in the names of universities or researchers we are familiar with, but it can not always be the case. Just make sure that you are not reading a study written by somebody employed by the beneficiary.
4. Is the study putting all products in one basket?
If the study is talking in extremes, in such a way that all e-cigarettes and vapors are great, or all e-cigarettes and vapors are bad, this should raise alarm bells. There are plenty of different brands of e-cigarettes, vaporisers and e-liquids, and no, they are not all made of the same ingredients.
You may be wondering why we care so much about what information you are being fed. Well, when scientific evidence is conflicting, people tend to dismiss it all, and we rely on scientific evidence to stress and stress again that we have the purest forms of e-cigarette liquids on the market.
Visit our About & Certificates page for scientific proof that our liquids, and not all liquids, but our liquids, the ones produced by McFlavors are completely free from Propylene Glycol.