I still don't see it. bunch of word salad. writing "safer nicotine products" in quotation marks and emphasizing that they ain't safe as if nobody's noticing a straw man argument. from what I gathered - whole thing is based upon Swedish research that states death is 2 times more likely (!!!) AFTER the heart attack while explicitly stating: "No increased risk of MI incidence has been observed in previous studies". because funky data extrapolation. oh well - at least they ain't crying that nicotine is the cause of cancer...
You likely didn’t read the sources. If you are already convinced of your (incorrect) position and assumptions despite ample evidence, why ask for sources?
From the second link:
>In this policy statement, 12 evidence-based key messages that highlight the CV [cardio vascular] toxicity of nicotine are presented, irrespective of delivery system.
So it doesn’t matter if it’s smoking, patches, gum, pouches, whatever. Nicotine is addictive and harmful. Perhaps not as harmful when it’s not combined with tobacco and all the other substances that come with cigarettes, but it’s not benign or harmless.
