Vaping & COVID-19 – Information for Vapers


Written by Roberto Sussman1 and Carmen Escrig2
1Institute for Nuclear Sciences, National University of México UNAM. Physics PhD. Director of Pro-Vapeo México AC
2Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Spain. Biology PhD specialized in Virology. Coordinator of the Medical Platform for Tobacco Harm Reduction in Spain.


PURPOSE The spread of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic provides fertile ground for spreading misinformation on vaping. Vapers must be equipped with solid information and data to counterargue.

ON SMOKING. The relation between smoking and the progression to severe conditions of COVID-19 is still uncertain, though identified vulnerability conditions for this progression (cardiovascular and respiratory disease, diabetes) in mostly senior patients are strongly correlated with long term harms from smoking.

ON VAPING. There is no evidence that vaping (intrinsically) increases the risk of infection or progression to severe condition of COVID-19. When evaluating risks on vapers it is necessary to consider that most are ex-smokers or still smokers. Vapers with a long previous smoking history could exhibit conditions seen in vulnerable patients. However, this would not be an effect of vaping but of previous smoking. Since completely switching from smoking to vaping improves cardiovascular and respiratory conditions, smokers who switch to vaping are expected to have a better prognosis if infected by SARS-CoV-2

ON PROPYLENE GLYCOL (PG) AS DISINFECTANT. Because of its hygroscopic nature PG vapor (not droplets) can act as environmental disinfectant wiping out pathogens under specific physical conditions. However, there is no evidence on whether this effect will work on SARS-CoV-2 and in the context of vaping.

ON ENVIRONMENTAL VAPOR. While there are no reported and verified cases of contagion, the saliva droplets carrying SARS-CoV-2 virus are much heavier than the rapidly moving volatile droplets of exhaled vapor. Therefore, vapor exhaled by an infected vaper is likely to spread as much viruses as in normal respiration in the personal breathing zone, far less and far closer than spreading by sneezing or coughing.

RECOMMENDATIONS. The precautions to prevent contagion from virus carried by e-cigarette vapor are the same “social distancing” measures recommended to all the population including non-vapers: avoid physical contact and proximity to others. For vapers specifically: vape with low powered devices, avoid vaping in public indoor spaces and in outdoor spaces vape at least 2 mts away from others.

The misinformation pandemic

Unfortunately, the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic follows the years long ongoing pandemic of serious misinformation on vaping. One of the main spearheads of this misinformation is undoubtedly Professor Stanton Glantz from the University of California at San Francisco. In his professional blog1 Professor Glantz squarely puts vaping and smoking on equal footing as serious risk factors for progression to COVID-19. Specifically, Glantz justifies this assessment by stating that:

The recent excellent summary of the evidence on the pulmonary effects of e-cigarettes reported multiple ways that e-cigarettes impair lungs’ ability to fight off infections:

a statement followed by listing a litany of adverse effects of vaping on respiratory infections, all taken from studies examined in the review by Gotts et al2 (the “excellent summary”). While recognizing that Vapers’ risk of viral infections has not been studied much, the popular journal Scientific American3 has cited Glantz and has also recycled some of the results reported by Gotts et al.

The review by Gotts et al, which Glantz and Scientific American take as source, is extremely superficial, biased and selective, it cited uncritically only studies reporting adverse effects, all of which are either acute effects without clinical relevance or cross sectional studies based on small samples of vapers in which the huge confounding effect of previous smoking history was not properly handled (see a critique of such studies in a much more balanced and extensive review of respiratory effects4 of vaping). Moreover, Gotts et al (and Glantz quoting them) interpret the results in a very selective manner. A representative example of their modus operandi is furnished by their assessment of the results obtained by one of the revised studies by Saudt et al5. From Glantz’s exact quote of Gotts et al we have

Healthy non-smokers were exposed to e-cigarette aerosol, and bronchoalveolar lavage was obtained to study alveolar macrophages. The expression of more than 60 genes was altered in e-cigarette users’ alveolar macrophages two hours after just 20 puffs, including genes involved in inflammation.

Curiously, Gotts et al and Glantz omit mentioning that the effects examined in5 were acute and that the same study reports that “No significant changes in clinical parameters were observed”. Gotts et al and Glantz quoting them also omit mentioning evidence pointing in the opposite direction: as reported by several studies reviewed in3 the usage of e-cigarettes actually reduces the presence of pathogens and respiratory infections. A significant decrease of respiratory infections in e-cigarette users has also been reported in a large scope randomized controlled trial researching smoking cessation6, a result based on a 12 months long clinical observation on a large sample of subjects. This result (and similar results in other randomized trials reviewed in7) are real life observational results that are more relevant to assess the immune response of vapers in the context of COVID-19 than the adverse acute effects in idealized lab studies reported uncritically by Gotts et al in2 and recycled by Glantz and Scientific American.

Professor Glantz is perhaps the most vocal spearhead, but he is far from being the only academic in the vast USA sourced anti-vaping activism, which is now presenting the relation of vaping and the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic through the grossly biased assessments from reviews like that of Gotts et al, conflating carelessly the risks of vaping and smoking and ignoring all contrary or critical evidence. It is very unfortunate that mainstream academia, politicians and the media in the USA is predominantly fed by this constant flow of misinformation, as can be seen in statements by the Major of New York City, Bill de Blasio8, and by various media outlets9.

COVID-19 and smokers

A good reference reviewing the available evidence on the relation between smoking, vaping and COVID-19 is the article written by Farsalinos, Barbouni and Nyaura10 (see also the professional blog entry of Farsalinos11). The authors conclude after reviewing the data from five studies on patients infected by SARS-CoV-2 that the relation between smoking cigarettes and the severity of COVID-19 in infected Chinese patients is uncertain and even protective (bearing in mind that 52.1% of Chinese men smoke whereas only 2.7% of women do). In his blog entry Farsalinos examines in more detail the data from the study with the largest sample12: 1096 patients, of whom only 12.5% were current smokers (1.9% ex-smokers), which (as in the other studies) is a much lesser proportion than that found among the population bearing in mind that 58.1% of the sample were men and practically 100% older than 15 years (to be representative of the population we would expect the proportion of smokers in the sample to be 29%). Of the 1096 patients:

  • 926 were reported without severe affectation (11.8% smokers)
  • 173 were reported with severe affectation (11.8% smokers)
  • 67 were reported in critical situation with intensive care, mechanical ventilation or dead (25.8% smokers)

These numbers indicate a higher proportion of smokers among those with severe outcomes, but still lower than in the general Chinese population given the high smoking prevalence among Chinese men. Evidently, smoking contributes to identified vulnerability conditions, such as cardiovascular ailments, diabetes or chronic lung disease, moreover, there seems to be no evidence that smoking in itself is the dominant or determinant factor.

The effect of COVID-19 on vapers

Contrary to statements by misinformation sources, there is simply no evidence suggesting that vaping has the capacity to affect negatively the immune body response in order to produce the development and progression of the diseases caused by SARS-CoV-2 on e-cigarette users.

To better understand the possibility of a progression of infection leading to COVID-19 in vapers it is necessary to bear in mind that the overwhelming majority are smokers or ex-smokers, some of them dragging long histories of previous smoking. This smoking history is very likely an important factor that could easily render as vulnerable a vaper who (say) smoked 20 or 30 years, even if he/she has been (typically) 2-3 years vaping without smoking. Such vaper would be more susceptible to the complicated etiology of COVID-19. However, this is not an intrinsic effect of vaping, but of smoking, and thus it does not justify casting vaping as a risk factor on equal footing as smoking (as inferred from misleading statements by Glantz that have been recycled by the media).

In fact, bearing in mind that smokers improve their biomarkers and their respiratory and cardiovascular conditions when they switch completely to vaping, it is highly plausible (as Farsalinos argues11) that they would have a better prognosis under possible progression of COVID-19 if they no longer smoke, even if they have smoked before. This effect would be even more pronounced if it turns out that smoking is a determinant factor in the evolution to severe complications from COVID-19.

It is also important to stress that there cannot be contagion of SARS-CoV-2 virus through e-liquids containing the virus. Pathogens have been detected on e-liquids, however it would be practically impossible to become infected by vaping e-liquids containing the SARS-CoV-2 virus or any other pathogen. The e-liquid becomes heated at 180-220 degrees Celsius. No pathogen can survive these temperatures (they stop functioning as the macromolecules making them up fragment).

Propylene glycol as a disinfectant

There has been mention in social networks that vaping might be protective in comparison with smoking on infection risks from COVID-1913, pointing out to experiments conducted in the 1940’s in which propylene glycol (PG) vapor was used as environmental disinfectant that removes pathogens in hospitals, military barracks and other places. The experimental procedure was as follows14,15: pathogens (bacteria) were delivered in aqueous droplets from aerosolized cultures into the test chamber (the control being a chamber with pathogens without the PG aerosol). PG aerosol or PG vapor is then continuously supplied into the test chamber with a ventilator evenly dispersing it. Tests for various ranges of ambient temperatures and relative humidity levels were conducted with various procedures to collect the bacteria. As the PG droplets in the aerosol rapidly evaporate they release PG vapor at concentrations between 0.05 and 0.66 ppm (200 to 3000 mg/m3). The cleansing effect was most efficient at lower temperatures (in the range 15-37 degrees C) and under intermediate relative humidity levels (between 27% and 91%, peaking at around 42%), though the cleansing effect was still possible (though slower) at low relative humidity (10%) with sufficiently high PG vapor concentration.

The physical property explaining this effect16 is the hygroscopic nature of PG vapor (not the aerosol droplets). As the PG droplets evaporate below air saturation they release PG vapor molecules dispersing at high velocities and (because hygroscopicity) these molecules condense (are rapidly accreted) into the aqueous droplets containing the pathogens. The latter are eliminated by numerous fast collisions with the accreted PG molecules once the latter accumulate to form 70-80% of the droplets mass. This effect is no longer effective in both extremes of humidity: at 0% relative humidity the droplets evaporate very fast and at close to 100% relative humidity they condense, leading to a steady state which limits the available PG vapor (see 16 for details).

It is difficult to relate these highly controlled and idealized experiments to the erratic and highly variable conditions in vaping. For starters, pure PG (as aerosol or as vapor) in these experiments was supplied continuously and spread evenly, whereas in vaping the aerosol is a mixture of PG and other compounds (glycerol, VG, nicotine, with residual concentrations of mostly aldehydes), it is supplied into the surrounding air (when inhaled or exhaled) intermittently during puffs and spreads unevenly. Second, PG concentrations in vaping are very variable, rapidly changing with time and position. While PG concentrations in the experiments might match those of inhaled vapor, this disinfectant effect is unlikely to occur inside the respiratory tracts in which relative humidity is close to 100%. The exhaled environmental vaping aerosol might approach better the experimental conditions: PG/VG droplets evaporates rapidly, thus releasing PG vapor molecules, while relative humidity levels of 40-70% are not unrealistic, but PG vapor concentrations might be too low (chamber studies measure about 200 mg/m317,18 the lower limit concentrations in the experiments in14,15).

Moreover, given the observed reduction of respiratory infections in users of e-cigarettes, it is possible to speculate that at least in some occasions environmental conditions allowing for this effect could have occurred when vaping. The air cleansing experiments conducted in the 1940’s only involved bacteria and the influenza virus, there is no way without experimental evidence to infer if this could happen with SARS-CoV-2 and in the conditions of environmental e-cigarette aerosol. Many viruses (and there is ample variation on this) cannot survive long time outside the protective envelope of a humid medium (the saliva droplets) or outside their host cell in the body tissues. However, it is not known if this is the case also with SARS-CoV-2.

Exhaled vapor as a possible path to spread SARS-Co-V2

A worrying theoretically possible path of infection of the SARS-Co-V2 virus is by breathing environmental aerosol (i.e. “vapor”) exhaled by vapers, a diluted and volatile aerosol composed almost entirely of droplets made of PG, glycerol (VG) and humectants (the visible “cloud”) suspended in a gaseous medium made of the same compounds (nicotine and aldehydes and metals are present at trace levels).

Can this exhaled vapor spread SARS-CoV-2? As stated by Rosanna O’Connor, director of the Tobacco Alcohol and Drugs of Public Health England19, and Professor Neil Benowitz of the University of California at San Francisco20, currently there is no evidence of contagion through vapor exhaled by users of e-cigarettes. As a contrast, the Scottish microbiologist Tom McLean, chief scientific advisor of the Nanotera Group, claims21 that exhaled vapor can spread the virus, even comparing exposure to exhaled vapor as “being spit in your face”. As we show below, McLean’s statements are completely mistaken and contradict basic principles of aerosol physics.

It is known that SARS-CoV-2 contagion occurs by exposure to the virus in airborne saliva droplets exhaled in the breath of an infected person (at short distances) and, in a more efficient form (at larger distances) when the infected person sneezes or coughs22. When using an e-cigarette the exhaled vapor is a tidal flow that is bound to carry into the environment any buoyant material (possibly including pathogens) contained in the respiratory system of the vaper, just as it happens when breathing, but vaping in itself would be a distinct unique mechanism (it is impossible vape and sneeze or cough at the same time).

As opposed to normal breathing, coughing or sneezing, the airborne saliva droplets carried by exhaled vapor would be suspended on a different chemical medium of PG/VG droplets and vapor (other compounds like nicotine and aldehydes are found at trace levels). While it is impossible to rule out the action of a disinfectant effect as reported in14,15,16 through the condensation of PG vapor on the saliva droplets carrying the SARS-CoV-2 virus, this remains a highly unlikely and merely speculative and theoretical possibility without any empirical support. The most important criterion to examine the possibility of SARS-CoV-2 virus transmission though the exhaled vapor is the dynamics of possible saliva droplets dragged by this flow.

The exhaled vapor is a diluted aerosol made almost exclusively of very light and rapidly moving PG/VG droplets (the “particles”) with mean diameters of about 100-300 nm23,24 (one nanometer nm is 1 billionth of a meter). These droplets evaporate very rapidly (20 seconds per puff) and the whole gaseous system is supersaturated and disperses completely in less than 2-3 minutes. Some of these droplets will impact walls or fall to the ground before evaporating. Chamber and laboratory experiments reveal that most droplets are not transported large distances: at 1.5 meters from the exhalation source they are barely detectable, with their particle number density almost indistinguishable from background values for all particle sizes (submicron, PM2.5 and PM10). For low powered devices this distance is likely to be less than 1 mts.

The spreading of the virus can be understood in terms of the dynamics of an airborne biological aerosol made by an ensemble of “viral particles” of about 100 nm typically contained in saliva droplets that are large particles of 5-10 microns (one micron is 1000 nm) of diameter22,25. The exhalation of normal breath under sedentary conditions is a low velocity nearly laminar air flow, so it will spread few droplets at short distances, whereas sneezing is a high speed explosive turbulent flow that can spread up to millions of droplets at larger distances (coughing can spread thousands of droplets). The saliva droplets transporting the virus can (in principle) remain buoyant for long time, though in real life conditions they are very susceptible to environmental conditions: temperature, relative humidity, solar radiation, evaporation, fall by gravity and impactation in surfaces22,25. Although such droplets have been reported traveling up to 2.5 meters away (probably from somebody sneezing), this distance is a maximal value so that under normal environmental conditions the average distance traveled before evaporation or impactation should be much less, probably around 1.5 meters (even less in dry and hot environments) and even less (the breathing zone of about 30 cm) when exhaled by normal breathing.

The exhalation flow associated with vaping is in terms of velocities an intermediate flow between the two extremes given by the near laminar flow of normal breathing and the fast turbulent flow of sneezing or coughing22. However, the saliva droplets carrying up to thousands of viral particles behave dynamically different from the rapidly evaporating PG/VG droplets in the e-cigarette aerosol: they stay buoyant for much longer times and are also much heavier and thus present a lot of inertial dragging to the exhaled flow.

Therefore, it is unlikely that the heavy saliva droplets dragged by the exhaled flow of an infected vaper would be transported as far as distances of 1.5 meters where the much lighter PG/VG droplets are barely detectable (their particle number density almost blends with environmental control values23,24). For low powered devices the exhaled vapor flow is slower and closer to being laminar, not much different from that of the normal respiratory flow, hence the distance reached by saliva droplets dragged by the exhalation should be even less, likely comparable to the personal breathing zone (30 cm).

Thus, Rosanna O’Connor from PHE and Professor Benowitz are right: there is no special risk of contagion of SARS-CoV-2 from exhaled vapor that would require more strict measures with respect to non-vapers. The contagion risk from exhaled vapor cannot be compared to that from spreading the virus through sneezing or coughing, as claimed by Tom Mclean. It is reasonable to expect that, depending on the power of the vaping device, exhaled vapor from an infected vaper would spread roughly the same amount of saliva droplets containing SARS-CoV-2 virus as the normal respiration of a non-vaper in his/her breathing zone. Keeping the same 1.5 to 2 meters distance recommended for non-vapers should prevent any contagion from a vaper.

Contagion of COVID-19 on surfaces

One of the mechanisms of contagion of viruses is physical contact with surfaces where they lie and then to touch the mouth, nose or eyes. It is known that viruses can survive on surfaces and that typically they lie inside thin liquid films that form when the saliva droplets impact the surfaces when transported by sneezing, coughing or sneezing22,25. This type contagion is thus theoretically possible from saliva droplets containing SARS-CoV-2 dragged by exhaled vapor and impacting the surface, but the risk should be comparable to that from droplets impacting a sufficiently close surface from normal breath.

How long can the virus they survive? It depends on the virus: it was reported that SARS-CoV-2 remains stable, viable and functional for several hours and (in some materials) up to 3 days25, but this comes from extremely idealized laboratory experiments that bear no relation with the realistic deposition of a virus on a surface: the researchers inoculate the virus in a host liquid protective solution on the surface and afterwards verify its viability. In the case of that SARS-CoV-2 it is not known how much time the virus can survive on surfaces under realistic conditions and if they can survive without their protective envelope.


On the basis of the information provided, we recommend

  • If you vape do not revert to smoking (if you are a dual user try to become an exclusive vaper)
  • If you enjoy vaping and do not smoke quitting vaping must be a personal choice, not an obligation
  • Be discreet and do not call unwanted attention (bear in mind that these are difficult times and that a lot of non-vapers have been exposed to a lot of misinformation)
  • Avoid big clouds in public at all costs (even outdoors)
  • Use low powered devices whenever possible and when others are around. The risk of spreading the virus with discrete vaping in low powered devices is roughly equivalent to the risk of spreading it through normal sedentary breathing
  • Avoid vaping in enclosed public spaces and try to keep at least 2 meters distance from others when vaping outdoors

You Don’t Know Nicotine – Documentary Film

You Don't Know Nicotine
Aaron Biebert

By Aaron Biebert

You Don’t Know Nicotine – Documentary Film

Join us on a wild journey around the world to discover the eye-opening truth about nicotine. Campaign FAQ Updates 2 Comments 5 Community Back this project


It was a caring community of passionate leaders from around the world that brought A Billion Lives (our last movie) to over 4,000,000 people. 

To make an even bigger impact this time, we’ll need your help. 

Welcome to Launch Week! 

We’ll reach out to the press all week and we’d like them to see what an epic community we have behind this. To help fuel the energy and make this the #1 most popular “Film & Video” Kickstarter project, please quickly pick an initial level (they start at $5) so you can get updates and encourage the new community.

If we don’t reach the goal, you won’t get charged. Also, you can upgrade later if you decide. Please note some reward levels only have limited quantities.

Here we go!

We’re excited to announce that You Don’t Know Nicotine is fiscally sponsored by The Film Collaborative, a California 501(c)3 organization based in Los Angeles. This means your donations to this project through the Kickstarter campaign are tax-deductible in the U.S. & countries with reciprocal tax laws. Regardless of where you live, we would be honored to have your help as we make a powerful film for a global audience. 

Nicotine is a very complicated molecule. Historically, it was mainly found in harmful cigarette smoke. In recent years, the use of clean nicotine without smoke has been growing due to changes in technology. Many are using nicotine to quit smoking. Despite a historic drop in teen smoking rates, nicotine use by young people is on the rise. Many do not understand the actual risks. 

With all the media hype surrounding nicotine, it’s time to end the harmful misinformation and educate the public on what nicotine is, isn’t, and what should be done with it.

We will answer three big questions during this 75-minute eye-opening journey: 

  • How does nicotine actually affect developing brains?
  • Are there any benefits to adults who use nicotine without smoking?
  • Who’s covering up the truth about nicotine, and why?

We will chase down as many experts (willing & unwilling) as our budget allows. It’s time to get answers from all sides of this debate.

If you’re curious, here’s the trailer for our last award-winning documentary:

The team is fired up to get going on this. All it takes is $50,000 to secure the base. We’ll use these initial Kickstarter funds to pay for necessary travel for interviews, crew time, and equipment needed to get started. 

Stretching beyond this goal will lead to substantial benefits for the strength and ability of the film to break through to the general public. We hope to see it get picked up by broadcast networks like A Billion Lives did, as well as major film distribution channels like Netflix/Amazon/Hulu/HBO/etc.

In order to maximize it’s potential, we’ll use additional funds to create an even better movie and drive additional publicity for our call to truth.

We’ll keep adding stretch goals until we’re the #1 most funded documentary project on Kickstarter and we’re able to market this film widely to the public like other blockbuster documentaries. Let us know if you have any ideas for stretch goal perks you’d like to see. We’ll add them as support grows! 

If we can reach this goal in the coming weeks, we’ll be on track to finish the movie this year. Here’s our expected timeline: 

  • February 2019 – Filming begins
  • March 2019 – Initial digital perks delivered
  • July 2019 – Primary filming finished
  • September 2019 – Final draft completed
  • February 2020 – World premiere at a key film festival
  • April 2020 – Massive Milwaukee premiere & worldwide theater events to follow

We plan to get it out to the public as quickly, intelligently, and widely as possible.

To the right (or tab above on mobile), we have a variety of special rewards for our backers. These include limited edition shirts, special coffee mugs, movie premiere experiences, and much more. 

Just like our filmmaking, we plan to make sure each reward is carried out with craft and awesomeness. Below are several concept designs of what the final coffee mug and shirt may look like. 

Are you a designer? We’ll be taking design submissions and feedback during the campaign. After you make your pledge, check out our Facebook page to join the discussion. 

  • Director:  Aaron Biebert 
  • Producer & Editor:  Jenni Biebert
  • Cinematographer:  Jimi Jake Shaw
  • Soundtrack:  N43 Records & Four Giants

Our team has won awards on four continents and shown movies in the theaters of more than ten different countries. This will be our third feature-length movie project.

Follow behind the scenes with the Third Line Films team (in association with Attention Era) on Facebook & Twitter

You can connect with the new #YouDontKnowNicotine community here: 

Tax Receipts

For all levels over $250, please provide your mailing address. In accordance with IRS regulations, The Film Collaborative (TFC) issues tax receipts for all donations of $250 and over. Kickstarter and credit card processing fees are deducted before TFC receives the funds. TFC issues tax receipts on the amount they receive.

 Thanks again for your support! We’re excited for this new movie! 

Risks and challenges

We think the time for this documentary is now, and we are committed to making the most impactful film we can, as quickly as possible. That said, documentary filmmaking is an art, not an exact science, and there could be some bumps along the way.

If production obstacles cause delays, that could mean that we get the film out to you, our backers, later than anticipated. But, based on our experience creating 900+ productions and the strong team we have put together, we are confident that we can make a great film by the end of 2019.

The biggest factor in hitting our goals will be funding.

This article is shared by VapeSling LLC. Please help fight for your #Right2Vape. Please Visit us on IG, Pinterest or Twitter (all SM accounts named “VapeSling”).

FEB2018 Vapor Calls To Action


FEB2018 Vapor Calls To Action

We hope you find this page helpful. Please let us know. We welcome feedback on CTA and/or VapeSling® products. Reach us anytime on the contact page or, or

The most vital 2018 Vapor Call to Action for your state or local area is asking for HR1136 support. Unite to fight for our right to VAPE! Write, call or both to your lawmakers : Contact your state representatives in Congress

House Reps by State:  Contact your state representatives in the Senate

HR1136 in PDF

VapeWarriors and Vape Shop Owners: Download your Stop The Vape Ban Posters here

VSLLC /VapersArmy updates this page daily.


VSLLC conducts daily research for new CTA’s (Calls to Action) every morning.

On occasion, one of the esteemed #2017VapeFight .org’s may publish a CTA later in the day. It may pass us till the next day. Help this page—> ON IG, we have received several CTA Alerts in the past from concerned Vapers (#VapeWarriors). We appreciate this and please continue or join in this practice. We will publish your handle when you tag us for the alert. Thank you VapersArmy!

 Although, most of these CTA do not pertain to VapeSling® products directly, they do affect our #VapeCommunity success. The Vape Community is family…being part of a family means doing your part. Please advocate for Vapor as Harm reduction for you and future vapers.

Posted 02.19.18



Posted 02.15.18


Posted 02.08.18

Your support is making a difference, and your voice is being heard – but we need you to keep encouraging your Congressional officials to support this modernization of the predicate date that is included in the House version of the budget.

Please TAKE ACTION and visit the Stop The Vape Ban site now. Let your Members of Congress know TODAY how important this issue is to you by tweeting them or sending an e-mail!

Click to Email Click to Email

Thank you for your continued support!

Posted 02.02.18 IN – Lafayette – Stop an indoor vaping ban!

Posted 1.30.18 Thank you for the Alert @beerdog123 on IG WA – Stop vaping taxes!

Posted 1.22.18 UT – Stop an outrageous tax on vaping!

Posted 1/19/18 AK – Keep Vaping OUT of Smoking Laws! (SB 63)

Posted 1.12.18 VapeWarriors and Vape Shop Owners: Download your Stop The Vape Ban Posters here

Posted 1/4/18

IQOS: Tobacco seeks to simulate the winning vape industry with it’s own alternative. Although better than traditional cigs, it’s still smoking whatever BIG Tobacco wants you to inhale. Vape e-liquid contains no deadly tar. Tobacco does. Plus, the trust of what you are inhaling is on Big Tobacco’s hands to do their worst. Such as the 900+ chemicals included with the tobacco in cigarettes. Now in a vaping device such as used for MMJ, BIG Tobacco can attempt to create the illusion of a healthier alternative. We can only hope this format of IQOS does not fool some into continuing the deadly tobacco habit. In worse case, reverting vapers back to Big Tobacco dollars. Truly a genius move by RJ Reynolds and all in Big Tobacco. VapeWarriors are a smarter bunch, yet need to heed the warning to family and friends. IQOS is still smoking BIG TOBACCO unknown fillers not VAPING a clean e-liquid.



Posted 12/21/17


Take Action – Send a Message

Today, Congress will consider a continuing resolution (CR) that will fund the US government through January 19, 2018. Although this CR will not contain changes to the appropriations language that addresses vapor products regulation, it is an important opportunity to send a message to Congress that we are still here and that predicate date change language must be included in the 2018 budget.

Sending this message to Congress is even more important now in the wake of rogue efforts by some in the industry who don’t understand the need to modernize the 2007 predicate date. Their fundamental misunderstanding of the Cole-Bishop language in the appropriations bill (Sec. 753) is creating confusion among our supporters and eroding relationships that have taken years to build.

Help us show Congress that we are unified in our support for changing the predicate date to August 8th, 2016 and that we are in favor of reasonable regulation that preserves consumer choice.

Take Action – Send a Message

Thank you & Happy Holidays!

CASAA Legislative Team

Posted 12/19/17

From CASAA president, Alex Clark:

In 2013, when I made the switch from smoking to vaping, I took the first $80 I didn’t spend on a carton of cigarettes and made a donation to CASAA. Today, I’ve donated a similar amount through #VapesGiving that I’ve saved by not smoking this week.

Even though #VapesGiving is focused on encouraging industry stakeholders to step up to the plate (i.e., “Manufacturer & Distributor Challenge”), anyone can contribute. As an added incentive, Naked 100 is matching donations dollar-for-dollar up to $190,000.

That means your contribution will be DOUBLED!

$5 = $10  |  $25 = $50  |  $50 = $100!

Every little bit makes a huge difference for CASAA, AVA, and the more than 20 state association participating in the VapesGiving event. If everyone who receives this email contributes just $2 through #VapesGiving, we can raise more than a quarter-million dollars for advocacy efforts across the country!

Please join me by contributing even the one or two dollars you saved today by not smoking.

Click Here to Donate

Posted 12.13.17

Staples, MN – Stop an Indoor Vaping Ban!

Posted 12.11.17



Today, leaders of the vapor community came together to present a unified front on the next steps for moving our agenda forward in Washington, D.C.  The Unity Letter, signed by the leaders of the American Vaping Association, the Consumers for Smoke-free Alternatives Association, the Smoke Free Alternatives Trade Association and the Vapor Technology Association asks every member of the vapor industry and broader community to get ready to act!

“December 11, 2017

Dear Members of the Vapor Community:

We write you today as a united front because the vapor industry is under attack and the future remains uncertain. We are all focused on the critical mission of making sure that Americans will continue to have access to the full range of vapor products that millions are using to quit smoking and improve our lives. We need your help to achieve this mission. 

We all agree that there are short term and long term policy changes that must be made to ensure a robust vapor product industry in this country, but we are focused today on a near term step – Changing the “Predicate Date” in Congress – which will allow all products on the market before 8/8/2016 to stay on the market and remain available to consumers. 

The US House of Representatives has passed an appropriations bill which contains language that would modernize the 2007 predicate date for products newly deemed to be tobacco. But the Senate has not included similar language in its version of the bill. These two conflicting pieces of legislation will be negotiated in Congress in the near future, and we are going to need EVERYONE to weigh in!

In the coming days and weeks, we will be reaching out to our respective members with additional opportunities and guidance on how you can engage with your two Senators and your Representative and urge them to modernize the predicate date for vapor products. We hope that when we call on you, you will take a few minutes to ACT to save the vapor industry.

Thank you!”


Posted 11.23.17

Your voice matters. Even if you have already reached out to your Members of Congress to Stop the Vape Ban, today is a perfect day to reinforce your previous message!

An email to your members of Congress is great – but a social media post may be even better! Elected officials pay attention to their constituents’ social media posts and comments. ACT NOW by tweeting your legislators!

We have made it easy for you to contact your Members of Congress via our website. Let them know you want to stop the virtual vape ban. The FDA deadline delays don’t stop – but merely delay many vape products potentially being pulled from the shelves.

Visit the Stop The Vape Ban site now and let your Members of Congress know TODAY how important this issue is to you by tweeting them or sending an e-mail!

Click to Email Click to EmailThank you for your continued support!


Stop the Vape Ban Team


Posted 11.10.17

IL – Elk Grove Village – Stop Tobacco 21!

Posted 11.3.17


The annual ECigIntelligence Vapers Survey is now open. If you can carve out 10 minutes to participate, your input will be appreciated.

CASAA and ECigIntelligence worked together to provide a survey that will aid in both out policy efforts as well as gaining a better understanding of the vaping market.

You can access the survey here


by copying and pasting this link into your browser’s address bar

Thank you for your fighting efforts!

Posted 10.2.17



Posted 9.25.17

Robbinsdale, MN – Take Action to oppose a Tobacco (and #vapor) 21 law!


Posted – 09.12.17

Detroit Lakes, MN – Local Alert! Take action to stop Tobacco and Vapor 21

Posted – 09.10.17

CT – Gov. Malloy’s Budget “Compromise” Contains an Outrageous Vapor Tax!

Posted – 08.28.17

PA – Stop a tax hike on vaping!

HR 1136 gains early co-sponsors. Take a moment to say THANK YOU!

Posted – 08.11.17


Posted – 08.5.17

Detroit Lakes, MN – Local Alert! Take action to stop Tobacco and Vapor 21

Posted – 07.13.17

PA – Take action to fix the vapor tax!

Posted – 07.08.17

DE – Help stop new taxes on vaping and higher taxes on smokeless tobacco!

Posted – 07.07.17 Alerted by @afcarmona

FDA – Comment NOW on proposed–unrealistic–standard for smokeless tobacco

Posted – 07.05.17

Opportunities to Take Action!

Posted 5/26/17

Delay the FDA – Comment on the Citizen Petition today!

A Citizen Petition has been submitted to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requesting that the agency issue “final guidance or regulations describing the recommended or required contents of premarket submissions…” In addition to requesting this final guidance, petitioners (NJOY et. al.) are requesting that the compliance period be extended by 24 months from the time the guidance is published. …

Delay the FDA – Comment on the Citizen Petition today!

Posted 4/16/17

Posted 4/12/17

Fire The U.S. Surgeon General. Unacceptable Anti-Vapor Propaganda Video

Urge your representative to co-sponsor HR 1136! Click Here

NEW congressional BILL: H.R.1136 – To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to provide for a certain effective date with respect to deemed tobacco products, to provide for the establishment of product standards for vapor product batteries, to provide for regulation of vapor products, and for other purposes.

Write or call to Ask your state lawmakers to support this bill

Cole/Bishop bill in it’s entirety


Older but current posts

Answer Ron Johnson


  (Please note: if you live outside of Wisconsin, please follow the directions below to print and send your letter.) Senator Ron Johnson (WI) is taking the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to task over the impact of the “deeming rule” on small to medium vapor businesses across the country. Sen. Johnson, Chair of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental …

Read More »


The Consumer Advocates for Smoke-free Alternatives Association (CASAA) is a non-profit 501(c)(4) organization with an all-volunteer board and a grassroots membership of more than two hundred thousand individuals from all walks of life, and we are growing daily. We are a consumer organization, not a trade association. We are dedicated to ensuring the availability of reduced harm alternatives to smoking and to providing smokers and non-smokers alike with honest information about those alternatives so that they can make informed choices.

The timeline includes links to articles, patents, court decisions, and many other resources to give a comprehensive history of this revolutionary alternative to combustible tobacco.

Vapor Calls To Action

JOIN CASAA. By joining CASAA, you will become plugged into an advocacy network.

European Smokers’ Choices Shift for Cessation Aids

European Smokers’ Choices Shift for Cessation Aids


E-cigarettes grow in popularity, at expense of everything else

  • Activate MedPage Today’s CME feature and receive free CME credit on Medical stories like this one.activate cme

Action Points

  • Note that this study was published as an abstract and presented at a conference. These data and conclusions should be considered to be preliminary until published in a peer-reviewed journal.
  • Use of electronic cigarettes as a tool to quit smoking conventional cigarettes increased threefold between 2012 and 2014, while use of medically approved smoking cessation therapies and smoking cessation attempts involving healthcare professionals declined, according to a European survey.
  • Note that almost all e-cigarette liquids sold in Europe contain at least one substance classified by the United Nations as a potential health risk.

MILAN — Use of electronic cigarettes as a tool to quit smoking conventional cigarettes increased threefold between 2012 and 2014 among surveyed Europeans, while use of medically approved smoking cessation therapies declined, researchers reported here.

The percentage of smokers using conventional nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) declined from 14.6% to 12.2% from 2012 to 2014, according to the surveys of more than 10,000 Europeans. At the same time, smoking cessation attempts involving a healthcare professional or smoking cessation clinic visit declined from 6.7% to 5.0% of respondents.


But experimentation with e-cigarettes for the purposes of quitting smoking increased markedly, with 11% of smokers reporting it in 2014, compared with 3.7% in 2012, said Constantine Vardavas, MD, PhD, of the University of Crete, Greece.

Vardavas told MedPage Today that the low rate of healthcare professional involvement is a “significant concern.”

Vardavas was one of several researchers to present studies examining e-cigarette usage and safety this week at the European Respiratory Society International Congress.

In a separate study, Vardavas and colleagues analyzed more than 100 e-cigarette liquids commonly sold in Europe, finding all but one of the products to have at least one substance classified by the United Nations as a potential health risk.

Roughly 25% of samples contained cyclopentanolone and 9% contained a-ionone. Both have been classified as chemicals that may cause allergy or asthma symptoms or breathing difficulties if inhaled. Menthol was present in 43% of the samples and ethyl vanillin was present in 16.5%. Both additives are classified as “able to cause respiratory irritation,” Vardavas noted.


A recent European Commission directive on electronic cigarettes noted that “except for nicotine, only ingredients are used in the nicotine-containing liquid that do not pose a risk to human health in the heated and unheated form.”

“We think the respiratory irritants we found may be a breach of this legislation,” Vardavas said. “We also think users should be aware that e-cigarettes may contain respiratory irritants.”

A third presentation, reporting results from a survey of more than 30,000 randomly selected adults in Sweden, bolstered earlier findings showing users of e-cigarettes to be more likely to be current cigarette smokers than former or never smokers.

About 10% of respondents said they only smoked conventional cigarettes, while 0.6% said they only used e-cigarettes, and 1.2% said they used both.

E-cigarette use was more common among current cigarette smokers, with around 10% reporting current vaping. Just 1% of former smokers and 0.6% of non-smokers surveyed reported current e-cigarette use.

Not surprisingly, cigarette smokers and dual smoker/vapers were the most likely to report respiratory symptoms, including persistent cough, productive cough, and wheezing.

Just over 25% of non-smokers reported experiencing respiratory symptoms, compared to 34% of e-cigarette-only users, 46% of cigarette smokers, and 56% of dual cigarette and e-cigarette users.

Behavioral scientist Linnea Hedman of Sweden’s Umea University, who presented the findings, said the data on smoking and e-cigarette dual users could be interpreted in several ways.

“It could be that they’re turning to e-cigarettes when they’re in places like cafes and restaurants where they cannot smoke conventional cigarettes, or it could be that they’re using e-cigarettes in the hopes of quitting smoking,” she noted.

In a press briefing held Sunday afternoon at the ERS conference, Hedman said the findings from her research team and others suggest that dual users may not be all that interested in using e-cigarettes to give up smoking.


“E-cigarette use was most common among (current) smokers,” she said, adding that while e-cigarettes are increasingly being promoted for smoking cessation, many current smokers may be using them instead for convenience.

She added that the newly reported data on e-cigarette use does not address the long-term impact of greater e-cigarette use.

“The question remains, will e-cigarettes increase the burden of respiratory conditions in the future or will they contribute to smoking cessation?” she said. “Only prospective studies following this group of individuals will be able to answer that question.”

Funding for the Vardavas et al. research was provided by the European Commission.

Warrior VinylAndVapor – small sparks start large fires

Warrior VinylAndVapor – small sparks start large fires



small sparks start large fires


You can make a difference. Download our sign and help spread the word at your local shop. Be sure to take photos and post using #vinylandvapor

Download sign here—-> Vinylandvapor_Sign

This endeavor would obviously cost money. I am a hardworking father who would have to take off time from work and would have to cover bills as well as the cost of the trip

If you have the means anything helps a dollar goes along way.

Donate here —>Donate to #MissionAskME VinylandVapor Activism tour


So before I put wheels in motion, boots on the ground etc. I figured I’d pick your brain in regard to this idea. Yesterday before I went out with my sign I was angry that the 8th had come and started thinking of ways to affect change. The methods and tactics we’ve all been pushing, practicing and being told to try, have seem to produce

little result. It’s a purely political path and really what it accomplishes is MAYBE some compromise. So I started thinking of the civil rights movement(the parallels are obviously a stretch) but the tactics of peaceful protest and civil disobedience were effective. If only in the sense that it provided a humanity to the injustice that was occurring as well as raising awareness of the people who were not being affected. And this is where the problem lies. No one I can think of approves of unreasonable and unfair legislation and a lot of it gets snuck by without anyone noticing. But what the FDA is pulling here as you obviously know is purely special interest pandering and lobby money motivated. 

After the post I put up with the sign received the response it did, a light went off. Maybe this is the way to get noticed. When I said no one didn’t see the sign, I meant passerbys. And when you explain exactly what is going on people get angry. Everyone who walked by asked questions. 

So today I thought, what if I went on a tour? A tour of vape shops and manufacturers with the same idea. Sitting in front of shops answering questions, talking to the people affected by these regs. As I shared the other day(with some trepidation as not to seem exploitative) my own father is succumbing to tobacco related illness. Putting faces to the movement. The small businesses, the smokers. And with said tour meeting vapers and kind of mobilizing them in a grassroots face to face way that might inspire them to do similar things. We know 200 vapers outside of a state building gets laughs from the public and the rest of us are preaching to the choir from the safety of social media.


You can make a difference. Download our sign and help spread the word at your local shop. Be sure to take photos and post using #vinylandvapor

Download sign here—-> Vinylandvapor_Sign

This endeavor would obviously cost money. I am a hardworking father who would have to take off time from work and would have to cover bills as well as the cost of the trip

If you have the means anything helps a dollar goes along way.

Donate here —>Donate to VinylandVapor Activism tour

From all at VSLLC, Thank you Erik. With warriors like you, there is no stopping us till we win our right to vape.