General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFor the 18th time: E-cigs might not help people quit smoking.
https://www.refinery29.com/2018/03/194997/electronic-cigarette-quitting-smoking-study-effects?bucketed=trueThis week, reportedly, the 18th study linking e-cigarette use to a reduced chance of successfully quitting was published in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine.
The study, conducted with funding from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, consisted of 1,357 recently hospitalized smokers who planned to try quitting upon their discharge. They were split into two groups, where one was given treatment to help quit and the other only received recommendations and advice on how to quit. The study authors checked in with the participants one month and three months after they left the hospital to see if they were using e-cigarettes to support their quitting efforts. At the three-month mark, 28% of participants reported using an e-cigarette.
Six months after the participants left the hospital, the researchers assessed how successful they were, and whether e-cigarettes really helped the people who tried them. Of those who used e-cigarettes, about 10% successfully quit. Meanwhile, about 26% of participants who didn't use e-cigarettes at all were able to quit. So, the researchers concluded, e-cigarette users appeared to have a harder time quitting than nonusers. Unfortunately, this is hardly the final word on e-cigs.
Just this past summer, a study published in the BMJ offered conflicting findings. The study suggested that smokers who used e-cigarettes not only tried to quit more often but were successful at quitting more often than nonusers. On the other hand, some researchers have expressed concerns that e-cigarettes actually prolong smokers' tobacco use rather than help ease them out of the habit.
http://www.newsweek.com/vaping-news-lead-arsenic-and-other-toxins-inhaled-when-smoking-e-cigarettes-818733
Electronic cigarettes may have been deemed safer than traditional smoking by the American Cancer Society, but that doesn’t make it a risk-free habit. Past research has found that oils used to vape contain toxins, and a new study shows that the latest e-cigarette devices might leak dangerous amounts of metal, including lead, which could have serious health risks.. . .
The data showed that nearly 50 percent of aerosol samples contained lead in quantities above the Ambient Air Quality Standards set by the Environmental Protection Agency. In addition, the concentrations of nickel, chromium and manganese found in nearly half of the aerosol samples exceeded the limits. Every e-cigarette in the study was different, so the amounts varied per model. This variety, explained Rule, is one of the study's strengths.
“Every person that came into our study brought in their own device,” she said. “We think it’s representative of what people are vaping in the country.”
Arsenic also was found in some of the e-liquid samples, both in the chamber and refills, as well as some vapor samples.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Ligyron
(7,627 posts)It's a nicotine delivery system.
No tar laden smoke is involved.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)LuckyCharms
(17,425 posts)pnwmom
(108,977 posts)Not all smoke is "visible smoke."
What is smoke? — Science Learning Hub
https://www.sciencelearn.org.nz/resources/748-what-is-smoke
The "vapor" produced from e-cigs isn't pure water. It contains nicotine and other toxins.
LuckyCharms
(17,425 posts)pnwmom
(108,977 posts)But it also depends on the particular e-cig, and any flavoring that has been used.
Other studies have shown that chemicals in the emissions contain formaldehyde, acetaldehyde and other potential toxins. The U.S. Surgeon General has concluded that e-cigarette aerosol is not harmless, and can contain harmful and potentially harmful chemicals, including nicotine.May 5, 2016
E-cigarettes and Lung Health | American Lung Association
www.lung.org/stop-smoking/smoking-facts/e-cigarettes-and-lung-health.html
LuckyCharms
(17,425 posts)That is, when you do not have any juice in the chamber and the internal wick burns. A dry hit causes you to choke, and you make sure it never happens again. Other onerous chemicals are avoided by simply knowing what is in your ejuice.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)
Doremus
(7,261 posts)Response to pnwmom (Reply #27)
Matt_R This message was self-deleted by its author.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)bring in their own e-cigs, and she said she got a broad variety of them that way.
Response to pnwmom (Reply #101)
Matt_R This message was self-deleted by its author.
tonyt53
(5,737 posts)When any organic substance is exposed to temperatures below about 1500F, is smolders. Burning leaves for example, give off acrolein. However, at temps above that threshold, the acrolein in consumed by the heat. What does an e-cig do? It sure doesn't reach 1500F. Acrolein is a carcinogen, according to the US EPA and several other worldwide organizations. However, the upper limits of exposure has not been established because there are so many organics. Where does 100% of that concentrated acrolein go from an e-cig and where does it remain? In the lungs of the person inhaling it.
Hell, everybody that is associated with the biodiesel industry knows this. There is your main toxin.
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)tonyt53
(5,737 posts)We learned about this as we attempted to use our glycerol as a fuel as a means of disposing of it. When you know what YOU are talking about, come back and try me again. Until them, you are just showing your ignorance. Once again, YOU have no idea what you are talking about.
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)LuckyCharms
(17,425 posts)50 degrees is below 1500 degrees. What happens when organic substances are exposed to 50 degrees? What is the LOWER LIMIT for exposure to this? Also, burning leaves do not equate. You are not burning ejuice. Nice try though.
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)But that's at 280C (and I'd imagine certain other conditions are involved ... anaerobic perhaps?? I say that because the boiling point of glycerol is 290C so if there's no condition but temp, then glycerol literally could not be boiled).
Not to mention there's a reason there's always at least 10% PG (typically it's 30% PG) in vape juice ... I believe it's at least in part to help prevent this exact reaction from a malfunctioning unit.
Also, I have a temp gauge on my vape unit, when I run in temp mode I usually cook it at around 400F ... which is just over 200C. The max temp any unit goes is 500C, which is 260F. There's a reason for that as well.
Also, I'm PRETTY sure we'd know if we were vaping acrolein. The main hazards on the MSDS are: Highly poisonous. Causes severe irritation to exposed membranes. Extremely flammable liquid and vapor. Pretty sure I'd notice these things.
As acrolein is highly flammable, if I held a lit lighter in front of my face and blew out my exhaled vape, it should basically explode if there were any appreciable amount of acrolein. But that doesn't happen. Just tried it.
tonyt53
(5,737 posts)Acrolein has an auto-ignite of around 500F if I remember correctly. But that auto-ignite is pure acrolein and nothing else. When it is a by-product of heating/combustion, everything changes. It will never be exposed to 500F. Yeah, just keep on vaping. Just be glad that you have health insurance, thanks to Obama.
tonyt53
(5,737 posts)20 years as a chemical engineer working with biodiesel here. We all learned a bit about vegetable oils and glycerin in that industry. And you? 1500F consumes the acrolein. So what you are saying is that e-cigs produce 50F, and that is why how they work? Poor try though.
LuckyCharms
(17,425 posts)Like formaldehyde and other carcinogens, acrolein at onerous levels can be produced in vaping studies.
Vaping studies are usually performed by machines that literally draw on the device in a manner that does not replicate human use. The vaping rig is activated at unnatural angles, and drawn upon until the wick within the coil reaches higher than acceptable temperatures and is actually burning and smoking. If this action is replicated by an actual human being, they experience a "dry hit". A dry hit is not sustainable, and the action is promptly avoided after experiencing one.
A normal moist hit may or may not have traces of acrolein, and like formaldehyde, if this does indeed occur, the levels present are orders of magnitude less than that of a combustible cigarette. In addition to the choking sensation of a dry hit, a person vaping will also experience a horrible smell which among other problems, almost certainly indicates an unacceptable level of acrolein.
Bottom line is this: The jury is out on whether dangerous levels of acrolein are produced with vaping temperatures of 250-280 degrees F. I can cite studies making the argument both ways. In any case, I don't think it can be argued that substantial harm reduction is apparent with vaping vs. cigarette smoking which produces thousands of chemicals that will kill you over time.
I commend you for your chemical engineering degree...I think. I don't commend you for your curt response to me. It's just the internet, friend. I hope you don't respond to people in your real life in this manner. If you do, they are calling you names behind your back. Have a nice Good Friday...I'm off to "run my mouth".
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)And while yes Glycerol is most economically made with a base stock of a vegetable oil (often Palm), the process itself removes the fatty acids (as I'm sure you know) rendering a highly water-soluble (pretty much the opposite of an oil) product. So you were misrepresenting there.
You are also inaccurate in implying that every organic compound turns into acrolein at <1500C. If that were true, when I open my bottle of everclear in the cupboard, a bunch of acrolein would escape the bottle, since my house is <1500C, and alchohol is an organic compound. Pretty sure that's wrong. IOW you were made wrong by not specifying a lower bound temperature at which acrolein is produced in the first place, and by saying broadly 'all organics' ... turn into acrolein.
The important piece is less to do with 'do I get it the glycerol hot enough to destroy all acrolein produced', but rather 'is the vaping temp high enough to turn glycerol/PG mix into acrolein in the first place' ... don't you think?
Your imprecision in your statements is why LC and I got on you about it.
There's been plenty of studies looking at acrolein in vaping and as LC says it is only produced when 'you're doing it wrong'. 'Dry Hits', IOW. They are very unpleasant, you never take >1 before getting the situation fixed, and that only happens if you're not paying attention to your fluid levels. Given that cigs produce the shit by nature and people usually survive 40-50 years of smoking before succumbing, I'm not too worried about the trade-off I've made switching to vapor, even if I DO occasionally get a hit with a bit of acrolein.
LuckyCharms
(17,425 posts)your informative posts on this subject. You type as someone very knowledgeable who has done their research. Very well done.
I am not a scientist, nor am I especially well-versed in such subjects. However, I read whatever I can find on vaping, and my opinion has been formed based on what I read. I speak about vaping from personal experience, so I also base my opinion on the changes in my health since I made the switch. Literally every smoking related ill improved or was eliminated entirely.
Thanks again...I've learned a lot from you.
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)I'm not a chemist but had plenty of chemistry exposure in getting my Bachelor of Science degree ... I understand the basics pretty well. And yeah I often read these types of studies and THEN I go out and read the rebuttals or the peer-reviews (if those were done, perhaps unsurprising these studies often get published and breathlessly touted by the Prohibitionists WITHOUT them, which I find amazing).
Before I even started about 4 years back I did a bunch of research, of course much less was known then than now. Even so the data coming in since has done little to disabuse me of the notion that given the choice of smoking or vaping, the proper choice is blatantly obvious.
It's also become very obvious that there's a campaign going on to STOP people vaping with fear-based and over-hyped 'studies' like the type Anti-Vapevangelist Stanton Glantz produces, one of which is referenced in the OP. That guy is on a mission and IMHO does shoddy work, sets vaping 'up to fail' by his methods, and then misrepresents what he's found when he talks about his studies. Furthermore, although he's nominally a 'Professor of Medicine', guess what? That doesn't mean he's has an actual DEGREE in friggin' Medicine. IOW, dude ain't even a 'Doctor' doctor, he just has a PhD (some type of Engineering I believe), so gets to call himself 'Doctor', and he's 'Professor of Medicine' cause he works in a Cardio department at UCSF ... but DOESN'T do 'medicine', he does engineering.
For more info ... https://www.vapingpost.com/2017/04/28/stanton-glantz-expert-or-extremist/
In particular read 'The Helena Miracle' and all that follows Very illuminating. The dude is NOT a legit medical researcher, and liar to boot. This is why I've harped at the people on this thread 'trusting' what this guy has to say.
And nearly every big study that's anti-vape that I've seen, when you read the 'conflicts of interest' about the researchers, it'll say "has previously done research paid for by XYZ, Makers of (Insert Big Pharma Tobacco-Cessation Product)" or even lobbied for Tobacco Co's themselves ... Glantz usually likes to glom onto those types of studies and get his name included in the discussion somehow.
For all the rest of you to gain some balance, consider taking in some actual POSITIVE research:
https://www.vapingpost.com/2015/08/19/the-position-of-the-british-government-on-the-electronic-cigarette-scrutinized/
The vape is less harmful than tobacco and could ultimately outcompete it, declared Public Health England (PHE) in a study that acknowledges for the first time that the e-cigarette is less harmful than tobacco. The British agency concludes that the best current estimate shows that the electronic cigarette is about 95% less harmful than conventional cigarettes and could lead to its future approval as an alternative drug to tobacco withdrawal such as nicotine patches.
<snip>
Not a gateway to tobacco
The study found that almost all of the 2.6 million adult users of electronic cigarettes in the UK are current or former smokers who use it as a way to stop smoking. Most of them are using the e-cigarette to help them wean themselves or prevent them from stepping back to smoking.
An NZ-based study replicating their methods a couple years after ... concluded the same.
To address another point, I absolutely believe there are 'kids' getting involved with vaping that probably wouldn't have screwed with cigarettes and hence not develop a nicotine addiction if there was no vaping and that does concern me a bit ... but I've seen no evidence that any monolithic 'big corporate entity or group' is going out of their way to make that happen. The vape shops I've been to are all strict about ID's and not even allowing INTO the store any persons under 18. They're doing 'what they can'. And given that there's no ACTUAL evidence that vaping is 'bad for you' other than the addiction to nicotine ... maybe it's not really that worth worrying about?
tonyt53
(5,737 posts)You actually didn't read what I said. I never said "every organic compound turns into acrolein at 1500C - I did say F, by the way. I said when it is exposed to temperatures of less than 1500F, the released acrolein is not consumed. And what temps does vaping produce? You need to read before jumping to conclusions.
Hell, I know lots of people that smoked those Camel non-filtered for 70 years and they never had cancer. But at the same time, I know many more that smoked for a many years less and they ended up with cancer. Hard to say exactly what caused their cancer, but acrolein has to be considered as one of the culprits.
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)it smolders. Burning leaves for example, give off acrolein" and "However, at temps above that threshold, the acrolein is consumed by the heat. What does an e-cig do? It sure doesn't reach 1500F."
The implication when read literally would be that a bottle of everclear in my cupboard, a 90% organic compound ... being exposed to 72F (i.e. <1500F) when opened, would release acrolein because as you say "when any organic substance is exposed to temperatures below about 1500F it smolders (and makes acrolein like leaves burning)".
You are the one not considering the lack of specificity to what you wrote, NOT that I 'didn't read what you said'.
You 'know what you meant', but you didn't say it accurately. There's also a LOWER BOUND of temp needed to create acrolein in the first place. RIGHT?!?
Per the Wiki, glycerol doesn't decompose to acrolein until reaching 280C. Vaping temps are typically <210C. SO ... WHERE are you getting the idea from that vaping devices are decomposing Glycerol to Acrolein in the first place? 1500F temps are MEANINGLESS ... if there's no acrolein being created to begin with. RIGHT?
And you're one who friggin' brought up OIL, who gives a shit who much glycerol in teh US is derived from palm or some other oil. That's irrelevant. The point is, glycerol is NOT OIL, even if vegetable oil is a feedstock to the process (most any vegetable oil works probably), and nobody vapes OILS. Glycerol could be said to be a product made from oily liquids ... after the friggin oils ... have been removed from it.
Why don't you just admit you did not accurately your point(s) in your first message? Why is that so hard?
LuckyCharms
(17,425 posts)take it up with my doctors who say that the hype against vaping is complete bullshit.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)The data showed that nearly 50 percent of aerosol samples contained lead in quantities above the Ambient Air Quality Standards set by the Environmental Protection Agency. In addition, the concentrations of nickel, chromium and manganese found in nearly half of the aerosol samples exceeded the limits. Every e-cigarette in the study was different, so the amounts varied per model. This variety, explained Rule, is one of the study's strengths.
“Every person that came into our study brought in their own device,” she said. “We think it’s representative of what people are vaping in the country.”
Arsenic also was found in some of the e-liquid samples, both in the chamber and refills, as well as some vapor samples.
LuckyCharms
(17,425 posts)Also, perhaps you can explain why my chronic bronchitis has disappeared, my blood pressure has returned to normal, and I can walk 10 miles without getting the slightest bit winded.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)without all the tar, but that doesn't mean that e-cigs are without risk.
LuckyCharms
(17,425 posts)of the latest study. Everytime. He gets riled up over it.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)In February, researchers from George Washington University and the UCSF Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education found that daily e-cig usage doubled the risk of heart attack. If e-cigarette smokers also continued to smoke regular cigarettes, their risk compounded by a factor of five.
"The finding of increased heart attack risk for e-cigarette use, in addition to the risks of any smoking, is particularly troubling, because most people who use e-cigarettes continue to smoke cigarettes," Glantz, the senior study author, said in a statement. The study analyzed data from the 2014 and 2016 National Health Interview Surveys of nearly 70,000 Americans.
One reason, the researchers said, is that although e-cigs contain lower levels of carcinogens than regular cigarettes, they have high levels of "ultrafine particles and other toxins that have been linked to increased cardiovascular and non-cancer lung disease risks -- which account for more than half of all smoking-caused deaths."
The good news, Glantz said, is that stopping smoking immediately drops the risk for heart attack: "Our study also shows little risk associated with being a former e-cigarette user."
LuckyCharms
(17,425 posts)get around to doing, I'll post it for you.
Hassin Bin Sober
(26,325 posts)Want to feel young again and keep the pounds off? Try cocaine!!
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)Who understand his/her patient is addicted to nicotine and hence is going to do 'one or the other'.
IOW, you're being disingenuous, as you damn well know that NO doctor would recommend TAKING UP vaping to a patient who's not already a nicotine addict. Sheesh.
It's called 'harm reduction'.
Hassin Bin Sober
(26,325 posts)That's what I was responding to.
LuckyCharms
(17,425 posts)Hyped risk does not equal complete safety. Risk is on a spectrum. You knew that. I'll take his (actually, their) words over someone on the internet.
Double the heart attack risk? I mean, "who doesn't have an internet poster" who throws phrases around without backup or consideration of other factors (like discussing the issue at length with a medical doctor)?
I don't know...I'd rather go from 2 packs a day to no packs a day while vaping zero nicotine than change my mind over one unsupported sentence that an anonymous internet poster says. But that's just me.
Now please excuse me, I have to go drink a cup of caffeine.
Mariana
(14,854 posts)With e-cigs, there is zero combustion, and zero smoke. By definition.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)LuckyCharms
(17,425 posts)pnwmom
(108,977 posts)And what it can do.
The argument about terminology reminds me of the argument about the terminology of assault weapons.
From the CDC:
https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/basic_information/e-cigarettes/index.htm
What is in e-cigarette aerosol?
The e-cigarette aerosol that users breathe from the device and exhale can contain harmful and potentially harmful substances, including:
Nicotine
Ultrafine particles that can be inhaled deep into the lungs
Flavoring such as diacetyl, a chemical linked to a serious lung disease
Volatile organic compounds
Cancer-causing chemicals
Heavy metals such as nickel, tin, and lead1
It is difficult for consumers to know what e-cigarette products contain. For example, some e-cigarettes marketed as containing zero percent nicotine have been found to contain nicotine.2
LuckyCharms
(17,425 posts)Heavy metals are avoided by knowing your rig and the metal composition of its components.
Ultrafine particles that can be inhaled deep into the lungs are in the air in your living room.
Cancer causing chemicals is non-specific.
Volatile organic compounds is non-specific and meaningless in this context.
Nicotine is only toxic above certain levels, and is moot if you have juices that don't contain nicotine.
Mariana
(14,854 posts)E-cig vapor is not smoke, by definition. Continuing to call it smoke, while knowing is not smoke, would be lying.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)Mariana
(14,854 posts)pnwmom
(108,977 posts)which is what the aerosol CONTAINS and whether the benefits outweigh the risks.
Mariana
(14,854 posts)Use the correct terminology.
Assault weapons have to be defined and described in order to ban them. Smoke and vapor are already clearly defined, ordinary English words. You provided a definition of smoke that excludes e-cig vapor. So stop calling it smoke, when you know perfectly well that it isn't smoke, and the problem of having people correct you for that goes away.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)I know you mean well, but it’s ridiculous.
Drahthaardogs
(6,843 posts)It is the tobacco specific nitrosamines that are the carcinogens, and truthfully, even that data is weak. The carcinogenic effect of cigarettes is probably attributable to other chemicals associated with combustion, heat, and irritation.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)pnwmom
(108,977 posts)It doesn't matter whether we call it "smoke," "aerosol," or "vapor." It contains toxins that don't belong in our lungs.
https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/basic_information/e-cigarettes/index.htm
What is in e-cigarette aerosol?
The e-cigarette aerosol that users breathe from the device and exhale can contain harmful and potentially harmful substances, including:
Nicotine
Ultrafine particles that can be inhaled deep into the lungs
Flavoring such as diacetyl, a chemical linked to a serious lung disease
Volatile organic compounds
Cancer-causing chemicals
Heavy metals such as nickel, tin, and lead1
It is difficult for consumers to know what e-cigarette products contain. For example, some e-cigarettes marketed as containing zero percent nicotine have been found to contain nicotine.2
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)In fluids for ages. It’s not terminology-the words describe two different things and all Smoke will have some carcinogens- not true of steam vapors.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)and the possible effects on the lungs. Arguments about whether it is "smoke" or "vapor" or "aerosol" are just a distraction, and won't do anything to protect breather's lungs.
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)Which then lodge themselves in the lungs. The particular ones coming off cigarettes are loaded w/known carcinogens. It also contains 'tar' which also has carcinogens, and has very low H2O solubility (i.e. OILY, i.e. its stick in your lungs for a long period), whereas the components of good quality vape juice are 100% water-soluble.
FACT: They're not even CLOSE to the same F***ING THING, no matter how much you want to imagine that to be the case. Pardon my French, but you're 100% WRONG on this.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)along with all the other toxins, but I don't agree that it doesn't matter that there are other toxins in the vapor of e-cigs.
If you want to use them, that's your right as an adult. But we shouldn't allow them to be marketed to teens, and the "vapor" should be kept out of public spaces so those of us who don't want to inhale them don't have to.
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)Then they are CONTAMINANTS and should NOT be there.
Vape juice consists of:
Nicotine (maybe)
Rx Grade Propylene Glycol (10-30%) ... used as substrate in asthma inhalers, and to purify air in hospitals, and 'fog machines' at dance clubs and concerts
Food or Hospital Grade Vegetable Glycerin (70-90%) ... literally you can drink, and even enema with, this stuff safely.
A tiny, tiny % of concentrated, food-grade, water-soluble flavoring, such as you'd use to make a Jolly Rancher, or frosting with.
THAT'S IT.
With a unit that functioning correctly, there is basically no 'chemical reaction' between these components, so don't imagine it's like 'burning' something. Yes, a 'dry hit' or hit using way excessive voltage can create formaldehyde and some other VOC's, but again, not a normal situation.
IOW, there are NO TOXINS. Other than nicotine. Stop 'buying' what Stanton freaking Glantz and the makers of Nicorette are selling here. If Goebbels did a 'study' on 'The Natural Evil of the Jew' it'd be about as reliable as Stanton Glantz doing a 'vaping study', I'm not kidding.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)This is from a new study by Ana Marie Rule of Johns Hopkins.
http://www.newsweek.com/vaping-news-lead-arsenic-and-other-toxins-inhaled-when-smoking-e-cigarettes-818733
The data showed that nearly 50 percent of aerosol samples contained lead in quantities above the Ambient Air Quality Standards set by the Environmental Protection Agency. In addition, the concentrations of nickel, chromium and manganese found in nearly half of the aerosol samples exceeded the limits. Every e-cigarette in the study was different, so the amounts varied per model. This variety, explained Rule, is one of the study's strengths.
“Every person that came into our study brought in their own device,” she said. “We think it’s representative of what people are vaping in the country.”
Arsenic also was found in some of the e-liquid samples, both in the chamber and refills, as well as some vapor samples.
Now that exposure has been established, the next steps are to determine if, and how, it impacts the body. Rule hopes this study, and corresponding research, will push the Food and Drug Administration to begin regulating e-cigarette pens. She believes quality control and newer, safer devices are issues that need to be addressed.
“Maybe there’s another way to heat or isolate the liquid from the heating element,” she said. Although she doesn't believe vaping is safe, Rule asserts there needs to be better devices for those who insist on the habit. “There’s got to be a safer way to do it," she said.
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)Just saying it 'exceeded AAQS' doesn't really tell you much. If the standard is 1 part per billion, is the vapor 1.1 part per billion? Or is it 1000 parts per billion? Notice that's conveniently not reported. Just 'higher than'. And it's only 50% of samples, which tells you ... it's entirely possible to avoid it.
Also, yeah, probably a tiny bit of metals are introduced into the body because there's metal components that the juice comes in contact with. Nickel isn't real great for you but chromium and manganese? Not particularly harmful unless in large quantities. Again, no numbers, just scary sounding words to the general public.
This is EXACTLY the of shit reporting about vaping that is RAMPANT, and that I friggin' hate. Esp. the way people just read it and blindly go "ZOMG !!! TEH LEADSZ!!! YOUR GONNA DIE!!!". No offense.
This all said I fully support attempts to make it even safer, but with good quality control, there's no 'toxins' inherently involved in this process.
Demit
(11,238 posts)From the article at the link: "In fact, when smokers switched completely to e-cigarettes, their intake of cancer-causing chemicals dramatically fell to a level found in people using nicotine replacements, the researchers found."
Somehow the people who are horrified at the idea of vaping nicotine and evangelize furiously against it, are quite approving of the use of nicotine patches and other (expensive and profitable) products. Funny, that.
I smoked for more than 40 years. Three years ago I started to vape, have not had a cigarette since, and am not in the least tempted to have one. I consider that wildly successful.
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)Pharma even more so because Nicorette and sales of similar products I GUARANTEE YOU are suffering MAJORLY due to vaping. And vaping is like 1/5 the cost if you shop around and buy your juice in bulk ... even CHEAPER is making your own. It's not rocket science, there's 4 ingredients (or a few more like if you want a 'berry mix' or something as your flavor).
You could VERY easily create an entire years of juice that would be the equivalent nicotine to smoking 1 pack a day or using 1 packs worth of nicotine in the form of gum or lozenges (approx cost $3000-4000 depending on your area) ... for about $200.
NOW do you guys understand the REAL impetus behind these "STUDIES"?
If it was anything but the dreaded 'smoking' thing, every one of you would SEE what's going on here.
Also, Stanton Glantz is a joke of a researcher and an utter slimebag. Once his 'studies' get peer-reviewed they get shredded, esp. his 'public pronouncements' about what he believes the data says.
Anyone who, for example, 'buys' that science has 'proven' that vaping increases your risk of 'heart attack' by 3X and that adding smoking TO vaping ... increases it only by 2X more ... is an idiot. That makes zero sense, and implies that smoking has a LOWER chance of increasing your attack risk (2X for smoking vs 3X for vaping? ... BULLSHIT). That's a Stan Glantz special right there.
It also doesn't seem to account for 'how much' a person smokes relative to vaping. Which HAS to be an important value. Someone who smoked 40 cigs a day and now smokes 1 cig a day and vapes 3mg juice 1 other time each day ... does NOT have a the same attack risk as someone who still smokes 40 cigs a day, and chain vapes 12mg juice constantly when not smoking. So a number like 5X is CLEARLY friggin made up from thin air.
In fact, even the 3X is made up from thin air because I guarantee you almost NO people who've had a heart attack since vaping was invented ... did not ALSO smoke previously in their lives. Barring a sudden outburst of young vapers dropping dead at a young age, it'll be at least 40 more years before we know with any certainty how dangerous vaping ALONE, actually is. Right now every vaper who's dying of some disease possibly 'smoking/vaping related' almost certainly also smoked cigs, probably for a long time. And I guarantee you that smoking cigs alone raises your 'chance of heart attack' FAR FAR more than vaping alone would do. So this 3X vs 5X thing Glantz pulled from his ass ... reeks, appropriately.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)We don't have them thanks to the tobacco industry.
GulfCoast66
(11,949 posts)Many of them in their classrooms or seeing a movie.
Other than that, yeah, just like assault weapons.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)Trying to distract from a discussion of risks with a discussion of terminology.
Mariana
(14,854 posts)except from you. Everyone else seems to agree to use the words smoke and vapor as they are defined.
If you want to speak of logic, how is it logical to expect people to take you seriously, after you've insisted that it doesn't matter whether the things you say are true?
LuckyCharms
(17,425 posts)it LOOKS like smoking!!!! 
Ligyron
(7,627 posts)But nicotine is only toxic above a certain level.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)The data showed that nearly 50 percent of aerosol samples contained lead in quantities above the Ambient Air Quality Standards set by the Environmental Protection Agency. In addition, the concentrations of nickel, chromium and manganese found in nearly half of the aerosol samples exceeded the limits. Every e-cigarette in the study was different, so the amounts varied per model. This variety, explained Rule, is one of the study's strengths.
“Every person that came into our study brought in their own device,” she said. “We think it’s representative of what people are vaping in the country.”
Arsenic also was found in some of the e-liquid samples, both in the chamber and refills, as well as some vapor samples.
Kirk Lover
(3,608 posts)a lot better than analogs....period. This we already know. The FDA is getting involved and everything is going to be regulated, which I'm actually happy about. Vaping is a much better delivery for nicotine or weed than smoking. Even Sanjay Gupta recommended you vape your medical maryjane.
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)I'm sure if you sampled enough steaks (or analog cigarettes) you'd find some lead in some of those too.
It's a very common contaminant, and most importantly it's NOT 'part of the product' and whoever is selling a vaping product that conveys lead to the user needs to taken out back and flogged.
It's almost certainly a foreign (china?) product ...
brer cat
(24,560 posts)My daughter used them to quit smoking successfully several years ago. It might not be the best way, but it worked for her, and I'm thankful for it.
Mariana
(14,854 posts)Congratulations to your daughter! I know you must be glad.
MountCleaners
(1,148 posts)It took a few months, but after a while, I came to HATE cigarettes.
I still vape, but less and less, and my health and physical condition have improved dramatically since taking up the e-cig.
I do an hour of cardio 3-4 days a week. I couldn't do that when I was smoking.
I'm extremely grateful for the e-cig. My own doctor counts it as "quitting smoking". I do intend to wean myself off of it, I don't enjoy it that much. When I've had enough vape, I put it down. I couldn't do that with cigarettes. I'd smoke if my throat was sore, if I had a headache. I don't wake up in the middle of the night to vape.
My life is so much better now.
GWC58
(2,678 posts)Since then I’ve used e-cigs exclusively. Since that time my appetite has improved greatly and food tastes much better. I’d say it is a healthier option.
Brainstormy
(2,380 posts)and had hundreds of dollars worth of nicotine patches, gun, drops, etc., in my medicine cabinet when I tried e-cigarettes. My cough stopped in 3 days. I went back to tennis a month later. Feel 20 years younger. Haven't had a real cig in four years. You can't tell me anything about e-cigarettes. I believe they saved my life.
Mariana
(14,854 posts)Me too, and a whole bunch of other former smokers in this thread. However, someone else tried an e-cig, didn't like it and went back to smoking, therefore e-cigs are useless at best. That's the kind of "reasoning" going on here.
LuckyCharms
(17,425 posts)I think a lot of it has to do with the satisfying of the hand to mouth action...which gum or patches do not do.
Congratulations on your success!
Luciferous
(6,078 posts)juice for it now, but I still wish he would quit. I quit cold turkey 11 years ago and it sucked but I still think it's the best way to do it.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)
Mariana
(14,854 posts)LuckyCharms
(17,425 posts)Had my last cigarette 1,681 days ago.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)LuckyCharms
(17,425 posts)Mariana
(14,854 posts)Tried the e-cig just to see what it was like, and that was it. I never smoked again.
I've said before what I think is going on to bring on all this rage we see from some people about e-cigs. Some people hate smokers a whole lot more than they hate smoking. Smokers deserve to suffer, even after they've quit. Now, we have smokers quitting with e-cigs, and not only are they not suffering while they quit, they're actually enjoying it! That drives some people right around the bend.
Mariana
(14,854 posts)You and me, we done good, no matter how much some strangers on the internet want to belittle what we did because they don't approve of the way we did it. All the other former smokers on this thread, too. Hooray for all of us.
LuckyCharms
(17,425 posts)And to use your words...YOU DONE GOOD! 
Phoenix61
(17,003 posts)It's been over 4 years and I can't imagine smoking a cigarette.
MyNameGoesHere
(7,638 posts)Keep tilting.
Kirk Lover
(3,608 posts)in awhile I may buy a pack for a concert or something but the thought of it is always better than the actual cigarette so I don't really care to smoke them anymore.
So if you want to quit smoking the traditional way ecigs are the best way in my opinion to do it. It also allows you to wean down on your nicotine intake. I am sooooo much happier with ecigs than analogs...I will never go back.
However, there is one thing...you do have to find the right flavor - bad flavors can turn you off ..just keep trying. It sucks spending the money on all these samples from different vendors but once you find your juices or juices ...you are all set.
From the article: "On the other hand, some researchers have expressed concerns that e-cigarettes actually prolong smokers' tobacco use rather than help ease them out of the habit."
That's obviously wrong that they prolong tobacco use...I'm sure they meant to say nicotine..which is true.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)Kirk Lover
(3,608 posts)kind of regularity. I mean at first there is some blending but if you have the right flavor/hardware/strength I think anybody can stop using them. I think if I can switch to ecigs with ease .....most anybody should be able to do it.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)Last week, a study of nearly 70,000 people found that daily e-cigarette use can double the risk for heart attack. If the user continues to smoke regular cigarettes each day along with e-cigarettes, the combined risk goes up five times.
"E-cigarettes are widely promoted as a smoking cessation aid, but for most people, they actually make it harder to quit smoking, so most people end up as so-called 'dual users' who keep smoking while using e-cigarettes," said Stanton Glantz, lead author of the latter study, in a statement.
Mariana
(14,854 posts)Within a short time, they either find a rig and juice that works for them and stop smoking, or they don't and give up vaping.
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)Between us we'd smoked over 80 years.
None of the 4 smoked analogs w/any regularity (2 never at all) within 2 weeks of weaning down and switching to e-cigs.
All had tried many times to quit and failed. I find it very hard to believe that 4 of 4 of us would do this if the true average is ... what this study purports. Also they dont' specify whether 'vaping only' counts as 'quitting smoking'. It SHOULD, but I'm guessing they don't count that as quitting.
Now, everyone does still vape, true, but 1 vapes only 1 or 2 times daily, and 1 is down to 0 mg nicotine. 3 of us vape 3mg (lowest nic strength) at most, personally I dilute 12mg juice 5-1 with 99% pure (rest is water) hospital-grade vegetable glycerin to make a 2mg mix.
There's no chance I am getting heavy metals in my vape, sorry. Nobody uses 'OILS' for flavor, either, that's bullshit. It's water-soluble food-grade flavorings in good quality US made juice, ALWAYS. Oils destroy your lungs.
I wouldn't say vaping makes it easier to quit NICOTINE, but smoking is SOOOO much worse.
I'd bet money the study was funded and/or conducted by people tied to the Tobacco industry.
Mariana
(14,854 posts)in the write-ups about some of these studies. I have to wonder if that's deliberate.
That assertion requires a link.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)Last week, a study of nearly 70,000 people found that daily e-cigarette use can double the risk for heart attack. If the user continues to smoke regular cigarettes each day along with e-cigarettes, the combined risk goes up five times.
"E-cigarettes are widely promoted as a smoking cessation aid, but for most people, they actually make it harder to quit smoking, so most people end up as so-called 'dual users' who keep smoking while using e-cigarettes," said Stanton Glantz, lead author of the latter study, in a statement.
Except it's not a study it is a partial extract of a study that had not been peer reviewed and which is NOT posted at your link. Further this:your major assertion is nonsense "so most people end up as so-called 'dual users' who keep smoking while using e-cigarettes," said Stanton Glantz, lead author of the latter study, in a statement."They don't get to just "say so".
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)And LONG before any tests were done.
It's the most evil thing in world to this man, and if you think for ONE SECOND he wouldn't fudge studies to come up with the results he wants, I got a bridge to sell you.
He is SLIME and totally unreputable.
He'd probably ask someone 'so have you had a cigarette since you began using e-cigs' and they'd say 'well yeah for the first week I did but that was 6 years ago, I only vape since then' ... Glantz would go 'okay, great' ... and put your name on the list of 'people who both smoke and vape'.
I'm not kidding. He has no ethics and is 100% a 'Crusader', period.
beaglelover
(3,466 posts)with this. People will smoke now and into the future.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)thinking it's harmless.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)"You're never going to end X, so I'm not sure why you waste your time with this. People will X now and into the future.
May we apply your sentiment consistently in that X=any social concern? Or is there an implied qualifier I missed?
Billy Jingo
(77 posts)I smoked for over 30 years and it was the e-cig that enabled me to stop smoking cigarettes.
I only vaped for about two months. It was a serious pain in the ass. I probably had a poor setup, though.
KY_EnviroGuy
(14,490 posts)I quit a 2-1/2 pack/day cigarette habit six years ago using an e-cig only, in around 2-days of use. I've helped several hundred people quit, either directly or indirectly as a payback.
One of the secrets to success is having other people to work with in your effort, such as a local group to help work out the typical issues in using e-cigs. An example is with menthol smokers, who typically have an extremely hard time quitting. I've had to work with some of those for a year or two to find the right combination of liquids and devices. Most regular cig smokers can stop within a week or so, having an acceptable e-liquid and device.
In other words, if you just hand a person an e-cig and tell to go home and quit smoking, it probably won't work. You need knowledgeable, experienced people to work with you to try different liquid flavors and nicotine levels, and perhaps different devices to find what works for you as an equivalence to your smoking habit.
This would be comparable to those trying to stop drinking in that having other drinkers to talk with that have quit makes a big difference. To use a phrase borrowed from the AA Program, "the only requirement for membership is the desire to quit smoking", and true desire is the key. One of the things that amazed me after working with a large number of people is that probably 90% of the people will slowly reduce their nicotine levels on their own over time.
As a person who has used e-cigs since well before they were readily available (I had to order all my stuff on-line in 2012), one of the most disappointing things that's come out of this is the sensationalization and machoization that's been promoted by local and on-line vendors, and this does not help people quit smoking and it tends to attract young people to try it for fun.
E-cigs do work when properly used in the proper circumstances...........
.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)But the details in your post make sense. There are probably ways things that can be done to increase the likelihood of success.
On the other hand, the advertising is also luring some teens into use, thinking it isn't harmful at all.
KY_EnviroGuy
(14,490 posts)particularly since it said "For the 18th time". Perhaps it's just the way I read it.
Honestly, I don't think non-smoking teens are lured directly by the ads, but instead are lured into both smoking cigarettes (and blunts) and/or e-cigs by their peers, as an "in-thing". Keep in mind that one of the "in" type big-vapor units can cost upwards of $100 or more.
Opposingly, I can get someone started with the basic necessities for stopping smoking for under $50, which is about what many smokers would spend in 2-weeks on cigarettes. I adapted a philosophy from the beginning that if I'm spending less on e-cigs than I did on cigarettes, then I can justify buying what I need to experiment - and it paid off.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)And aside from possible effects on kids, I'm okay with adults making their own decisions -- as long as they agree to including vaping in no-smoking areas. They might be okay with breathing that stuff, but I'm not.
flotsam
(3,268 posts)And fraud involving research grants.
http://www.sfexaminer.com/ucsf-professor-faces-second-sexual-harassment-lawsuit/
The worst came in January 2017, when a post-doctoral colleague of mine witnessed [Glantz] scream and yell, ‘I only hired you because you are Native American,’” Jackson said in a statement shared with the San Francisco Examiner, adding that she believed Glantz had exploited her for her “tribal enrollment status to obtain [National Institutes of Health] funding” for tribal policy research that she had been tasked with performing.
Kirk Lover
(3,608 posts)so I didn't have to work so hard.
KY_EnviroGuy
(14,490 posts)I actually started before the big forums got going. There was a company called Liberty Flights that I bought my first parts (510 types) and juices from, and they had a private blog that I got my very first mixing ideas from. Liberty had a juice that hit me just perfect, but it would take over a week to get it and sometimes they were out of stock.....so I developed my own clone of it and still vape it today. I tried numerous juices from other vendors (this was in 2012) and most of it was crap.
Wasn't long before I was doing my own recipes and I had several people helping evaluate my mixes (I never rely on my judgment alone). It just exploded from there because there were very few companies selling the stuff back then. I am very grateful for ECF because there was always good ideas on new flavorings to try. To date, I've probably collected around 300 flavorings from several companies (from all of that cigarette money I didn't spend, LOL).
Wow, what a change in an industry in 6 or 7 years. It's really been an enjoyable, rewarding journey. Thanks for chiming in!.......
former9thward
(31,984 posts)One size does not fit all. No method of attempting to quit is good with everyone. Cold turkey, reduction, patches, hypnosis, etc does not help ALL people quit.
Oh and the unscientific comment in the last sentence about arsenic is typical. Let's SCARE people. How much arsenic? Oh, silence on that. Arsenic is a natural substance and can be found almost everywhere if you look hard enough for it. It can be found in most municipal water systems at levels that are meaningless for human consumption.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)and that it increases the likelihood that teens will get hooked on nicotine.
Kirk Lover
(3,608 posts)Have you ever smoked analog cigarettes?
Actually teen smoking in general is down down down.
The Genealogist
(4,723 posts)I haven't lot a cigarette in over 6 years, nor has my SO. The ecig helped us noth kick that habit. The smell of them is nauseating now.
Billy Jingo
(77 posts)I am an addict. I haven't smoked a cigarette in over two years but I will go to my grave wanting to.
50 Shades Of Blue
(9,978 posts)an instant sore throat any time I'm around them.
Kirk Lover
(3,608 posts)The stuff I use, you wouldn't even know.
JNelson6563
(28,151 posts)But I really wanted to. I still use one with very little nicotine and I am so glad to not be smoking anymore.
Doremus
(7,261 posts)3-pack a day smoker for 35 years. Many, no all, quitting aids/techniques tried and failed. Only one worked. The one that let me imagine I was still smoking but actually only inhaling water vapor.
Habit kicked in 1.5 years, last 6 months was sans any nicotine, not that it really matters. Nicotine isn't the harmful chemical in analog cigarettes. It's all the dirty products of burning things, i.e. tars et al.
Mariana
(14,854 posts)It might not help (some) people quit smoking. It would be equally true to say it might help (some) people quit smoking. It depends on the bias of the headline writer, who decides whether to say "might" or "might not".
It helped me, too. Took the first hit of an e-cig, and never smoked again. That was in 2011. I still vape sometimes, with zero nic fluid, because I enjoy it. I like blueberry flavor.
Leith
(7,809 posts)E-cigs help some people quit tobacco. Just because it isn't the 100% mark is no reason to slam it like that.
I go to a local shop where they know my name, remember my flavor and concentration, and make their own e-juice out of the same vehicle that delivers asthma medicine. Are you going to attack inhalers because they don't cure asthma?
I haven't wheezed since I switched. I have nice, minty breath. I don't blow the vapor in anyone's face. I can climb stairs until my leg muscles give out, not pause to pant on every landing.
I really don't understand the periodic hatred of vaping that prompts threads like this. It really makes those who vape wonder who or what is really behind articles. Is Refinery 29 such a good source?
MountCleaners
(1,148 posts)...and have gradually become less addicted. I use a low concentration now, and less and less of it.
Nothing else worked for me. Not prescription pills, not patches or gum.
Leith
(7,809 posts)It astonishes me when people start attacking vaping. They ignore the facts that (1) it is so much less dangerous than smoking was; and (2) it works. Those of us who vape and know what it is and what it does should not be brushed aside for what sounds like propaganda paid for by tobacco companies and Nicorette gum.
The absolute stupidest argument is that the flavors could entice youngsters to start vaping and move on to smoking. Anyone who tries that spurious nonsense should visit their local liquor store and see what flavors are added to schnapps and vodka: butterscotch, candy apple, spearmint, cherry, cinnamon, and so on. I don't remember anyone whining that kids are going to try drinking because of it.
Mariana
(14,854 posts)They would prefer to see you keep on smoking and sicken and die, rather than see you partaking of a much less dangerous alternative to smoking. Don't get me wrong, they want you to quit, but you better be miserable when you do, because that's what you deserve. The idea that you can quit smoking painlessly - and that you can even enjoy doing it - drives some people insane with rage.
LuckyCharms
(17,425 posts)IronLionZion
(45,431 posts)Smoke bothers me because I have asthma.
Vapers are OK. My brother vapes. I hardly even notice if someone is vaping around me.
Ms. Toad
(34,065 posts)The arguments I've heard aren't gateway arguments, it is that they will entice kids who are not nicotine addicted to become addicted via vaping - when we don't yet know what the harms associated with vaping are.
This largely has one driver: The same people who intentionally made smoking look glamorous and advertised to kids are now looking for a replacement industry for their cigarettes. Not to become smokers, but to become vapers. If ecigs are only used by those currently smoking, the customer base is declining. To keep the customer base steady, you have to generate a steady new flow of customers - youth who are not switching from smoking to vaping (or from vaping to smoking) but in whom they might generate new loyal customers for vaping. Using the same tactics they used years ago to generate loyal customers for smoking.
As to your suggestion about alcohol - people are definitely (and accurately) making that suggestion: http://archive.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2010/11/20/targeting_youth_to_start_drinking/
ETA: I'm all in favor of vaping as a means to quit smoking (even if you are a child who is hooked), and I don't think the mom-and-pop stores pose any particular risk (even with candy-flavored ejuice). My concern is that cigarette companies, which have a history of very sophisticated advertising that was used to entice (and hook) generations of smokers is on the hunt for a new customer base for vaping when we do not yet know what the long-term consequences are. I have no doubt they will use the same tactics to entice non-smoking and non-vaping youth to give it a try.
logosoco
(3,208 posts)My husband and I, smokers for over 30 years with no intention of quitting got started on the ecigs with a cheap kit. We moved to much better ones and make our own e-juice. We have not smoked regular cigarettes for over 6 years now. I still use nicotine in mine. It saves soooo much money. And I can breathe probably as well as I could have before I ever started smoking. I don't notice any adverse side effects, only good ones. ymmv
The way this headline is worded, it may dissuade a person from even trying to see if they can switch.
BoneyardDem
(1,202 posts)Attempting to sway public opinion by pretending this is all about smoking cessation. Bullshit. It's another method of addicting another generation of kids and thereby ensuring a revenue stream. One just has to look at the type of advertising, the anguage, the flavorings etc...it's all geared towards kids.
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)And this study is wrong. It's carried out by a very unscrupulous researcher who's literally been an anti-vape crusader since long before there was ANY data about it. He makes ridiculous generalizations and his studies are bogus.
I literally personally know at least 10 people who switched to vaping and quit cigs entirely, and I know 0 people who gave vaping an honest shot and were unable to quit smoking with it.
Sure there has to be SOME desire, but vaping makes it FAR FAR easier to do. Yes it's not getting you off of nicotine, but it's far far less harmful than smoking. If you'd done both for years, you'd KNOW ... like I know.
Every vape store in US doesn't allow people under 18 (21 in CA). The flavorings are what EVERYBODY LIKES, not just kids. You're wrong on that.
And ads for a vaping unit, or for vape juice are very rare and very discreet afa 'claims' go ... only the big-tobacco companies behind the 'cig-a-likes' (which are a joke and ARE useless to quit smokign with) are the big advertisers for E-Cigs. I mean, yeah, there's ad's on vaping websites. But you ever seen a tv ads about vaping units or juice? Ad's in magazines to buy the latest vaping unit? Newspapers other than maybe an ad for a particular vape shop? Any of those ads say anything much besides, 'great prices, great selection, these are the brands we carry?' type of deal?
Funny how THIS WHOLE ARTICLE is about the bogus studies of an anti-vape evangelist, and you're complaining about E-Cig makers trying to sway opinions? WHERE are they doing that? They are actually a very very diverse and non-monolithic group, very very different from 'big tobacco', btw. Other than vaping units made by some large companies in China, the juices are pretty much just all made by very small-business owners.
Lastly, it's LITERALLY against the law to claim that vaping is a cig cessation aid ... and thus NO COMPANIES EVER EVER EVER DO THAT.
Find another windmill, bud ...
Mariana
(14,854 posts)put out by Big Tobacco suck so much. You can't tell me they're incapable of making a decent product. I think the tobacco companies made them that bad on purpose. They knew smokers would hear about vaping and want to try it, but few would spend much time learning about different rigs and fluids and all that. So they put these shitty cheap disposables everywhere that cigarettes are sold, and advertised them heavily. They want smokers to try them, hate them, decide vaping isn't for them, and continue smoking.
BoneyardDem
(1,202 posts)Regardless of your 10 success stories, the ads geared towards minors, the new tiny devices designed to appeal to youngsters masking it use from adults, and most notably forwarding a new method to sell nicotine addiction ensuring a new revenue stream to replace falling tobacco sales statements I made, stands. Put that in your pipe.......
Kirk Lover
(3,608 posts)but um yeah we all know how marketing works so what do you want to ban nicotine? I have cut my nicotine intake in HALF. I'll be down to ZERO nicotine in no time. That's not cessation?
But another poster made a good point...no problem with all the liquor and it's massively fun varieties. That's OK....alcohol which destroys lives and families - but let's rag on vaping - which may not be perfect but it's a hell of a lot better than traditional cigarettes and REAL SCIENCE has already proven that.
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)prevalent this nefarious scheme is. Not saying it never happens, but I've never seen it. Enlighten me?
Just like your spiel about the 'flavors' (cause grownups hate like ... vanilla, strawberry, minty stuff ... only kids like those flavors ... right) ... fact is, tiny devices appeal to everyone who doesn't like carrying big honking things in their pockets. Do you have any evidence whatsoever these are being made specifically for the purpose you claim?
And 'Big Cigarettes' co's HATE e-cigs and their only role in it is if they also involved in tobacco growing (which many are not directly) and hence involved in distilling tobacco into the Pharma-grade Nicotine used in e-juice. Which is a massive LOSS of profit vs. selling the tobacco for cigs. So even for Tobacco growers, it's a LOSER. Pharma-grade nicotine is dirt cheap. Roughly 1000 cigarettes worth of tobacco distilled into pure nicotine sells for like $10 in this format.
This monolithic 'e-cig industry' that you imagine? For the most part, does not exist. 'Big Cigarettes' are in no way 'behind this', it's more like they're behind these garbage studies, along with big pharma co's, who makes Nicorette, etc.
I don't know of a single E-cig company larger than about 10 stores within a 50 mile radius of each other. Every one of them I've been to is owned by someone 25-45 y.o's, the owners typically work in the stores, they're vapers themselves, and they are in no way associated with any larger corporations. They buy various mostly-chinese made vape units (pretty much the only place making them) to stock their stores with, then they also sell coils (heating elements, as those wear out) and lithium batteries and vend juices from various small/local juice houses (some of these are just other small companies that have a few stores and make juices for their stores and to sell to other small stores) as well as typically having a 'house line' of juice, which they make by buying vats of PG/VG and bottles of pure Rx-Quality nicotine, and various food-grade flavors, which they mix in laboratory/clean-room conditions and sell in their stores as well.
There are no giant corporations behind vaping. Except the Cig makers who make the 'cig-a-likes' at the convenience store. Which NOBODY remotely serious about vaping ever uses. And the Chinese corporations who make the vaping units are probably not 'small' companies, but they aren't doing much advertising. If they were, names like Aspire, Smok, Kanger, Joyetech, and Itaste would be household names.
Sadly with Juice that's also changing a BIT as there's seeming to be some LARGE foreign juice houses in places like Malaysia that some of the stores around here are beginning to stock, but I don't buy that crap, I don't trust non-US made juice. I could see maybe big tobacco getting involved in that aspect of things, but I really hope it doesn't happen. ALL of us vapers want NO STENCH of Big Tobacco associated with what we're doing. A BIG goal for many of us was to stop funding those killers.
Fact is, stores selling vaping gear are a quintessential 'American Small Business Opportunity', and they're about as much of a monolithic Corporate entity as the (remaining) independent booksellers in this country.
Mariana
(14,854 posts)I spent some time looking around, trying different search terms, trying to find any example such an ad. All I could find was references to ads marketing e-cigs to children, and demands that they should not be allowed, like the statements in this thread.
MountCleaners
(1,148 posts)They are really friendly, excited to have your business, and have that personal touch that you certainly don't get with most products. I love being able to help a small business with my addiction.
I have to say what keeps me from quitting entirely is that I find it pleasurable. Pleasurable in a way that I didn't experience with smoking. I hated myself after having cigarettes, I would get headaches from them, never felt healthy. And you don't have coffee-flavored cigarettes! Also, I actually get compliments on smelling like coffee. Who says that about tobacco smokers?
I don't vape that much during the day, but I look forward to coming home and sitting down to my vape. Because of the great flavors, it's helped me lose weight. If I crave something sweet, I just vape. I've lost sixty pounds in two years. And I wouldn't be able to do all of the cardio I do to lose weight if I were still smoking.
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)studies as 'gospel' should take note of the pushback among us ... we wouldn't be saying what we're saying if we didn't KNOW from experience what we're talking about.
We're telling you ... that vaping TOTALLY facilitated US ... quitting cigarettes. That we're feeling a f*** of a lot better after quitting the cigs and getting onto the vapor. That our lives are better. That our lungs feel MUCH clearer. That we cough way less now. That we're much less easily winded. That we don't stink anymore. That we don't get bronchitis regularly anymore. That we're saving a bunch of money. That we didn't start vaping because of AD's or some conspiracy to trick us. That we feel good we're NOT appreciably contributing to big tobacco (unless maybe if they're tobacco growers who are distilling tobacco into Rx nicotine, in which case we're still 'costing' them vs. if we were buying smokes BIGLY).
Another neat thing is that after not that long on just vapor, cigs start to smell and taste really disgusting to you. If you have one, you'll almost surely hate it and go 'blech, I'll never do THAT again'. You still might once in a while ... high stress times maybe ... but you won't like it anymore.
Basically, if you've smoked for a long time, find yourself unable to quit, vaping gives you a SHOT to do so as evidenced by the many people here telling the rest of you 'it worked for me'. You really just need a BIT of motivation, I'm telling you. And you may need to make yourself 'wean' off cigs for a couple weeks, nothing wrong with doing that if helpful.
But if you succeed in getting off the analogs, after 3-4 months you will be amazed how much better you feel. Is it still addictive? YES. But weaning is possible, fairly conveniently. I've known a few to do so and get down to 0% nicotine. Or ... don't.
No matter what, due to the simplicity (and totally water-soluble nature) of the mixtures, you're inhaling a hell of lot less toxins, with no particulates or insoluble, carcinogenic 'tar' to lodge in your lungs ... vs. cigs.
Is it a risk because it's unknown still? Yes. Does it MAKE SENSE to assume it's highly likely to be 'less bad' than cigs? OF COURSE IT DOES. It's all food and pharma grade products, the nicotine is the only remotely 'toxic' piece of the equation. Vegetable Glycerin and PG are pretty damn innocuous substances.
It is important to address though these metals issues. Since the vaping units are Chinese mass-produced w/little oversight, we're going to need to do something about that. Gotta be possible to move to something else beside having our juice live in direct contact with cheap Chinese metals ... something 'ceramic' based perhaps? I'd also like some studies on the flavorings in particular. I think it's likely that some that are being used are not actually entirely 'safe' to vape even if they're accepted as 'food grade' and hence non-toxic, nominally.
MountCleaners
(1,148 posts)I turned three smokers from work on to vaping, and now they vape exclusively. In my experience it's less addictive than cigarettes. I can go several hours without vaping, it doesn't mess me up to do it.
They all thanked me for urging them to try vaping.
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)$5-10/day for our shitty nicotine replacement product (that rarely works) any more, and instead spending like $1/day for something that DOES, and also provides actual enjoyment to you.
Also WWWWAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH ITS NOT FAIR so we're going to make up bullshit to try to get our profits back!!!
Demit
(11,238 posts)Just read a Reuters story about how Starbucks, Dunkin Donuts et al now have to put a warning label on their products:
"One of those chemicals is acrylamide, a byproduct of roasting coffee beans that is present in high levels in brewed coffee.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Elihu Berle said in a decision dated Wednesday that Starbucks and other companies had failed to show there was no significant risk from a carcinogen produced in the coffee roasting process, court documents showed."
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-california-lawsuit-coffee/starbucks-coffee-in-california-must-have-cancer-warning-judge-says-idUSKBN1H5399
Hekate
(90,645 posts)...intention of helping people truly quit nicotine.
Vaping is just another means of delivering the dose.
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)They are against it, except for the ones making the cig-a-likes in the convenience stores, which no real vapers EVER use ... they basically seemed 'designed' to friggin' SUCK and cost WAY too much ... many of us believe they created these products to disabuse the average person from every quitting cigs to take up 'e-cigs' instead. 'Vaping' as we call it is quite different (and way cheaper) than those cig-a-like products, and FAR more useful as a substitute to smoking.
I believe you're incorrect in this assertion of cause and effect ... Vaping is much more like something that regular folks invented to help themselves get off of the costly/deadly products offered by Big Tobacco that got them addicted to nicotine and replace it a much less harmful and expensive alternative.
Bonhomme Richard
(9,000 posts)It took a while to find the right e-cig flavor and once I did I never went back. I have been around smokers since and never craved to have one. I remember trying a cigarette after I started the vaping and when I lit it up I thought Wow! That stinks and then what do I do with these ashes. Finally I didn't like the taste and put it out. That was the last one over a year ago. Now I am cutting down the nicotine level. I can't imagine going back.
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)into' these BS, rigged 'studies' when they come across them, and maybe even friggin' stop posting this kinda nonsense about vaping altogether.
There IS anti-vaping conspiracy, and it's mostly led by Stanton Glantz ... a joke of a 'researcher', and a liar to boot.
Dude likes to say shit like "43% OF VAPERS HAVE HAD TEH HEART ATTACKZ!!! ZOMG!!!"
Then you look closer at the data and it turns out that in actuality, like 97% of those instances were people who smoked for decades, and switched to vaping AFTER having a tobacco-related heart attack. But that doesn't matter to Glantz, however he can spin shit up to make vaping look bad, he'll do it.
https://www.vapingpost.com/2017/04/28/stanton-glantz-expert-or-extremist/
Bonhomme Richard
(9,000 posts)I didn't have a heart attack, nor did I have any symptoms, high blood pressure or bad cholesterol but they found clogged arteries and did a triple bypass on me. I stopped smoking while recuperating but started up again because I couldn't focus on my work. That was when I tried the e-cigs and haven' looked back. I order online and the supplier I use even provides quality control sheets on the juice I use checking for dangerous ingredients.
sl8
(13,748 posts)I'd be curious to see how e-cigs compare with other nicotine replacements (gum, patches, etc.) or prescription drugs like Zyban.
From a very cursory Google search,
http://www.tobaccofree.org/quitlinks.htm
Study compares Zyban, nicotine replacement and a combination of both treatments
A large recent study of 900 patients compared Zyban and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) alone, and in combination.
With the prescription anti-depressant Zyban, the initial success rate was 36% upon completion of therapy. A follow-up study showed a 30% success rate for Zyban, after one year. Zyban is by prescription.
With Nicotine Replacement Therapy the initial success rate was less -- 23%, and only 15% after one year. Nicotine replacement products like the patch and gum are sold over-the-counter, except the nicotine inhaler.
When NRT and Zyban were used in combination under a physician's care, the success rate was 39%, and 35.5% at one year. This study was published in the NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE in March, 1999 was funded by the makers of Zyban.
......
Again, this was a brief Google search, I don't know how accurate those numbers are.
It would be interesting to see how e-cigs compare.
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)IMHO, if you no longer smoke regular cigarettes with anything like 'regularity', then you've successfully 'quit smoking'.
That blurb above doesn't define 'quitting' either. What % of the people who 'succeeded' are actually OFF the patches/lozenges/etc? Do you have to be to meet the criteria, IOW?
Similarly with vaping, what if one used to smoke, but have since switched completely to vaping ... for years. Is that NOT 'quitting smoking'? How many years or months must it be? Does having had 1 cig a month ago in a time of stress 'count against you', even its the only 1 you had in 4 years? What if have weaned to 0% nicotine, but still vape? Is that quitting? To a researcher, it all depends on the standards/methodology.
There's no real 'common definition', and that makes comparing studies ... tricky.
Mariana
(14,854 posts)We have the OP arguing and insisting there's nothing wrong with calling e-cig vapor "smoke" and calling vaping "smoking", seemingly with the deliberate intention of fooling readers into believing that there isn't any substantial difference between the two. We have the articles about the studies being incredibly vague about how the studies were done, how terms were defined, what data were collected, and what conclusions were drawn, if any. Why all this dishonesty and evasion?
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)Last edited Sat Mar 31, 2018, 03:42 AM - Edit history (2)
Just so you know this Public Health Expert (Dr. Seigel) quoted in the article is no Hack ... apparently due to his stature he had inside info on what they were seeing in the study ahead of time ...
http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com.mt/2017/05/vape-shop-air-sampling-by-california.html
"This study adds to the evidence that under real-life conditions, "secondhand vaping" does not appear to pose any significant health risks.
Despite the claims of many anti-vaping organizations, the documented health risks of "secondhand vaping" appear to be minimal. And this is in an environment with relatively extreme conditions -- there was a visible cloud of vapor at times.
Based on the current scientific evidence, I fail to see the justification for banning vaping in most public places. And remember, this is coming from a guy who has devoted virtually his entire career to banning smoking in bars, restaurants, casinos, and every other indoor workplace (and even outdoor seating areas of restaurants). So I'm certainly not one to minimize the health risks of preventable environmental exposures.
However, I believe that there must be reasonable evidence before the government intervenes to ban a behavior such as smoking or vaping. With regards to vaping, I just don't see any reasonable evidence at this time that it poses any significant health hazard to bystanders."
emphasis mine
More about Dr. Siegel:
Dr. Siegel is a Professor in the Department of Community Health Sciences, Boston University School of Public Health. He has 32 years of experience in the field of tobacco control.
He previously spent two years working at the Office on Smoking and Health at CDC, where he conducted research on secondhand smoke and cigarette advertising. He has published nearly 70 papers related to tobacco.
He testified in the landmark Engle lawsuit against the tobacco companies, which resulted in an unprecedented $145 billion verdict against the industry.
And YET ... there he is ... telling you that studies by State of CA are showing that 2nd Hand Vape isn't going to harm bystanders, and there's no reason to ban it in public like cigarettes.
FACTS PEOPLE!!!
Mariana
(14,854 posts)A lot of people sure seem to believe it. I don't know if it's from a flawed thought process like this: Cigarette smoke causes cancer; Cigarette smoke contains nicotine; Therefore nicotine must cause cancer. It may be that some people (maybe funded by tobacco companies?) are spreading that lie on purpose.
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)The dude I hate.
But my post is about a different guy Michael Siegel's observations in his blog post. He is apparently a Professor in the Department of Community Health Sciences, Boston University School of Public Health and he apparently had access to the study data before release.
Glantz is unlikely to talk about cancer effects, as 'the heart' is all he knows squat about ... and neither of them are 'medical professionals', really. Seigel, while a very smart dude and very reputable, is mostly just interpreting a study done by others, but who's outcome suggests there's not even any real 'public health' justification to ban vaping ... ANYWHERE, essentially. Because there's just no evidence 2nd Hand Vapor poses any health threat to anyone.
That making more sense (along w/my edit to earlier post for clarity) now?
nocoincidences
(2,218 posts)immediately gave up smoking, after 30 years of it.
I love my vape, been using it for 5 years, since I quit smoking, and truly don't desire a cigarette at all. It's much more pleasant to vape and my lung function has improved dramatically.
I would love to hear which online companies people like to use. I have mostly gone to a local tobacco shack, but they are getting bad about not having my flavor on hand.
Anybody have recommendations?
