<i>You&#x27;re arguing inferred, postulated, or plausible effects from the chemical nicotine specifically in a combustion process that releases thousands of different varieties of volatile chemicals...</i><p>Not really, but I get what you&#x27;re saying.<p>I can accept that e-cigs are likely vastly less harmful than smoked tobacco cigarettes.<p>It will take a lot of time and rigorous research to establish what the difference really is, but I would expect it to be profound.<p>But my point stands that there is likely not any way to get all the &quot;benefits&quot; of smoking without any of the harms.<p>If it were just about nicotine, I&#x27;d expect to see everyone stop smoking and switch to nicotine patches or gum. Clearly that hasn&#x27;t happened. So it&#x27;s not just about finding a safer way to deliver nicotine.<p>Of the thousands of chemicals inhaled in cigarettes, I know of at least one - cadmium, which is both a known adrenal stimulant (&quot;benefit&quot;) and a known carcinogen (&quot;harm&quot;).<p>And sure enough, cadmium is right there among the components of e-cig vapors, though not in dangerous amounts, according to the lobbyists. [1]<p>We&#x27;ll see.<p>[1] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ecigarette-research.org&#x2F;research&#x2F;index.php&#x2F;research&#x2F;research-2015&#x2F;209-metals" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ecigarette-research.org&#x2F;research&#x2F;index.php&#x2F;resear...</a>