| category | factcheck |
| score | Hearsay Expertise πΏπΏπΏπΏπΏ |
| claim | "95% of zero popcorn lung cases from vaping being deadly" |
| url | https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-11011221/Up-95-people-develop-severe-popcorn-lung-result-vaping-DIE.html |
| author | DailyMail / Mansur Shaheen |
| tags | ['third-party-fact-check', 'popcorn-news', 'undisclosed-coi'] |
## DailyMail still being the epicenter of popcorn news
Article claims that vaping would cause [popcorn lung](wiki/popcorn-news),
despite diacetyl being banned in the UK/EU. Rationale for still peddling
this FUD was some unvalidated estimate from the Johns Hopkins phrasing
bank.
And you know, at some point you have to recognize that a hypothetical worry
becomes a fictional one. After zero cases over 15 years, for instance.
What's interesting is the "95%" deadliness after 5 years claim from
pulmonologist Dr Panagis Galiatsatos. It's [not clear where](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=bronchitis+obliterans+mortaility)
this came from, raised my suspiscion about being an ALA spokesperson.
**Edit**: Later clarified that he was certainly quoted out of context,
and neither pleased about it:
And in a more [detailed discussion on LBC](https://www.globalplayer.com/catchup/lbc/uk/b8FPjS1/)
clarified that while there's a chemical feasibility, the likelihood
and case numbers aren't there. (Good points on recognizing branding
and marketing as main concerns to avert non-smoker uptake. The very
thing CTFK only uses for lobbying, but doesn't want addressed.)
Still leaves the question if the article tries to piggyback or linguistically
undermine a more established 95% estimate. The "safer" spin (rather than
"less harmful than continued smoking") is a common indicator for disinfo
sourcing.
### references
*
*
### phrase check
| E-cigarette and vape manufacturers have often marketed their products as safer alternatives
| π§ | Actually from PHE. Vendors aren't usually allowed to make such claims. |
| e-cigarette devices are more dangerous
| π§ | Author himself suffers from perception woes |
| Many users will eventually develop 'popcorn lung'
| π₯ | Article premise is bunk. |
| under scrutiny from regulators in recent years as part of a larger effort to curb teen smoking
| πͺ | Observably more to reverse the decline in teen smoking. |
| experts warn that users can develop the devastating condition 'popcorn lung'
| π₯ | Popcorn lung people aren't widely considered experts. |
| tells DailyMail.com
| π¨ | Hadn't actually told this. |
| Juul products from shelves, before allowing the company temporary reprieve
| π§ | Forced by courts, not by courtesy. |
| Diacetyl is also used as a flavoring agent in many electronic nicotine products.
| π₯ | Not in the UK. |
### verdict
Normally wouldn't spend time on this. But this appears to be tagged as `"@type":"NewsArticle"` no less.
Lots of topical conflation, and quite aligned with prevalent propaganda,
or sports-style reporting the author is more accustomed to.
It now spread to LADbible. (Bit of a joke or tittytainment news site, and
their credence/reach has likely peaked.)