This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
2019–2020 vaping lung illness outbreak article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
This article was nominated for
deletion on 21 December 2019. The result of
the discussion was |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Text and/or other creative content from Electronic cigarette was copied or moved into 2019–20 vaping lung illness outbreak. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Text and/or other creative content from Safety of electronic cigarettes was copied or moved into 2019–20 vaping lung illness outbreak. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Text and/or other creative content from 2019–20 vaping lung illness outbreak was copied or moved into Hospitalized cases in the vaping lung illness outbreak. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Text and/or other creative content from Hospitalized cases in the vaping lung illness outbreak was copied or moved into 2019–20 vaping lung illness outbreak. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
On 25 October 2020, it was proposed that this article be moved to 2019–20 vaping lung illness outbreak. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 31 August 2021 and 3 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ajameson1.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 16:39, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/basic_information/e-cigarettes/severe-lung-disease.html Somatt ( talk) 06:39, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Images should be smaller and go on the right. Lead is a bit too long. Consider having an image in the lead section. Add external links if possible. Otherwise, looks good..
Willbb234 Talk (please {{ ping}} me in replies) 15:40, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
Should be "United States and Canada", based on Health Canada statement https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/news/2019/10/statement-from-the-council-of-chief-medical-officers-of-health-on-vaping-in-canada.html also a growing number of cases across the country, including at least one person on life support (Sept 18) https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/vaping-respiratory-illness-london-1.5288065 - Tenebris 66.11.171.90 ( talk) 08:22, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
There is a whole section in this article encouraging the reader to become an activist - this is content fit for a blog not wikpedia
Mfernflower ( talk) 04:14, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
I've pared back some information that seemed extraneous, added some missing details such as case and individual names, and otherwise done work to make the prose less awkward. I still think we probably ought to rework more quotes into prose, and it still does seem we might have some extraneous bits that could be trimmed. Seraphimblade Talk to me 20:11, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
We don't have another image to replace this image. Other images don't replace this image. I have restored it but reduced the size. QuackGuru ( talk) 09:40, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
This edit added content not found in the source. QuackGuru ( talk) 22:05, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
References
These sources does not mention the outbreak and does not appear verify the claim. The previous source does verify the content and does mention the outbreak. QuackGuru ( talk) 22:05, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
Could we all agree to limit it to three cases? Wikipedia isn't a news aggregator for good reasons Mfernflower ( talk) 15:36, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
No, QuackGuru, there is not a consensus for a new article. Three people have floated the idea; two have objected. That is not a consensus. Seraphimblade Talk to me 03:33, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
Repeated deletions of relevant sourced content [1] are not improving the page. If you have a problem with the content, please take to Talk here. Thank you. Cloudjpk ( talk) 20:36, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
He estimates that probably “75-80%” of black-market vapes use some form of cutting agent."Estimates that probably" is synonymous with "guess". If he actually had data in hand to make that statement, it wouldn't call it an "estimate", qualify it with "probably", and even then provide a range rather than a number. (Source: [2]). So yes, the source says it's a guess. Not in exactly those words, but that's quibbling on semantics, and I'm not going to do that. It is clear, from what the source itself says, that it is a guess. Seraphimblade Talk to me 22:52, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
I cannot stand to edit any more in the E-Cig topic area - both ANI and the COI investigators said this whole debacle should to go to arbitration (ANI saying a consensus is not needed to file an arb claim) and as such will no longer edit in this area until arb is underway Mfernflower ( talk) 21:45, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
I am just getting things started. I don't have the time to dig up the best sources, etc.. Including WP:MEDRS, etc..
By the way, Vitamin E acetate is not found in nature. As always, one needs to dig down to the references used in the articles below.
"This ingredient is basically a form of vitamin E created in the laboratory. Manufacturers take natural vitamin E and add acetic acid to it."
Various concerns and side effects are listed in the article.
Chemical of the Day - Q&A - Tocopherol vs. Tocopheryl Acetate. 26 April 2011. From the article (emphasis added):
the finished products can contain traces of
hydroquinone. ...
The best form of vitamin E when considering contamination concerns, is vacuum-distilled. ... researchers found that tocopherol acetate alone caused tumors to form when injected, but tocopherol alone did not. |
See the "depigmentation" section of the hydroquinone article for its toxic effects. -- Timeshifter ( talk) 10:57, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
Source does not verify "of CBD oils" [3] and vitamin E is explained in detail in other sections. QuackGuru ( talk) 10:22, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
...of CBD oils, which are currently being tested for Vitamin-E Acetate. The cited reference ( [4]) explicitly states this:
Pauwaert's CBD oil is now being tested for vitamin E, according to HLN.How on Earth does that "fail verification" when the source directly and explicitly confirms it? Seraphimblade Talk to me 01:29, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
The content was rewritten without the SYN violation. See "His doctors believe the cause of death was probably a result of his vaping.[56] Pauwaert's CBD oils he also used were tested for vitamin E at the Saint-Luc Hospital in November 2019.[55]" Ref 55 is a new source. QuackGuru ( talk) 01:03, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
This RfC was superseded by Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2019 December 30#Media reports of persons hospitalized involving the 2019 vaping lung illness outbreak.
Should we undo the merge and restore the previous article? QuackGuru ( talk) 10:37, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
Most editors opposed the merge and there is enough content for a separate article. QuackGuru ( talk) 10:37, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
I think the content should not be deleted. The edit reverted back to an old version and deleted subsequent improvements. If it is too long we don't delete. We keep the content or start another article. If anyone supports deleting the content then that suggests a split is warranted. QuackGuru ( talk) 11:14, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
So I think what we should do at this point is try to determine which cases are the most noteworthy and representative, and see if we can trim down to those. Also, the quality of the prose in that section is pretty poor, so I think once we've gotten it trimmed to a manageable level, we can work on improving that. My thoughts would be the double-transplant patient, and the one who was photographed with the sign and became somewhat the "face" of the issue. We also may want to include more in general in regards to the lawsuits over it, though that may belong in a separate section. Seraphimblade Talk to me 20:04, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
What is the point of having a US map showing every single state highlighted? "Confirmed or probable cases have been reported in" literally every area of the map; the map is now useless. Time to remove it. Ikjbagl ( talk) 04:06, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
There is a new map with reported cases for each state and so on. This level of detail is not found in the body of the text. QuackGuru ( talk) 14:45, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
The content about Juul is off-topic. [9] QuackGuru ( talk) 20:32, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
@ QuackGuru: This revert seems to have lost some helpful changes by Citation Bot to add page numbers etc., and possibly helpful changes by other editors. -- Beland ( talk) 19:08, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
CDC just released this report. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6902e2.htm?s_cid=mm6902e2_w
I don't have time right now, but its content should be added to the article. Among the main facts is that the vast majority of those with lung illness consumed THC cartidges from informal sources, 82% and 78% respectively.
KristofferR ( talk) 14:26, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
@ QuackGuru: You have repeatedly restored this sentence to the article: "This indicates that this has the possibility to be a more pervasive phenomenon." This is a speculative claim that makes a prediction about future knowledge. It's not appropriate for an encyclopedia per WP:NOTCRYSTAL. Moreover, this claim is from September 2019, and does not seem to have materialized (which is why speculative claims are generally not allowed) for reasons which are now better understood. -- Beland ( talk) 20:23, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
Reading through what's presented here: This indicates that this has the possibility to be a more pervasive phenomenon.[7] However, the prevalence of lung injuries in various countries is unknown as of September 2019.[7] Prevalence of lung disease attributable to vaping is likely under reported as cases brought to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) are some of the most severe.[18]
That's a textbook case of
weasel wording. If a reliable source says it is underreported for some reason, then we can put that in the article. But right now, that's a bunch of scary sounding assertions, full of "maybe could kinda possibly be." QG, you objected to that with vitamin E acetate, even though it's now come out that the issues are very likely caused by that. We can't do it one way for one thing and another way for something different, so at least pick one standard of certainty you'd like to apply to everything.
Seraphimblade
Talk to me 04:16, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
I changed (twice) "This indicates that this has the possibility to be a more pervasive phenomenon." to "The author of one paper, published in September 2019, wrote that this suggested the phenomenon could be more widespread than the United States." in order to make clear both what is being predicted and when the prediction was made. It would be misleading to say that this paper is predicting a possibility based on what we know in February 2020; it was based on what was known no later than September 2019. I also found the phrase "more pervasive" to be an unsatisfactory summary, because it sounds like it's talking about frequency, when actually I think it's just saying more cases will probably be found in more countries. Based on what we know in February 2020, more cases have been found in other countries, but not nearly to the same degree as in the United States. I'd still say this shouldn't have been added back in September because with breaking news events Wikipedia should report on actualities and not possibilities (I'm remembering writing Wikipedia:Reliable sources#Breaking news; though this outbreak is slower-moving than a shooting, many possibilities still end up being wrong). But now, it is just rather uninteresting that this one author made this prediction back in September; in February 2020 we can actually just say how many cases have since been found in what countries, given the increase in awareness of this problem and active surveillance. So I think we should just drop this sentence entirely. -- Beland ( talk) 04:27, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
The claim "the prevalence of lung injuries in various countries is unknown as of September 2019" now seems to be out of date. We have good information on deaths and hospitalizations in Canada, for example. Now that the main cause of the outbreak is known, it also appears that the reason no or few cases have been reported from most countries is that the additives that caused the outbreak were not generally used in products sold there. Under-reporting may cause less-severe lung injuries to not appear in statistics in any country, but in February 2020 it seems we can now usefully report on the relative frequency of deaths and hospitalizations in the last few months. -- Beland ( talk) 04:27, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
@ QuackGuru: Please don't remove the {{ update section}} tag from the International section. Some of the claims there are from September 2019, which was at the peak of the outbreak and the beginning of scientific investigation. It's unreasonable to assume that there isn't more updated information available about the number of cases in more countries. The tag is there to indicate that sources need to be found and read. -- Beland ( talk) 20:16, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
See "Pauwaert's CBD oils he also used were tested for vitamin E at the Saint-Luc Hospital in November 2019.[60][needs update]" I am unable to update the content without a source. I removed the tag and added instead his death in under investigation and other content. QuackGuru ( talk) 03:30, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
The CDC and the US FDA have made progress in the outbreak research. I'll try to work on a draft to update the article with one edit rather than make several edits. I'm busy at the moment. In a few days when I have time I will update the entire article rather than a few numbers. A tag at the top of the article is *not* required. QuackGuru ( talk) 23:27, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
There are several cases noted in the article which don't seem to have anything to do with the 2019-20 outbreak. They occurred years before the outbreak (if 2019-2020 in the title is accurate), and involve different chemicals, and different symptoms like allergic reactions. In one or two cases it's not clear that vaping was at all related to the death, for example one patient who died of a heart attack who also vaped, and there's no further explanation given connecting the two, either individually or statistically. Adverse effects of electronic cigarettes would seem to be a better place for any events that do not match either the timeframe or suspected causative agents. Including those here implies more of a relationship than is supported by sources. -- Beland ( talk) 07:06, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
I have a feeling there are many, many lawsuits being filed against vaping product manufacturers and retailers, by both injured people and goverments; the section on them may need to be cleaned up to only mention the big ones, and otherwise report numbers. -- Beland ( talk) 21:28, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
I deleted a couple of lines in the lawsuit section that just restated article headlines giving a play by play of a trial in the moment, seemed unnecessary. This article has a lot of other issues, particularly the Canada section where it says "This case has not been confirmed, as September 27, 2019" and the citation is an article about the case being confirmed 2601:401:180:E1E0:84B2:3FC1:4A4E:9BD7 ( talk) 04:05, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved ( non-admin closure) Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 11:28, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
– Per similarly titled articles, e.g. 2019–20 Philippines polio outbreak, 2019–20 locust infestation, 2019–20 Hong Kong protests, 2019–20 Lebanese protests, 2019–20 Iraqi protests, etc., I think the "2020" in these article titles are redundant and should be shortened. Love of Corey ( talk) 03:44, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
I don't have time to find the best WP:MEDRS sources, but here is some important news:
A class of chemicals—vitamin E acetate, squalane, squalene, MCT oil—found in certain “botanically derived terpene” products like True Terpenes’ Viscosity are linked to:
Why? Because burning vitamin E acetate can make phosgene, a chemical warfare agent that slowly melts lung tissue. Heating squalane and squalene to a modest 464℉ releases acetic acid, formic acid, and acetone, experts told the OLCC. |
-- Timeshifter ( talk) 12:32, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Why does no one see that the symptoms of this disease are similar to Covid 19? Isn't it very interesting?
Why is this article linking to an ecommerce store for Dank Vapes instead of a page explaining what they are? CutePeach ( talk) 04:14, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
Removed "Prominent proponents of smoking bans are not in favor of criminalizing tobacco either, but rather allowing consumers to have the choice to choose whatever products they desire." Don't see how this isn't self-contradicyory, and it's not in the linked article. Abe g92 contribs 11:59, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
2019–2020 vaping lung illness outbreak article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
This article was nominated for
deletion on 21 December 2019. The result of
the discussion was |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Text and/or other creative content from Electronic cigarette was copied or moved into 2019–20 vaping lung illness outbreak. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Text and/or other creative content from Safety of electronic cigarettes was copied or moved into 2019–20 vaping lung illness outbreak. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Text and/or other creative content from 2019–20 vaping lung illness outbreak was copied or moved into Hospitalized cases in the vaping lung illness outbreak. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Text and/or other creative content from Hospitalized cases in the vaping lung illness outbreak was copied or moved into 2019–20 vaping lung illness outbreak. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
On 25 October 2020, it was proposed that this article be moved to 2019–20 vaping lung illness outbreak. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 31 August 2021 and 3 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ajameson1.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 16:39, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/basic_information/e-cigarettes/severe-lung-disease.html Somatt ( talk) 06:39, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Images should be smaller and go on the right. Lead is a bit too long. Consider having an image in the lead section. Add external links if possible. Otherwise, looks good..
Willbb234 Talk (please {{ ping}} me in replies) 15:40, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
Should be "United States and Canada", based on Health Canada statement https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/news/2019/10/statement-from-the-council-of-chief-medical-officers-of-health-on-vaping-in-canada.html also a growing number of cases across the country, including at least one person on life support (Sept 18) https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/vaping-respiratory-illness-london-1.5288065 - Tenebris 66.11.171.90 ( talk) 08:22, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
There is a whole section in this article encouraging the reader to become an activist - this is content fit for a blog not wikpedia
Mfernflower ( talk) 04:14, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
I've pared back some information that seemed extraneous, added some missing details such as case and individual names, and otherwise done work to make the prose less awkward. I still think we probably ought to rework more quotes into prose, and it still does seem we might have some extraneous bits that could be trimmed. Seraphimblade Talk to me 20:11, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
We don't have another image to replace this image. Other images don't replace this image. I have restored it but reduced the size. QuackGuru ( talk) 09:40, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
This edit added content not found in the source. QuackGuru ( talk) 22:05, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
References
These sources does not mention the outbreak and does not appear verify the claim. The previous source does verify the content and does mention the outbreak. QuackGuru ( talk) 22:05, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
Could we all agree to limit it to three cases? Wikipedia isn't a news aggregator for good reasons Mfernflower ( talk) 15:36, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
No, QuackGuru, there is not a consensus for a new article. Three people have floated the idea; two have objected. That is not a consensus. Seraphimblade Talk to me 03:33, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
Repeated deletions of relevant sourced content [1] are not improving the page. If you have a problem with the content, please take to Talk here. Thank you. Cloudjpk ( talk) 20:36, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
He estimates that probably “75-80%” of black-market vapes use some form of cutting agent."Estimates that probably" is synonymous with "guess". If he actually had data in hand to make that statement, it wouldn't call it an "estimate", qualify it with "probably", and even then provide a range rather than a number. (Source: [2]). So yes, the source says it's a guess. Not in exactly those words, but that's quibbling on semantics, and I'm not going to do that. It is clear, from what the source itself says, that it is a guess. Seraphimblade Talk to me 22:52, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
I cannot stand to edit any more in the E-Cig topic area - both ANI and the COI investigators said this whole debacle should to go to arbitration (ANI saying a consensus is not needed to file an arb claim) and as such will no longer edit in this area until arb is underway Mfernflower ( talk) 21:45, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
I am just getting things started. I don't have the time to dig up the best sources, etc.. Including WP:MEDRS, etc..
By the way, Vitamin E acetate is not found in nature. As always, one needs to dig down to the references used in the articles below.
"This ingredient is basically a form of vitamin E created in the laboratory. Manufacturers take natural vitamin E and add acetic acid to it."
Various concerns and side effects are listed in the article.
Chemical of the Day - Q&A - Tocopherol vs. Tocopheryl Acetate. 26 April 2011. From the article (emphasis added):
the finished products can contain traces of
hydroquinone. ...
The best form of vitamin E when considering contamination concerns, is vacuum-distilled. ... researchers found that tocopherol acetate alone caused tumors to form when injected, but tocopherol alone did not. |
See the "depigmentation" section of the hydroquinone article for its toxic effects. -- Timeshifter ( talk) 10:57, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
Source does not verify "of CBD oils" [3] and vitamin E is explained in detail in other sections. QuackGuru ( talk) 10:22, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
...of CBD oils, which are currently being tested for Vitamin-E Acetate. The cited reference ( [4]) explicitly states this:
Pauwaert's CBD oil is now being tested for vitamin E, according to HLN.How on Earth does that "fail verification" when the source directly and explicitly confirms it? Seraphimblade Talk to me 01:29, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
The content was rewritten without the SYN violation. See "His doctors believe the cause of death was probably a result of his vaping.[56] Pauwaert's CBD oils he also used were tested for vitamin E at the Saint-Luc Hospital in November 2019.[55]" Ref 55 is a new source. QuackGuru ( talk) 01:03, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
This RfC was superseded by Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2019 December 30#Media reports of persons hospitalized involving the 2019 vaping lung illness outbreak.
Should we undo the merge and restore the previous article? QuackGuru ( talk) 10:37, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
Most editors opposed the merge and there is enough content for a separate article. QuackGuru ( talk) 10:37, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
I think the content should not be deleted. The edit reverted back to an old version and deleted subsequent improvements. If it is too long we don't delete. We keep the content or start another article. If anyone supports deleting the content then that suggests a split is warranted. QuackGuru ( talk) 11:14, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
So I think what we should do at this point is try to determine which cases are the most noteworthy and representative, and see if we can trim down to those. Also, the quality of the prose in that section is pretty poor, so I think once we've gotten it trimmed to a manageable level, we can work on improving that. My thoughts would be the double-transplant patient, and the one who was photographed with the sign and became somewhat the "face" of the issue. We also may want to include more in general in regards to the lawsuits over it, though that may belong in a separate section. Seraphimblade Talk to me 20:04, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
What is the point of having a US map showing every single state highlighted? "Confirmed or probable cases have been reported in" literally every area of the map; the map is now useless. Time to remove it. Ikjbagl ( talk) 04:06, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
There is a new map with reported cases for each state and so on. This level of detail is not found in the body of the text. QuackGuru ( talk) 14:45, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
The content about Juul is off-topic. [9] QuackGuru ( talk) 20:32, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
@ QuackGuru: This revert seems to have lost some helpful changes by Citation Bot to add page numbers etc., and possibly helpful changes by other editors. -- Beland ( talk) 19:08, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
CDC just released this report. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6902e2.htm?s_cid=mm6902e2_w
I don't have time right now, but its content should be added to the article. Among the main facts is that the vast majority of those with lung illness consumed THC cartidges from informal sources, 82% and 78% respectively.
KristofferR ( talk) 14:26, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
@ QuackGuru: You have repeatedly restored this sentence to the article: "This indicates that this has the possibility to be a more pervasive phenomenon." This is a speculative claim that makes a prediction about future knowledge. It's not appropriate for an encyclopedia per WP:NOTCRYSTAL. Moreover, this claim is from September 2019, and does not seem to have materialized (which is why speculative claims are generally not allowed) for reasons which are now better understood. -- Beland ( talk) 20:23, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
Reading through what's presented here: This indicates that this has the possibility to be a more pervasive phenomenon.[7] However, the prevalence of lung injuries in various countries is unknown as of September 2019.[7] Prevalence of lung disease attributable to vaping is likely under reported as cases brought to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) are some of the most severe.[18]
That's a textbook case of
weasel wording. If a reliable source says it is underreported for some reason, then we can put that in the article. But right now, that's a bunch of scary sounding assertions, full of "maybe could kinda possibly be." QG, you objected to that with vitamin E acetate, even though it's now come out that the issues are very likely caused by that. We can't do it one way for one thing and another way for something different, so at least pick one standard of certainty you'd like to apply to everything.
Seraphimblade
Talk to me 04:16, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
I changed (twice) "This indicates that this has the possibility to be a more pervasive phenomenon." to "The author of one paper, published in September 2019, wrote that this suggested the phenomenon could be more widespread than the United States." in order to make clear both what is being predicted and when the prediction was made. It would be misleading to say that this paper is predicting a possibility based on what we know in February 2020; it was based on what was known no later than September 2019. I also found the phrase "more pervasive" to be an unsatisfactory summary, because it sounds like it's talking about frequency, when actually I think it's just saying more cases will probably be found in more countries. Based on what we know in February 2020, more cases have been found in other countries, but not nearly to the same degree as in the United States. I'd still say this shouldn't have been added back in September because with breaking news events Wikipedia should report on actualities and not possibilities (I'm remembering writing Wikipedia:Reliable sources#Breaking news; though this outbreak is slower-moving than a shooting, many possibilities still end up being wrong). But now, it is just rather uninteresting that this one author made this prediction back in September; in February 2020 we can actually just say how many cases have since been found in what countries, given the increase in awareness of this problem and active surveillance. So I think we should just drop this sentence entirely. -- Beland ( talk) 04:27, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
The claim "the prevalence of lung injuries in various countries is unknown as of September 2019" now seems to be out of date. We have good information on deaths and hospitalizations in Canada, for example. Now that the main cause of the outbreak is known, it also appears that the reason no or few cases have been reported from most countries is that the additives that caused the outbreak were not generally used in products sold there. Under-reporting may cause less-severe lung injuries to not appear in statistics in any country, but in February 2020 it seems we can now usefully report on the relative frequency of deaths and hospitalizations in the last few months. -- Beland ( talk) 04:27, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
@ QuackGuru: Please don't remove the {{ update section}} tag from the International section. Some of the claims there are from September 2019, which was at the peak of the outbreak and the beginning of scientific investigation. It's unreasonable to assume that there isn't more updated information available about the number of cases in more countries. The tag is there to indicate that sources need to be found and read. -- Beland ( talk) 20:16, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
See "Pauwaert's CBD oils he also used were tested for vitamin E at the Saint-Luc Hospital in November 2019.[60][needs update]" I am unable to update the content without a source. I removed the tag and added instead his death in under investigation and other content. QuackGuru ( talk) 03:30, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
The CDC and the US FDA have made progress in the outbreak research. I'll try to work on a draft to update the article with one edit rather than make several edits. I'm busy at the moment. In a few days when I have time I will update the entire article rather than a few numbers. A tag at the top of the article is *not* required. QuackGuru ( talk) 23:27, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
There are several cases noted in the article which don't seem to have anything to do with the 2019-20 outbreak. They occurred years before the outbreak (if 2019-2020 in the title is accurate), and involve different chemicals, and different symptoms like allergic reactions. In one or two cases it's not clear that vaping was at all related to the death, for example one patient who died of a heart attack who also vaped, and there's no further explanation given connecting the two, either individually or statistically. Adverse effects of electronic cigarettes would seem to be a better place for any events that do not match either the timeframe or suspected causative agents. Including those here implies more of a relationship than is supported by sources. -- Beland ( talk) 07:06, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
I have a feeling there are many, many lawsuits being filed against vaping product manufacturers and retailers, by both injured people and goverments; the section on them may need to be cleaned up to only mention the big ones, and otherwise report numbers. -- Beland ( talk) 21:28, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
I deleted a couple of lines in the lawsuit section that just restated article headlines giving a play by play of a trial in the moment, seemed unnecessary. This article has a lot of other issues, particularly the Canada section where it says "This case has not been confirmed, as September 27, 2019" and the citation is an article about the case being confirmed 2601:401:180:E1E0:84B2:3FC1:4A4E:9BD7 ( talk) 04:05, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved ( non-admin closure) Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 11:28, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
– Per similarly titled articles, e.g. 2019–20 Philippines polio outbreak, 2019–20 locust infestation, 2019–20 Hong Kong protests, 2019–20 Lebanese protests, 2019–20 Iraqi protests, etc., I think the "2020" in these article titles are redundant and should be shortened. Love of Corey ( talk) 03:44, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
I don't have time to find the best WP:MEDRS sources, but here is some important news:
A class of chemicals—vitamin E acetate, squalane, squalene, MCT oil—found in certain “botanically derived terpene” products like True Terpenes’ Viscosity are linked to:
Why? Because burning vitamin E acetate can make phosgene, a chemical warfare agent that slowly melts lung tissue. Heating squalane and squalene to a modest 464℉ releases acetic acid, formic acid, and acetone, experts told the OLCC. |
-- Timeshifter ( talk) 12:32, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Why does no one see that the symptoms of this disease are similar to Covid 19? Isn't it very interesting?
Why is this article linking to an ecommerce store for Dank Vapes instead of a page explaining what they are? CutePeach ( talk) 04:14, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
Removed "Prominent proponents of smoking bans are not in favor of criminalizing tobacco either, but rather allowing consumers to have the choice to choose whatever products they desire." Don't see how this isn't self-contradicyory, and it's not in the linked article. Abe g92 contribs 11:59, 6 June 2023 (UTC)