HEALTH RISKS OF VAPING, VAPING PRODUCTS AND ACCESSORIES

WARNING: All vapers should carefully read this page and all the links listed on this page before they consider buying any YOUFILL products.

Based on the published scientific documentation, vaping, using refillable pods, ceramic coil of the pods, plastic housing of the pods, e-juice may be a serious health risk to vapers. Dr. Tony Casolaro says, ”Vapers, who often see the devices as safer and healthier than cigarettes, are potentially inhaling a toxic stew of atomized oils, an aircraft de-icing chemical and toxic heavy metals leaching from the heating elements used to create the "smoke" “This appears to be an unforeseeable mixture of elements resulting from the combination of metal, heat, THC and liquid, causing very different lung injuries,” said Dr. Tony Casolaro, a former clinical chief of the pulmonary medicine branch at the National Institutes of Health, who is now a clinical professor at Georgetown University’s medical school. We strongly recommend all vapers to do their own research until a clear FDA regulations are mandated. Following are some of the scientific articles, vapers should read before they buy any vaping products and any accessories of vaping products. Vapers should definitely read this article  https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/10/23/vaping-devices-under-scrutiny-outbreak-lung-illnesses-continue/4009350002/

first before they make a decision to buy any YOUFILL products. Customers agree to use all YOUFILL products at their own risks. 

WARNING: Smoking causes bladder cancer, which can lead to bloody urine. WARNING: Smoking during pregnancy stunts fetal growth. WARNING: Smoking can cause heart disease and strokes by clogging arteries. WARNING: Smoking causes COPD, a lung disease that can be fatal.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/10/23/vaping-devices-under-scrutiny-outbreak-lung-illnesses-continue/4009350002/

  1. Brown J, Beard E, Kotz D, et al. Real world effectiveness of e-cigarettes when used to aid smoking cessation: a cross-sectional population study. Addiction. 2014;109(9):1531–1540. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Siegel MB, Tanwar KL, Wood KS. Electronic cigarettes as a smoking-cessation tool: results from an online survey. Am J Prev Med. 2011;40(4):472–475. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Royal College of Physicians. Nicotine without smoke: tobacco harm reduction. [Accessed June 24, 2017];2016 Available at: https://www.rcplondon.ac.uk/projects/outputs/nicotine-without-smoke-tobacco-harm-reduction-0.
  4. Arrazola RA, Singh T, Corey CG, et al. Tobacco use among middle and high school students in the United States, 2011-2014. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2015;64(14):381–385. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Bunnell R, Israel A, Apelberg B, et al. Intentions to smoke cigarettes among never-smoking U.S. middle and high school electronic cigarette users, National Youth Tobacco Survey, 2011-2013. Nicotine Tob Res. 2015;17(2):228–235. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Gilreath TD, Leventhal A, Barrington-Trimis JL, et al. Patterns of alternative tobacco product use: emergence of hookah and e-cigarettes as preferred products amongst youth. J Adolesc Heal. 2016;58(2):181–185. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Abrams DB. Promise and peril of e-cigarettes: can disruptive technology make cigarettes obsolete? JAMA. 2014;311(2):135–136. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Kozlowski LT, Warner KE. Adolescents and e-cigarettes: objects of concern may appear larger than they are. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2017;174:209–214. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Bareham D, Ahmadi K, Elie M, Jones AW. E-cigarettes: controversies within the controversy. Lancet Respir Med. 2016;4(11):868–869. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. US Food and Drug Administration. Center for tobacco products overview. [Accessed May 31, 2017]; Available at: https://www.fda.gov/TobaccoProducts/AboutCTP/ucm383225.htm.
  11. Haddock CK, Lando H, Klesges RC, et al. Modified tobacco use and lifestyle change in risk-reducing beliefs about smoking. Am J Prev Med. 2004;27(1):35–41. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Berg CJ, Stratton E, Schauer GL, et al. Perceived harm, addictiveness, and social acceptability of tobacco products and marijuana among young adults: marijuana, hookah, and electronic cigarettes win. Subst Use Misuse. 2015;50(1):79–89. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Giovenco DP, Lewis MJ, Delnevo CD. Factors associated with e-cigarette use: a national population survey of current and former smokers. Am J Prev Med. 2014;47(4):476–480. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Hall MG, Pepper JK, Morgan JC, Brewer NT. Social interactions as a source of information about e-cigarettes: a study of U.S. adult smokers. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2016;13(8):788. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. US Department of Health & Human Services and Food and Drug Administration. Deeming Tobacco Products to be subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as Amended by the Family Smoking Prevention and Control Act. [Accessed June 24, 2017];Fed Regist. 2016 81(90):28973–29106. Available at: http://webapps.dol.gov/federalregister/PdfDisplay.aspx?DocId=26927. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. 111th United States Congress. [Accessed May 31, 2017];2009 Available at: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/111/hr1256/text.
  17. Trasher JF, Hammond D, Fong GT, Arillo-Santillán E. Smokers' reactions to cigarette package warnings with graphic imagery and with only text: a comparison between Mexico and Canada. Salud Publica Mex. 2007;49(Suppl 2):S233–S240. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Hammond D, Fong GT, Borland R, et al. Text and graphic warnings on cigarette packages: findings from the international tobacco control four country study. Am J Prev Med. 2007;32(3):202–209. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Hammond D, Fong GT, McNeill A, et al. Effectiveness of cigarette warning labels in informing smokers about the risks of smoking: findings from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four Country Survey. Tob Control. 2006;15(Suppl 3):iii19–iii25. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. McCool J, Webb L, Cameron LD, Hoek J. Graphic warning labels on plain cigarette packs: will they make a difference to adolescents? Soc Sci Med. 2012;74(8):1269–1273. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Bansal-Travers M, Hammond D, Smith P, Cummings KM. The impact of cigarette pack design, descriptors, and warning labels on risk perception in the U.S. Am J Prev Med. 2011;40(6):674–682. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Hammond D. Health warning messages on tobacco products: a review. Tob Control. 2011;20(3):327–337. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Hammond D, Fong GT, Zanna MP, et al. Tobacco denormalization and industry beliefs among smokers from four countries. Am J Prev Med. 2006;31(3):225–232. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. O'Hegarty M, Pederson LL, Nelson DE, et al. Reactions of young adult smokers to warning labels on cigarette packages. Am J Prev Med. 2006;30(6):467–473. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. White V, Webster B, Wakefield M. Do graphic health warning labels have an impact on adolescents' smoking-related beliefs and behaviours? Addiction. 2008;103(9):1562–1571. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. McCool J, Webb L, Cameron LD, Hoek J. Graphic warning labels on plain cigarette packs: will they make a difference to adolescents? Soc Sci Med. 2012;74(8):1269–1273. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Schneider S, Gadinger M, Fischer A. Does the effect go up in smoke? A randomized controlled trial of pictorial warnings on cigarette packaging. Patient Educ Couns. 2012;86(1):77–83. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Farsalinos KE, Polosa R. Safety evaluation and risk assessment of electronic cigarettes as tobacco cigarette substitutes: a systematic review. Ther Adv Drug Saf. 2014;5(2):67–86. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Goniewicz ML, Lingas EO, Hajek P. Patterns of electronic cigarette use and user beliefs about their safety and benefits: an Internet survey. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2013;32(2):133–140. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Mays D, Smith C, Johnson AC, et al. An experimental study of the effects of electronic cigarette warnings on young adult nonsmokers' perceptions and behavioral intentions. Tob Induc Dis. 2016;14(17) [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Sanders-Jackson A, Schleicher NC, Fortmann SP, Henriksen L. Effect of warning statements in e-cigarette advertisements: an experiment with young adults in the United States. Addiction. 2015;110(12):2015–2024. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Kong G, Cavallo DA, Camenga DR, et al. Preference for gain- or loss-framed electronic cigarette prevention messages. Addict Behav. 2016;62:108–113. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Czoli CD, Goniewicz M, Islam T, et al. Consumer preferences for electronic cigarettes: results from a discrete choice experiment. Tob Control. 2016;25(e1):e30–e36. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Wackowski OA, Hammond D, O'Connor RJ, et al. Smokers' and e-cigarette users' perceptions about e-cigarette warning statements. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2016;13(7) [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Byrnes JP, Miller DC, Schafer WD. Sex differences in risk taking: a meta-analysis. Psychol Bull. 1999;125(3):367–383. [Google Scholar]
  36. Gustafson PE. Sex differences in risk perception: theoretical and methodological perspectives. Risk Anal. 1998;18(6):805–811. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Johnson BB, Slovic P. Presenting uncertainty in health risk assessment: initial studies of its effects on risk perception and trust. Risk Anal. 1995;15(4):485–494. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Carpenter DM, Geryk LL, Chen AT, et al. Conflicting health information: a critical research need. Health Expect. 2016;19(6):1173–1182. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Kong G, Morean ME, Cavallo DA, et al. Reasons for electronic cigarette experimentation and discontinuation among adolescents and young adults. Nicotine Tob Res. 2015;17(7):847–854. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Krishnan-Sarin S, Morean ME, Camenga DR, et al. E-cigarette use among high school and middle school adolescents in Connecticut. Nicotine Tob Res. 2015;17(7):810–818. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Chatterjee S, Kang YS, Mishra DP. Market signals and relative preference: the moderating effects of conflicting information, decision focus, and need for cognition. J Bus Res. 2005;58(10):1362–1370. [Google Scholar]
  42. Naylor RW, Droms CM, Haws KL. Eating with a purpose: consumer response to functional food health claims in conflicting versus complementary information environments. J Public Policy Mark. 2009;28(2):221–233. [Google Scholar]
  43. Fennis BM, Stroebe W. Psychology of Advertising.2nd. New York, NY: Routledge Taylor and Francis Group; 2016. pp. 125–243. [Google Scholar]
  44. Stern PC. Learning through conflict: a realistic strategy for risk communication. Policy Sci. 1991;24(1):99–119. [Google Scholar]
  45. Kasperson RE, Renn O, Slovic P, et al. The social amplification of risk: a conceptual framework. Risk Anal. 1988;8(2):177–187. [Google Scholar]
  46. Cameron TA. Updating subjective risks in the presence of conflicting information: an application to climate change. J Risk Uncertain. 2005;30(1):63–97. [Google Scholar]
  47. Wackowski OA, O'Connor RJ, Strasser AA, et al. Smokers' and e-cigarette users' perceptions of modified risk warnings for e-cigarettes. Prev Med Rep. 2016;4:309–312. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Rodu B, Plurphanswat N, Hughes JR, Fagerström K. Associations of proposed relative-risk warning labels for snus with perceptions and behavioral intentions among tobacco users and nonusers. Nicotine Tob Res. 2016;18(5):809–816. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Agostinelli G, Grube JW. Alcohol counter-advertising and the media: a review of recent research. Alcohol Res Health. 2002;26(1):15–21. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Smith SW, Atkin CK, Roznowski J. Are “drink responsibly” alcohol campaigns strategically ambiguous? Health Commun. 2009;20(1):91–99. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Team T. Who stands to gain from the e-cigarette phenomenon? [Accessed May 31, 2017];Forbes. 2015 Jul 23; Available at: https://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2015/06/23/who-stands-to-gain-from-the-e-cigarette-phenomenon/#573eac37c8db.
  52. Duchowski AT. Eye Tracking Methodology.2nd. New York, NY: Springer; 2009. [Google Scholar]
  53. Liberman N, Trope Y. The psychology of transcending the here and now. Science. 2008;322(5905):1201–1205. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Byrne S, Katz SJ, Mathios A, Niederdeppe J. Do the ends justify the means? A test of alternatives to the FDA proposed cigarette warning labels. Health Commun. 2014;30(7):680–693. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Rodriguez D, Romer D, Audrain-McGovern J. Beliefs about the risks of smoking mediate the relationship between exposure to smoking and smoking. Psychosom Med. 2007;69(1):106–113. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Uhrig JD, Lewis MA, Bann CM, et al. Addressing HIV knowledge, risk reduction, social support, and patient involvement using SMS: results of a proof-of-concept study. J Health Commun. 2012;17(Supp1):128–145. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Lundborg P, Andersson H. Sex, risk perceptions and smoking behavior. J Health Econ. 2008;27(5):1299–1311. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. Flynn J, Slovic P, Mertz CK. Sex, race, and perception of environmental health risks. Risk Anal. 1994;14(6):1101–1108. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  59. Garbarino E, Strahilevitz M. Sex differences in the perceived risk of buying online and the effects of receiving a site recommendation. J Bus Res. 2004;57(7):768–775. [Google Scholar]
  60. US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. No decline in overall youth tobacco use since 2011. [Accessed May 31, 2017];2016 Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2016/p0414-youth-tobacco.html.
  61. Miller CH, Burgoon M, Grandpre JR, Alvaro EM. Identifying principal risk factors for the initiation of adolescent smoking behaviors: the significance of psychological reactance. Health Commun. 2006;19(3):241–252. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  62. Zwar N, Bell J, Peters M, et al. Nicotine and nicotine replacement therapy – the facts. Pharmacist. 2006;25(12):969–973. [Google Scholar]
  63. Ferguson SG, Gitchell JG, Shiffman S, et al. Providing accurate safety information may increase a smoker's willingness to use nicotine replacement therapy as part of a quit attempt. Addict Behav. 2011;36(7):713–716. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

 

  1. Fatal e-cigarette or vaping associated lung injury (EVALI): a first case report in Europe

Camille Marlière et al., European Respiratory Journal, 2020

  1. Diagnostic value of BAL lymphocytosis in patients with indeterminate for usual interstitial pneumonia imaging pattern

Vasilios Tzilas et al., European Respiratory Journal, 2019

  1. Diffuse alveolar haemorrhage secondary to e-cigarette “vaping” associated lung injury (EVALI) in a young European consumer

Thomas Villeneuve et al., European Respiratory Journal, 2020

  1. COVID-19 and vaping: risk for increased susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection?

Kielan Darcy McAlinden et al., European Respiratory Journal, 2020

  1. Telomere length in patients with unclassifiable interstitial lung disease: a cohort study

Brett Ley et al., European Respiratory Journal, 2020

 

  1. A Finale on EVALI?: The Abated but Not Forgotten Outbreak of Acute Respiratory Illness in Individuals Who Vape

Matthew Koslow et al., JAMA Network Open, 2020

  1. One-third of e-cigarette users report symptoms of lung irritation, injury

By Erin T. Welsh et al., Healio, 2020

  1. Vaping—Seeking Clarity in a Time of Uncertainty

Stephen R. Baldassarri et al., Journal of American Medical Association, 2019

  1. Association of Electronic Cigarette Use With Incident Respiratory Conditions Among US Adults From 2013 to 2018

Wubin Xie et al., JAMA Network Open, 2020

  1. Local Coverage Determinations Roundup: Razor Genomics, Guardant Health

Kelsy Ketchum et al., GenomeWeb

https://erj.ersjournals.com/content/54/6/1901922