Yet More Evidence That Vaping Is Probably Terrible | SciShow News

{♫Intro♫} When you get scared or stressed, your body
sets off what’s often called the “fight or flight” response—a series of changes
which includes an increased heart rate and faster breathing. And for years, we’ve thought this response
was kicked off by hormones from your adrenal glands. But research published yesterday in the journal
Cell Metabolism found that a hormone released by your bones can trigger the response all
on its own. We’ve long known that the sympathetic nervous
system, one of the automated branches of your nervous system, prepares you to respond to
danger. And this is generally thought to be controlled
by the release of stress hormones like adrenaline and cortisol from your adrenal glands on top
of your kidneys. But that doesn’t explain why people and
animals that can’t release these hormones for whatever reason can still experience a
heart-pounding, breath-quickening, acute stress response. In fact, you can completely remove the adrenal
glands from mice and they still react to threats with what looks like true “fight or flight”. That suggests there is another source of stress
hormones in the body that can turn on the sympathetic nervous system. And for the past few years, one research group
has suspected that source may be bones. After all, the whole point of having a skeleton
is to let us run away from predators and protect our organs from harm. And studies have found that a bone-derived
hormone called osteocalcin improves muscle function during exercise, so it seemed like
a good place to start. So, they took some mice, applied an electric
shock to their feet to trigger a stress response, and then looked at hormones in their blood. Sure enough, osteocalcin levels surged to
150% in just fifteen minutes. The researchers also exposed mice to a chemical
found in fox urine. And just like with the shocks, the mice’s
osteocalcin levels shot up. They reached a peak just a few minutes after
sniffing the scent, then stayed high for hours. And human subjects also showed a similar elevation
in osteocalcin when stressed out. This time not smelling fox pee, but asked
to do, like a public speaking task. But the team still had to tie this bone hormone
to how the brain processes stress. They found that injecting osteocalcin was
enough to trigger a mouse’s stress response. And injecting a neuron-quieting drug into
the fear center of the mice’s brains prevented the surge of osteocalcin, while removing the
mice’s adrenal glands did not. So the osteocalcin-induced response doesn’t
depend on adrenal stress hormones—it’s a complementary switch. They also conducted experiments to figure
out how the hormone turns on the fight or flight response. And it turns out it’s more about what it
turns off. You see, the researchers found that when they
injected osteocalcin into mice, the cells within bones called osteoblasts took up more
of the neurotransmitter glutamate. Through a string of biological events, this
dampens the activity of neurons in the parasympathetic nervous system, a part of your nervous system
that works against the sympathetic nervous system a lot of the time, like by slowing
down heart rate. So basically, osteocalcin quiets one of your
body’s key regulating systems, allowing your sympathetic nervous system do its thing
unopposed. This alternate stress response fills in some
gaps in our understanding, but the researchers say there’s a lot more to learn about bone
hormones and their effects on the body. And more research is needed on how this alternate
stress pathway interacts with adrenal responses if we want to fully understand the relationship
between brain and bone. Speaking of needing more research… vaping Ever since vaping became a thing, scientists
have been trying to figure out how it compares with smoking in terms of health effects. Companies that make e-cigarettes like to claim
that vaping is harmless, or at least way safer that smoking… but what we’re finding is that it doesn’t
cause the same problems that smoking does, it causes some problems of its own. And a paper published recently in the Journal
of Clinical Investigation adds to this idea. They found that the presence of e-cigarette
vapor altered lung immune cells in mice, making them more prone to infection. The researchers started by exposing the mice
to traditional cigarette smoke, vapor from e-cigarettes both with and without nicotine,
and then just also regular old air. The e-cigarette smoke didn’t trigger the
kind of inflammation and structural changes to the lungs that can lead to conditions like
emphysema—stuff that is seen with traditional cigarette smoke. So, yay. But, when they looked at the lung tissues
under a microscope, they saw something strange was happening. Specifically, immune cells called macrophages
were getting overly fatty. These fats, called lipids, are important components
of cells, and they play crucial roles in lung function and immunity. You see, your lungs are coated with a goo
that helps trap foreign invaders while ensuring enough oxygen can get through. It works because it’s composed of a special
mix of lipids and proteins. And macrophages are responsible for ensuring
the goo has the right lipids in it. If macrophages are accumulating lipids inside
of them, that suggests there’s something going wrong with the goo. And that could leave the lungs susceptible
to infection. So, the team ran another experiment. This time, they exposed the mice to e-cig
vapor with nicotine, e-cig vapor without nicotine, or regular air for 3 months, and then gave
them a lethal dose of flu virus. And it didn’t matter if the vapor had nicotine
or not—the mice exposed to the vapors were significantly more likely to die. And when given sub-lethal doses, the mice
exposed to e-cig vapors lost more weight, which the researchers interpreted as a weaker
immune response. They also found increases of inflammatory
markers in the lungs, so their conclusion seemed clear — exposure to vaping impairs
the lung’s immune system, even if it doesn’t contain nicotine. In mice, anyway. Though, if something similar happens in people,
it could help explain the recent rush of pneumonia cases in people who vape. You see, tests have found macrophages similarly
laden with fats in patient’s lungs. And that kind of connection between human
cases and animal models is concerning. But, it doesn’t prove that vaping is directly
responsible for people’s lung infections. Also, it’s not yet clear what it is in the
vapor causes these changes to lung immune cells. If we can pinpoint that, we might be able
to make vaping products safer by switching up the ingredients. Still, studies seem to keep suggesting that
vaping is harmful in its own unique way—which is why health regulatory agencies like the
US FDA keep slamming companies for claiming their products are safe. And whether vaping is ultimately less risky
than smoking unfortunately remains an open question. Thanks for watching this episode of SciShow
News! This episode was brought to you by today’s
President of Space, Matthew Brant. Thank you, Matthew, for your presidential
support! If you want to join Matthew in supporting
this channel, you can learn how over at {♫Outro♫}

100 thoughts on “Yet More Evidence That Vaping Is Probably Terrible | SciShow News”

  1. As a former smoker now vaper. I have no delusion of it being good for me but I would say it's not as bad. My lung capacity is better my energy levels are better and I find I'm more stable emotionally than when I smoked. I'm not advocating for vaping. I don't want people to start thinking it's just fine. I think active cigarette smokers would be better off if they switched over.

  2. the science of the vaping portion is, well, scientific, as i have come to expect from scishow. but your script and headline specifically fail to mention that over 80% of the deaths and illnesses in the current vaping-related-illness epidemic result from using unregulated, untested, black market THC vape cartridges. nicotine products are much more heavily regulated than cannabis products. if even a portion of the 20% who are nicotine users got their juul pods or whatever from a black market source, then the scientific way to approach the topic is to say that unregulated black market vape juices use chemicals that are unsafe, while the evidence is still way out on vaping in general. one single study of mice isn’t enough to overcome the fact that the current problem comes largely from black market weed vapes, not market-legal vaporizer nicotine.

  3. That's the part of vaping I didn't understand.
    Don't we try really hard to keep fluids out of our lungs? Doesn't vaping just kinda.. put those fluids directly into them? Thus explains the pneumonia cases.

  4. Ooooo! This leads me to a question for #BecauseScience ; does this mean that Spider-Man's spidey sense travels through his bones, which causes his muscles to auto-respond to threats leading to his ability to evade danger!?

  5. I appreciate that he said we can make vaping g safer instead of flat out banning it like some other people might suggest.

  6. Trust thick as sh*t yanks to screw something up that is helping millions of people. STOP VAPING WITH DODGY CHEAP COILS MADE IN MEXICO OR MODIFYING YOUR E-LIQUID, OBVIOUSLY, THAT MIGHT NOT BE GOOD FOR YOU…..YOU IDIOTS. STOP BLAMING VAPING!!!!

  7. 3 months for how long per day? i take a puff every so often, i dont bask in vapor. these types of studies are misleading at best and a waste of time at worst. if u want studies on vaping, study vapers. WoW wHaT a CoNcEpT?!

  8. It could be that regularly inhaling any form of vapor, even steam, can cause negative effects because it alters the chemistry inside the lungs.

  9. I'm really disappointed to see a channel normally doing their research so we'll taking over information only from some of the study's. To me it's kinda odd that when Trump wants to ban flavoured e-liquids suddenly it's all bad. Big side note a lot of those study's used unregulated liquids. 10 years of vaping started in the UK and yet not a single person either sick or death related to vaping 🤔🤔

  10. Thank you for an unbiased look at vaping. I can't respect a lot of the information I see on it because itd always slanted one easy or another.

  11. Sci show: vaping is bad

    Me, cheifing my juul like I’m gonna die if I’m not breathing its sweet nectar: 🤔 I’m listening

  12. So could this be what's causing that " mystery illness" that's been hitting people who vape? Or was it just some really bad M pneumonia? I never saw another article on it since they all reported on that.
    Edit: I know I had heard that at least one person died ( I believe it was more than one though) from whatever illness they got from vaping, but after that it just kinda went away from what I saw.

  13. What scares mice?
    Being hunted, mauled to death and eaten by a giant with fangs and claws.

    What scares humans?
    Speaking to multiple people.

  14. since i started working out my reaction have improved, apparently yoga helps bone density etc. Maybe there is a connection.

  15. Did these scientists expose the mice to an amount that is relatively the same as a regular vaper or did they pump in vapor all the time making it the only thing they breathed? I’m thinking about stuff like vg/pg concentration, time of exposure, nicotine concentration. I understand that it would be dangerous if it was the only gas I got into my lungs for 3 months, but that’s not the case. There are many factors playing into this.

  16. Well the fact vaping is unhealthy is a non discussion. However it seems with the variety of vaping substance, is it possible that has more to do with the most recent issues. Vaping has been around for over a decade. If vaping tradition e liquids was so toxic, wouldn't it caused more reports sooner?

  17. The research however will not point out that it's a Vape brand that is approved by the US health organisation. All issues reported recently with vape infections are all from a particular brand

  18. It's just as dishonest to say the "jury's still out" on whether vaping is safer than cigarettes, as it is to say that vaping is completely harmless. Vaping likely comes with it's own health risks, which are still being investigated. But it is less harmful than smoking.

  19. So, one study (on mice) and you are shouting about the dangers of vaping, and say literally nothing about it's benefits over smoking cigarettes.

    Vaping isn't meant for non-smokers (which you don't state), and although "not safe" as you point out, it's safer than smoking by a long shot.

    I normally respect you @hank but honestly this is just headline grabbing nonsense I'd expect from a third rate tabloid, not a respectable channel such as scishow. Very unbalanced.

    You risk people who do smoke saying "see? I told you it wasn't safe, I'm sticking with smoking". Shame on you.

    In addition, you do NOT mention that (and quoting your own sources):

    "About 80% of the persons who vaped and became ill reported having used both nicotine products and tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) or cannabidiol (CBD) products."

    Who'd have thought vaping cannaboids would be bad.

  20. Just checked the methodology of the vaping study. The results are meaningless. They used an ancient device with no temperature control and used it much more frequently than a human ever would. That means ecig will run dry and get far hotter than any human could or would ever tolerate.

    What they have published compares smoke with partially combusted PG and VG, not vaped PG and VG.

    Temperature controlled devices have been around for years. That they did not use one in their study just shows the lack of understanding the researchers have of what they are studying.

  21. Scientists in the Netherlands claimed the chemical to cause the smoke was cancer triggering. That was enough for me to be against it.

  22. "The most recent figures on children aged 11 to 16 show continued linear decline in smoking. Although people are experimenting with e-cigarettes, it’s certainly not making them smokers."

    "If you buy decent stuff from a reputable supplier we can’t guarantee that it is safe but we can guarantee it’s an awful lot safer than smoking."

    "Tobacco cigarettes cost the smoker one day of life for every four days they smoke, it is by far in a way the most lethal legal product on the market. It’s inconceivable that e-cigarettes are as harmful as that."

    Professor John Britton, director of the UK Centre for Tobacco & Alcohol Studies

  23. It is not safe, but it is 95% safer than smoking cigs. This is backed
    by the Public Health England and Royal College of Physicians. As a 10
    year smoker that tried to quit several times, vaping succeeded and I've
    been cigarette since 2013. Smoking kills 450,000 a year, so you tell me
    what you would rather see people doing?

  24. I see this recent up trend in negative vape news as a result of big tobacco trying to regain control of the market and as a side effect, some news outlets are adding fuel to the fire and taking it as a way to try and stop kids from starting to vape and get addicted to nicotine. Which is obviously bad. Unfortunately there's not yet any means of completely validating any news for it's accuracy so there's always going to be a certain degree of speculation on either side of any given argument. Even the most reputable news outlets are subject to the occasionally skewing of the truth to fit either an agenda or for a hefty payout. All I know for sure is that I smoked for 10+ years and when I switched to vaping I feel better. Some juices do irritate my lungs more than others, so I try and avoid those. But it's obvious to me that it's the healthy alternative.

  25. My dad smoked for 50 years and tried everything to give up, finally managed it thanks to vape. Emphysema and lung cancer are worse than lung infections. Your title is clickbait and you should be ashamed of yourselves. "Terrible" .

    Cigarettes have cyanide and arsenic in them. CYANIDE AND ARSENIC. Vaporized food flavours + nicotine might be worse than burnt cyanide arsenic and nicotine (as well as over 60 other carcinogens, and many others recognized as poisonous) ? Well yeah in the sense that there might be a teapot orbiting Saturn, it's a ridiculous hypothesis.

  26. EPA has deemed anything that is glycol based either as a hazardous substance or hazardous waste so how is a product that contains glycol supposed to be safe it's one of the main ingredients of antifreeze people!!!

  27. It's funny how every one of these deaths and happenings of kids getting sick are from fake thc carta and everyone is just ignoring it because "VaPe BaD, cIgArEtTeS gOoD"

  28. "I feel it in my bones
    Enough to make my systems blow"
    "I'm breathing in the chemicals"

    Imagine dragon called it first.

  29. Anybody think that these pneumonia symptoms are simply caused by kids taking huge swigs of flavoured glycerine in gaseous form?

  30. I wonder how humid the air was that they used in the vaping experiment. Would be interesting to see if humidity affects the lungs.

  31. Has anyone tried to compare theatrical haze to e-cig vape? The core components (water, glycol / glycerine) are the same, though studies on theatrical hazers have not found any sort of long term effects.

  32. Whatever the problems, no 4 thousand chemicals and smelling like an overused toaster. If people want to damage their bodies, vaping is guaranteed to help us. Is it bad for them, who cares.

  33. People that love vaping will believe what they want to believe while those that don't will look more closely at the evidence as it rolls out. There's still no question that vaping has helped even long term smokers to get off smoking and vaping all together when they wisely slowly taper off the nicotine. I've chatted with people that have gone from a 40 year addiction to smoking and with 3 months of vaping quit cigarettes for good. The problem in society is far too many young people who have never smoked and perhaps never would, thought vaping looked cool and are now hooked.

  34. Everything in moderation guys. Vaping is cleaner than smoking cigarettes but people took that to mean, "let's vape more than we were smoking in the first place". If a hypothetical substance is 4 times less toxic than another, if you take it 8 times as much, guess what, its now more toxic.

  35. As a long time subscriber to all of SciShow disappointed by your piece on Vaping. I quit smoking for vaping 9 years ago and my annual medicals give me a clean bill of health. Anxious to see if the study referred to in your piece can stand up to a peer review process. Typically the two biggest with these studies are temperature and application. Interesting, when you want to achieve a specific outcome, how skewing the inputs or methodology keeps that grant money rolling in. I'm not denying that there is a problem out there the issue is the source of the problem. Preliminary investigations would indicate that blackmarket manufactured pre-filled pods and THC being mixed into the pods would be a good place to start looking seriously.

  36. That people thought inhaling oil would have no significant health effects is really weird to me. Why is this treated as a mystery? Aqueous solutions vs oily solutions with respect to lung health is not a virgin field of study.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *