[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by TerryTagnut

Thankies!



Whoohoo lucky me



Patronising?

I have answered your concerns over vegetable glycerine. I've even linked you to some juicy links which shows the positives of ecigs.

Would you be willing to answer the following questions Kizzy?

Do you drink tea or coffee? They are both drugs.
Do you consume sugar? Most dieticians regard sugar as a recreational drug.
Do you consume alcohol?
Do you take regular exercise?
Are you overweight?

I'll answer those questions first. I might drink a few cups of tea a day (usually black) and have an occasional coffee. Mainly though, I drink herbal tea. I don't drink alcohol, and I avoid sugar. I do regular cardiovascular exercise and train with weights. I train for marathons and currently learning to rock climb. In short, I'm a very very boring person

That said, I have no problems whatsoever if people enjoy getting ratarsed, can't be bothered to do any exercise and drink coffee like it's going out of fashion. It's their life - non of my business (although tbh, I do think of the children sometimes when I see shelf after shelf stacked with sugar-laden chocolate, a recreational drug clearly aimed at children).

However, I do enjoy my nicotine (my drug of choice, just like alcohol or caffeine might be other people's choice). I now enjoy my nicotine in a far healthier manner.

If you answered yes to any of the questions above btw, would you consider me patronising for rebuking you because you enjoy them?

Sorry for the waffle (!) but I think this is important. I have tried over and over again to give up cigarettes (and if used according to the instructions, will probably kill you). Traditional NRT (gums, patches, sprays) have over a 90% failure rate (in other words, they do not work but line the pockets of the pharmaceutical industry). NRT never worked for me. You can give me the line about "just give up". But only a non smoker would ever say such a thing. Fact is fact. I have tried and failed. But succeeded by using an ecig.

Now, even the most ardent opponent of ecigs would have to concur that ecigs are without question, far far far safer than using a cigarette. Couple that with the fact that, for some, just giving up smoking is impossible, then what do you do?

Just condemn people to die a horrendous fate, just because you and the Daily Mail can't stand the idea of people enjoying themselves?

I'm not sure how to answer your question about the "think of the children" line tbh. How do you want me to think about them precisely? That line is usually dragged out when there's a lack of supporting evidence to bolster a proper line of argument.

For some reason, the Daily Mail has an agenda against ecigs. It completely ignores the positive, but blatantly lies week after week with half truths and misinformation. That link you gave earlier, about diacetyl. At the moment diacetyl is a contentious issue in the vaping community, but it's only found in some and not all eliquids. It's also a problem being address, making sure future liquids will not contain these chemicals. And even if they did, they would still be far far far far safer than smoking a traditional cigarette. It's scare tactics, it's taking something and completely distorting it to fit an agenda.

If you want to criticise ecigs because of a weakness that can be remedied, then you might as well criticise water because some people drown in it. In other words, you can change things to make them safer. In other words, it's not a legitimate argument against the inherent positives of ecigs.

Anyway, sorry about the waffle. But I look forward to your answers. Is stoicism really the answer? Is pleasure such a bad thing? Who gives anyone the right to pass judgement, just because they personally don't like it? You can drag up as many children as you want, but the fact remains; if you try to prevent people from using ecigs, then you would be condemning millions and millions of people to an early demise. This is fact.

You didn't answer my concerns and have conveniently glossed over the article I posted voicing said concerns... maybe you could dip your toe and give a response to that?

I don't feel questioning me on my habits would be of any benefit seeing as I'm not addicted to nicotine, nothing else would be comparable would it?
You can't compare one addictive substance to another like that.... nicotine suspended in an oil based solution is nothing like sugar, sugar is a substance in it's natural state, it is ingested and absorbed in a compleatly different way and it's effects are equally diverse.

Why you've aligned me with the daily mail and suggested I don't like people 'enjoying themselves' I don't know
If you vape and are not physically or mentally equipt to rid yourself of your addiction and choose to see what you do as enjoyment that's fine terry.

I never asked you to think of the children, I stated I was considering them due to the target market is all, don't misquote me please. I'm not judging you either, you can surround yourself in a custardy haze all day for all I care, my initial issue was with the aim of the marketing is all.

[TerryTagnut]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

You didn't answer my concerns and have conveniently glossed over the article I posted voicing said concerns... maybe you could dip your toe and give a response to that?

I don't feel questioning me on my habits would be of any benefit seeing as I'm not addicted to nicotine, nothing else would be comparable would it?
You can't compare one addictive substance to another like that.... nicotine suspended in an oil based solution is nothing like sugar, sugar is a substance in it's natural state, it is ingested and absorbed in a compleatly different way and it's effects are equally diverse.

Why you've aligned me with the daily mail and suggested I don't like people 'enjoying themselves' I don't know
If you vape and are not physically or mentally equipt to rid yourself of your addiction and choose to see what you do as enjoyment that's fine terry.

I never asked you to think of the children, I stated I was considering them due to the target market is all, don't misquote me please. I'm not judging you either, you can surround yourself in a custardy haze all day for all I care, my initial issue was with the aim of the marketing is all.

From the International Journal of Environmental Research and
Public Health:

Propylene glycol and glycerol are the main ingredients of EC liquids. Both are classified by Food
and Drug Administration (FDA) and by the Flavor and Extracts Manufacturers Association (FEMA) as
additives that are “generally recognized as safe” for use in food (FEMA GRAS numbers 2,940 and
2,525 respectively). They are also used in tobacco cigarettes as humectants; however they may be
pyrolyzed to acrolein and formaldehyde [32,33]. Goniewicz et al. found acrolein and formaldehyde in
EC vapour [34]; however, the levels detected were lower compared to CS by orders of magnitude,
probably because the temperature of evaporation of EC liquid is lower compared to the temperature of
combustion in tobacco cigarettes. Similar observations were made by Lauterbach and Laugesen [35].
Even if such chemicals were released during vapour production in this study, the amount was probably
not enough to produce any significant cytotoxic effect on cultured cells. Nicotine, at levels commonly
found in cigarettes, does not induce cell death and may even have anti-apoptotic properties in
myocardial [36] and other cell lines [37,38].,

Damn, there's probably loads of studies which back up use of vegetable glycerine to be 'safe'. I don't pretend to be a medical expert (actually, medically ignorant would be a better description), but one thing I do know, there's a plethora of peer reviewed research that all come to the same conclusion - that ecigs are a far healthier alternative to smoking. As I've stated before, if cigarettes are deemed 100 (in terms of risk), then ecigs by comparison are somewhere between 1 and 5.

But, not even getting bogged down by the science, you speak to any user of ecigs and they'll all probably be saying the same thing: they can breathe better, they feel far healthier and it's been a life-changing decision for them.

I'm not sure why you're saying that it's unfair to compare one addiction to another. Let's take alcohol for a start. In 2012, about 3.3 million deaths, or 5.9 % of all global deaths, were attributable to alcohol consumption. That's quite a number.

Remember, nicotine has the same risk profile as caffeine. So, I'm left unclear why someone would say it's unfair to make a comparison? People think nicotine is the killer, when in fact it's all the other crap in cigarettes. There's mountain evidence that far from being a killer, nicotine in fact might be a wonder drug!

http://discovermagazine.com/2014/march/13-nicotine-fix

It would be a crying shame if the benefits of nicotine were swept under the carpet just because of some moral fanaticism.

Anyway, I apologise for aligning you with the Daily Mail. I think it was the "think of the children" thing that lead me to this misapprehension. Usually put forward by the zealots without any rational argument. Speaking of which:

http://ecigarettereviewed.com/top-10...vaping-zealots

I think people's main concern with ecigs is the fact that in some circumstances it can look like smoking. But it's just vapour. Do we ban kettles? Do we ban shaking coke cans in public because it might look like a gratuitous act of onanism? Where do we draw the line?

One thing I know though - the sooner the truth about ecigs becomes apparent, and can be discussed in a sensible and adult fashion, without emotive and nonsensical argument put forward such as "the think of the children" line (which doesn't have one shred of evidence to substantiate it being used), the better it will be. It will give millions of smokers a chance to make an informed decision to switch to a healthier alternative if they so desire.

That said, I have nothing against smokers - it's their choice, and they should have the right to carry on without the constant bullying and chastisement from a pernicious and judgemental society.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by TerryTagnut

From the International Journal of Environmental Research and
Public Health:





Damn, there's probably loads of studies which back up use of vegetable glycerine to be 'safe'. I don't pretend to be a medical expert (actually, medically ignorant would be a better description), but one thing I do know, there's a plethora of peer reviewed research that all come to the same conclusion - that ecigs are a far healthier alternative to smoking. As I've stated before, if cigarettes are deemed 100 (in terms of risk), then ecigs by comparison are somewhere between 1 and 5.

But, not even getting bogged down by the science, you speak to any user of ecigs and they'll all probably be saying the same thing: they can breathe better, they feel far healthier and it's been a life-changing decision for them.

I'm not sure why you're saying that it's unfair to compare one addiction to another. Let's take alcohol for a start. In 2012, about 3.3 million deaths, or 5.9 % of all global deaths, were attributable to alcohol consumption. That's quite a number.

Remember, nicotine has the same risk profile as caffeine. So, I'm left unclear why someone would say it's unfair to make a comparison? People think nicotine is the killer, when in fact it's all the other crap in cigarettes. There's mountain evidence that far from being a killer, nicotine in fact might be a wonder drug!

http://discovermagazine.com/2014/march/13-nicotine-fix

It would be a crying shame if the benefits of nicotine were swept under the carpet just because of some moral fanaticism.

Anyway, I apologise for aligning you with the Daily Mail. I think it was the "think of the children" thing that lead me to this misapprehension. Usually put forward by the zealots without any rational argument. Speaking of which:

http://ecigarettereviewed.com/top-10...vaping-zealots

I think people's main concern with ecigs is the fact that in some circumstances it can look like smoking. But it's just vapour. Do we ban kettles? Do we ban shaking coke cans in public because it might look like a gratuitous act of onanism? Where do we draw the line?

One thing I know though - the sooner the truth about ecigs becomes apparent, and can be discussed in a sensible and adult fashion, without emotive and nonsensical argument put forward such as "the think of the children" line (which doesn't have one shred of evidence to substantiate it being used), the better it will be. It will give millions of smokers a chance to make an informed decision to switch to a healthier alternative if they so desire.

That said, I have nothing against smokers - it's their choice, and they should have the right to carry on without the constant bullying and chastisement from a pernicious and judgemental society.

It's not just water though is it in all seriousness? In the information you posted there is the mention of formaldehyde so the argument that they are harmless begins to crumble.
The inclusion of the 'think of the children line again is unnecessary as I have already explained your misquotation of that comment,neither are my concerns nonsensical as I have also provided science based counter information to your claims that ecigs are the next best thing to fresh air, which as your breakdown of the components prove they are not.
Nobody is bullying anyone as far as I can see everyone still has the choice to smoke, there is no pernicious societal judgement involved in this discussion so you can relax.

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/...es-really-are/

[TerryTagnut]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

It's not just water though is it in all seriousness? In the information you posted there is the mention of formaldehyde so the argument that they are harmless begins to crumble.
The inclusion of the 'think of the children line again is unnecessary as I have already explained your misquotation of that comment,neither are my concerns nonsensical as I have also provided science based counter information to your claims that ecigs are the next best thing to fresh air, which as your breakdown of the components prove they are not.
Nobody is bullying anyone as far as I can see everyone still has the choice to smoke, there is no pernicious societal judgement involved in this discussion so you can relax.

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/...es-really-are/

Lol @ that link. That features the infamous Stanton Glantz - he's basically a complete laughing stock, considered a buffoon of the highest order by proper medical doctors and cardiologist (his PhD is in applied mechanics and engineering economic systems).

He's following a puritanical agenda (most probably getting back-handers). Basically spouting lie after lie, which have all been blown out of the water by proper professional medical scientist.

I have never said that ecigs are harmless. From the very beginning I said that it's harm reduction. Not many things in life are harmless. Just like people who enjoy coffee, alcohol, meat, milk etc etc, are all engaging in an exercise of risk.

There again, compared to real cigarettes it's harm reduction by a considerable amount.

Your last line is incorrect. Smokers have been castigated, belittled, bullied, demonised and turned into social pariahs by the media. It's disgusting. Not only disgusting, but slightly alarming when you sit back and think about the wider implications. Yeah, yeah, relax. Comfortably numb eh? This is a sad reflection of modern times.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by TerryTagnut

Lol @ that link. That features the infamous Stanton Glantz - he's basically a complete laughing stock, considered a buffoon of the highest order by proper medical doctors and cardiologist (his PhD is in applied mechanics and engineering economic systems).

He's following a puritanical agenda (most probably getting back-handers). Basically spouting lie after lie, which have all been blown out of the water by proper professional medical scientist.

I have never said that ecigs are harmless. From the very beginning I said that it's harm reduction. Not many things in life are harmless. Just like people who enjoy coffee, alcohol, meat, milk etc etc, are all engaging in an exercise of risk.

There again, compared to real cigarettes it's harm reduction by a considerable amount.

Your last line is incorrect. Smokers have been castigated, belittled, bullied, demonised and turned into social pariahs by the media. It's disgusting. Not only disgusting, but slightly alarming when you sit back and think about the wider implications. Yeah, yeah, relax. Comfortably numb eh? This is a sad reflection of modern times.

Ah right I see so you can post links to your biased 'ecigreview' sites and yet you rubbish mine with specific measured data included?
Your inclusion of potatoes was laughable enough but now milk comes under question in your analysis of the benefits of nicotine... It's an addiction, and you are a not demonised there is a drive to help those who wish to rid themselves of that addiction. I don't feel by vaping you are doing yourself any favours substituting one nicotine product for another isn't a 'healthy' option however you attempt to spin it.
You yourself are probably more at risk due you your preference forthe custard flavour which as you probably know will contain traces of the very dangerous diacetyl.

[TerryTagnut]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Ah right I see so you can post links to your biased 'ecigreview' sites and yet you rubbish mine with specific measured data included?
Your inclusion of potatoes was laughable enough but now milk comes under question in your analysis of the benefits of nicotine... It's an addiction, and you are a not demonised there is a drive to help those who wish to rid themselves of that addiction. I don't feel by vaping you are doing yourself any favours substituting one nicotine product for another isn't a 'healthy' option however you attempt to spin it.
You yourself are probably more at risk due you your preference forthe custard flavour which as you probably know will contain traces of the very dangerous diacetyl.

What's laughable about a potato? Or a pepper. They both have nicotine in them. That was just an example that nicotine is found in innocuous sources. An example that nicotine is fairly common and not just found in a rolled up piece of paper full of tar. I'm not sure why the inclusion of this example is so difficult for you to grasp? Why was my reference to milk so hard for you to understand? Don't you realise that supermarket milk is full of growth hormones? Sorry, I overestimated you, I thought you'd be able to join the dots together, to comprehend the implicit.

This is becoming a fruitless discussion to be honest. It's getting ridiculous. I supply you with peer-review research from leading medical scientist and you call that pseudo-science, but at the same time, you give me a link from a laughing-stock who's not even a qualified medical practitioner!

You're suffering from a bad bout of confirmation bias because instead of perhaps looking at those peer-reviewed studies I supplied you with, you'd rather attack science with ignorance in the form of Stanton Glantz. The man's a laughing stock, period. It's quite embarrassing even referring to him.

Nope about the diacetyl. I make my own liquid. I have my own pharma grade PG/VG/Nic and get my custard from a company called Flavourart, who don't use diacetyl in their custards.

Addiction. Please don't moralise to me about addiction. You refused to answer if you consumed caffeine, or alcohol. We all have our poisons. God, even TV can be said to be a form of addiction. Unless you can come back to me and say you do regular exercise, don't indulge in alcohol, don't drink caffeine, don't indulge in the odd 'recreational' drug etc etc, then you can keep your lecturing to yourself. Otherwise, it just makes you look like a high-horsed, moralising hypocrite.

Right I'm done I guess. My last post. I enjoy engaging in conversation, but one addiction I don't suffer from is banging my head unremittingly against a brick wall. I think I might need an E-wall

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by TerryTagnut

What's laughable about a potato? Or a pepper. They both have nicotine in them. That was just an example that nicotine is found in innocuous sources. An example that nicotine is fairly common and not just found in a rolled up piece of paper full of tar. I'm not sure why the inclusion of this example is so difficult for you to grasp? Why was my reference to milk so hard for you to understand? Don't you realise that supermarket milk is full of growth hormones? Sorry, I overestimated you, I thought you'd be able to join the dots together, to comprehend the implicit.

This is becoming a fruitless discussion to be honest. It's getting ridiculous. I supply you with peer-review research from leading medical scientist and you call that pseudo-science, but at the same time, you give me a link from a laughing-stock who's not even a qualified medical practitioner!

You're suffering from a bad bout of confirmation bias because instead of perhaps looking at those peer-reviewed studies I supplied you with, you'd rather attack science with ignorance in the form of Stanton Glantz. The man's a laughing stock, period. It's quite embarrassing even referring to him.

Nope about the diacetyl. I make my own liquid. I have my own pharma grade PG/VG/Nic and get my custard from a company called Flavourart, who don't use diacetyl in their custards.

Addiction. Please don't moralise to me about addiction. You refused to answer if you consumed caffeine, or alcohol. We all have our poisons. God, even TV can be said to be a form of addiction. Unless you can come back to me and say you do regular exercise, don't indulge in alcohol, don't drink caffeine, don't indulge in the odd 'recreational' drug etc etc, then you can keep your lecturing to yourself. Otherwise, it just makes you look like a high-horsed, moralising hypocrite.

Right I'm done I guess. My last post. I enjoy engaging in conversation, but one addiction I don't suffer from is banging my head unremittingly against a brick wall. I think I might need an E-wall

It's not difficult for me to grasp it's just pointless... as pointless as saying when you use mouthwash you should join AA as it contains alcohol.
Whatever issues you have with the dairy industry are not relevant to this thread either so shall we stick to the issue here?
I think the consensus is there is a question mark over the industry with it being so new and much of the information comes from sources with some kind of organisational bias so it's hard to find reputable independent study.

However you make your frankenfags is of no interest to me, again if you want to feed your addiction that's your business.
This is a discussion forum I don't have to have first hand experience of anything to have an opinion thank you but as it happens I do have experience of addiction as I am an ex smoker.. I hope that qualifies me in your mind to have a view on this subject.,I'm not a bleeding heart, a mail reader, fun thief or hypocrite.