You forgot to add the following for Dawkin's research:
"While there can be toxic chemicals present in the vapour, they are far fewer and generally at lower concentrations than in tobacco smoke. Evidence so far still shows both high and low nicotine e-cigarettes are far less harmful than smoking"
For the study presented using NIH dataset in 2019 :
2 year study only.
A quarter were former smokers. And 66% were using both e-cig and conventional cigarettes.
They also noted that there was a 'lasting effect' for former smokers.
Furthermore , no significant increase in Acute Myocardial Infarct in former and (sometimes) e-cig users.
One study also note that:
1. the risk rapidly dissipates upon stopping e-cig
2. People briefly experiment with e-cigs and stop before any lasting damage is done.
3. E-cigarettes have not been around long enough to cause permanent damage.
The others are in vitro studies which require further studies in humans, not just cells. One was looking at cancer cells (too late for the individual).
And if we look at cooking oil fumes, they have been associated with lung cancer in non-smoking women - so should we also ban deep frying or cooking oil? Then bitumen and road fumes- ban vehicular use or roads? Mining activities associated with lung cancer and diseases? Ban mining?
The premise of e-cigs is to reduce the risks posed by conventional tobacco. Not eliminate it.
Now if the government bans all forms of tobacco citing that all causes cancer, then that is reasonable. They can also go ahead and ban alcohol together with all the clubs in LKF while they are at it. After all, government has to discipline the youth on behalf of their parents.
Iqos and e-cigs should be regulated - yes. Not straight out banned. The fumes from iQOS and e-cigs don't smell as crap as burning conventional tobacco cigarettes. Plus think of the cleaner environment - less butts on the floor.