I’m concerned with the methodology used in this research. I’d like to ensure they haven't simply produced dry burn results (burning of the cotton/wick) and based their results off these conditions instead of real life vaping conditions. Scientists time and time again have completely ignored this issue of dry burning of the coil/wick in most all electronic cigarette research. As a result it often will give the appearance of vaping being inaccurately harmful. I would really to see studies conducted in actual realistic vaping conditions. How do I know this study has done that? There is no information that I have seen on the types of devices that were used to produce the vapor, the brand and Ohm of the coil, the temperature they had the device at, whether the temperature was appropriate for the type of coil, the time interval between drags taken on the e-cig. 10 second drags on an E-cigarette are already well above the average for users, most vape 2-6 second drags. If the researchers assume e-cig drags are equal to traditional tobacco cigs, they will almost certainly produce dry burning of the coil and induce these chemicals the media headlines love to tout around in their anti-vapor stories. Yet I would very much like to ensure this study did indeed take all of these dry burn scenarios into account prior to running the experiment. Because all of these factors attribute to RLC (Real Life Conditions) of vaping. If these aren't known and accounted for in the respected research study, it is impossible to conclude whether any given study is applicable to the real life risks of vaping. We already know dry burning the coil/cotton produces dangerous chemicals that could cause cancer. Luckily the experience of dry burning is so disgusting and obvious to the user no vaper could/would actually continue to vape this dry burning cotton enough to produce these dangerous effects.