Vaping Switch

I've worked in industry for 20 years. Many studies are funded by industry. Some people say: "Don't trust them. They're biased." But here's the uncomfortable truth: Without industry studies, most of the safety data you rely on wouldn't exist. Let me explain. Want to approve a new pesticide or drug? You need data: → Toxicology. → Residue data. → Carcinogenicity. → Environmental fate. → Endocrine disruption. → Reproductive studies. → Chronic exposure tests. These studies are required by regulators. Guess who pays for them? Industry doesn’t do these studies for fun. They do them because they’re legally mandated. EFSA, EPA, ECHA, FDA, ANSES - all require massive data packages. Some submissions are 100,000+ pages. They take years and cost millions. No university is going to do that. Industry studies don’t stay behind closed doors. They’re: → Audited. → Publicly available. → Reviewed by independent experts. → Summarized in regulatory assessments. They’re not hiding in some secret vault. They’re sitting on EFSA’s website. "But they’re biased!" Yes - every study has potential for bias. That’s why the methods matter. Industry studies follow guidelines, GLP protocols, and strict regulatory checklists. Not blog-science. Not cherry-picked stats. Structured. Transparent. Reproducible. Academics often publish hypothesis-driven research. Industry? They test everything: → What happens at low dose? → What happens over 2 years? → What if the animal is pregnant? → What about bees? Soil? Water? This isn’t just science. It’s exhaustive documentation. EFSA doesn’t rubber-stamp anything. Neither does the EPA. They dissect every study line by line. Then they ask for more. If the study was junk - they’d reject it. If you throw out industry studies, here's what happens: → No new medicines. → No safer chemicals. → No food innovations. → No climate-friendly fertilizers. → No modern toxicology databases. You don’t get precaution. You get paralysis. So what should we do? → Push for open science. → Demand transparency. → Allow independent reanalysis. But don’t discard industry studies just because of who funded them. Evaluate the evidence - not the logo on the lab coat. Industry studies are not perfect. But without them, we’d still be guessing. Science isn’t about who you trust. It’s about what you can prove - under scrutiny. And these studies face more scrutiny than most. Understand the process. Read the methods. Follow the data. Not the headlines. Seen a story that dismissed a study just because it was industry-funded? Share it. ♻️ Repost to push back against bias in the name of science.