American Lung Assoc seeks to ban "e-cigarettes"

[Lance_Boyle]

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2890542/american_lung_association_vs_electronic.html?singlepage=true&cat=5

"A source at the ALA, an organization which claims to be dedicated to 'save lives by improving lung health and preventing lung disease,'acknowledged in response to a recent email inquiry that 'yes there are fewer chemicals but your body is still being exposed to chemicals that should not be in your system. Nicotine can also cause the body harm, so yes many of the products do contain nicotine, but used correctly a person uses the products to wean down their nicotine level so they can completely get rid of it. Many people are using the e-cigs as an alternative to smoking the regular cigs thinking that it will not harm them and have no intention of quitting, just switching.'"

The war against "things-I-don't-personally-like" moves on. Where was the ALA on nicotine gum? Patches?

[Tailormyst]

1. sigh

:eyes:

[LLStarks]

2. This is stupid. ALA needs to pick their battles more wisely. nt

[YOY]

3. I love mine...people get a kick out of me puffing at my desk.

No smell, no second-hand.

[LLStarks]

5. That would look so odd... nt

[Solomon]

28. It drives my wife nuts when I "smoke" in the house.

No odor or anything. The first time she saw me she hit the roof. Now she's just annoyed that I can "smoke" in the house and she can't say anything. LOL

[laughingliberal]

60. Heh! And they haven't a leg to stand on

Many who have said they're just concerned about the health problems from second hand smoke are revealed to be just pissed off about seeing someone do something they don't like.

[iris27]

76. Nope. I am a big hater of 2nd hand smoke and couldn't be more thrilled for the invention of e-cigs!

Trying to talk them up around my boss so maybe she won't come back inside after a smoke break, stand right by my desk, and about gas me out because she reeks.

[Solomon]

88. I have an employee who reeks the whole hallway up when she

comes in in the morning. I can just imagine her chain smoking in the car on the way to work. It's terrible in the winter because smokers have to smoke with the windows up.

[laughingliberal]

89. You're not the only one to whom I could have been referring

Witness the post to which I replied. Guy's wife had him smoking outdoors over the excuse about 2nd hand smoke. Now he uses his e-cigarette in the house. No odor, no smoke and it still pisses her off. :rofl:

I'm sure there are those for whom the debate is about 2nd hand smoke. I'm equally sure there's a big group of morality police out there who just hate to see people do things of which they don't approve.

[Solomon]

93. Most people have an unconscious assumption when they see

the vapor that it's smoke. They have to "think" and not react and I think that's why they don't like to see the vapor indoors.

You know the brain is a funny thing. It produces chemicals based on what you see , hear, and feel.
I imagine that some people's brains might tell them they smell smoke just from seeing the vapor. lol

[laughingliberal]

94. Lol! Next up, we get held responsible for the tricks others' brains play on them.

The future is bright.

[inna]

12. Where do people buy those?

I thought they were "virtual cigarettes", I had no idea they were for real. Maybe I should try those.

[YOY]

14. There is a DUer who sells them. Forget who. Certain mall kiosks in my ara (DC) maybe others..

And online of course...just google it!

[blogslut]

44. Hey there

:hi:

[YOY]

47. And it would be you Blogslut!

Won't forget it in the future!

[Synnical]

91. Post as a reminder to PM you later today n/t

[Michigan-Arizona]

17. DU'er by the name of Blogslut sell's them n/t

[Touchdown]

21. These are what I bought and what Blog Slut offers. Click on her link...

where ever you see her posts, and I think she gets credit.

Anyhow, if you just want to read up, here's the site of the most popular brand.

http://www.blucigs.com/

[blogslut]

51. Well

I only get a commission if the person uses my affiliate link. DUer's gotta PM for it.

[Liberal In Texas]

31. Just Google them, tons of outlets. Also try looking at the e-cig forum

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/

for discussions about the various products.

I currently have 2 different brands I'm using. One thing I would like to see is regulation on the "juice" that's used in them to not allow the use of the ingredient ethylene glycol (which is used in auto anti-freeze) but require propylene glycol (vegetable glycerin).

[blogslut]

46. Actually

I think you'll find that the "juice" does not contain ethylene glycol. When the FDA tested e-cigs (two whole brands!) the PECs came from the plastic in the tips - not the "juice". The trick is to not use the same tips over and over.

[Liberal In Texas]

66. There are discussions on the forum about being careful you don't

buy e-cigs with ethylene glycol. I always make sure any I buy have disclosure showing they contain propylene glycol. One can't always be sure someone isn't lying in the disclosure which is the only thing I'd like to see the gov't. regulate on the e-cigs.

The FDA is claiming and the ALA parroting the results of a limited study done on one product that found ethylene glycol. They're condemning e-cigs from one stinking study.

I have never heard this about the plastic in the tips.

[blogslut]

71. Read the FDA study

http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/ScienceResearch/UCM173250.pdf

They took the little "juice" soaked pads and their plastic housing, put them both in a beaker, added some ammonium acetate and then tested the mixture.

[Liberal In Texas]

82. I haven't taken any science courses since I was at university, but that sounds

like bad science to me.

[Politicalboi]

105. Or big tobacco

Gave the ALA a big check.

[iris27]

4. BAN? Why?

Anyone who switches IS benefiting their health. No, it's not as good as quitting, but come on, water vapor and nicotine is much better than nicotine, tar, unidentified preservatives X, Y, and Z, and whatever the hell else is in regular cigs.

And it's much more pleasant for the uber-sensitive non-smoker like me, who is irritated when the person in the car ahead of them is smoking, or when she has her windows at home open and her next-door neighbor steps outside for a cigarette.

Hell, if I were queen of the world and banning things, I'd ban regular cigs and open all the restaurants/bars/etc. where smoking is currently banned to let people use e-cigs there.

[YOY]

6. There's more to it than this...money made from ecigarettes doesn't have a big industrys backing.

n.t.

[laughingliberal]

19. Exactly! And no big tax revenue, either! nt

[YOY]

34. A sad fact in this country...shit doesn't get done unless someone can maximize a profit.

n/t

[Kalyke]

54. Well... they should have thought of that when they last slapped

some big taxes on sin.

I'm all for paying for the health care of underprivileged children, but, if it's so great to care for these kids - and it is - then EVERYONE should pay a tax. Not just smokers.

The point of diminishing returns: tax it enough and people will either buy black market, from a reservation, quit or switch to these e-cigs and not pay the tax.

Duh. :crazy:

I think congress needs to go back and take Economics 101.

[laughingliberal]

59. Yes, they have reached diminishing returns on the cigarette tax

Funny, how they are trying to take this cheaper, less harmful alternative off the market, huh? You'd almost think they're upset at decreasing cigarette sales, wouldn't you?

[Warpy]

7. American Heart Association I can see

because nicotine in any form plays hell with the cardiovascular system by causing vasospasm, decreasing arterial blood supply to all organ systems. That's why smokers age more rapidly than nonsmokers, it destroys the skin as well as the innards.

It's just odd that the ALA would object since it probably is kinder to the lungs than inhaling all that carbon and other trash.

[iris27]

39. Do the AHA and/or ALA advocate the full-on banning of the real thing?

Because otherwise this seems like a vastly disproportionate reaction to a somewhat less harmful product.

[Warpy]

43. It's at least as harmful to the cardiovascular system

and the AHA has advocated everything approaching a ban, including the ban on vending machines and high taxes to discourage kids from starting.

My only quibble was with which organization was advocating a ban on these things.

In any case, since they're a drug delivery system instead of a ridiculously meddled with plant wrapped in paper, the FDA will have the final say on them.

A ban on the plant will never work. Look at Prohibition and the drug war to find out why.

[laughingliberal]

45. It makes no sense from a health standpoint to ban the e-cigs

Although nicotine does present hazards to the cardiovascular system, it can not be argued that they are worse or even as bad as cigarettes with, at least, 600 fewer chemicals present in the vapor.

The FDA has control on tobacco these days, too. The e-cig industry already banned sales to minors voluntarily and I would think that should be sufficient. But this product is pissing off the pharmaceutical companies who manufacture nicotine replacement products. They are more effective than most of those products and definitely cheaper. It's another ridiculous intrusion. If they spent half as much time keeping us 'safe' from the effects of drugs coming to market as they do protecting drug industry profits, we'd be healthier and happier.

[Divine Discontent]

8. seems like an odd thing to attack. what, are they mad the companies aren't making donations or

placing their phamplets in their boxes or something? It seems like a good device to help ween people off cancer sticks

[tridim]

9. Can anyone provide a study that shows nicotine causing "body harm"?

I know nicotine is toxic at high levels, but almost everything is.

[Taverner]

41. Exactly - no doctor has ever been able to explain why nicotine is dangerous

It always goes back to the delivery method

From what I can tell, nicotine by itself is no worse than caffeine

[Robb]

64. I'm no expert, but my first Google hit was an interesting article:

http://articles.sfgate.com/2001-07-03/news/17610335_1_nicotine-new-blood-blood-vessels

...It appears to have good and bad effects, and the key will be in understanding dosages and situations where it can be useful. :shrug:

[frustrated_lefty]

65. Here ya go

Also note, this was administered in solution (as a liquid), so the observations are not simply due to the effects of smoke. To help make the doses make sense, 6 mg/kg/day nicotine is roughly what a human is exposed to by smoking 1-2 packs a day.

Brain Res. 2001 Jul 6;906(1-2):127-34.
Nicotine produces selective degeneration in the medial habenula and fasciculus retroflexus.

Carlson J, Noguchi K, Ellison G.

Department of Psychology, University of California -- Los Angeles, 405 Hilgard Avenue -- Franz Hall, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA. [email protected]
Abstract

Nicotine's neurotoxic properties in rats were investigated by administering (-)-nicotine tartrate for 5 days either continuously in doses of 5.01, 5.72, 6.44, 7.13, 20.41 and 43.1 mg/kg/day via osmotic minipump or intermittently at 11.32 mg/kg/day via one daily subcutaneous injection. As assessed by silver staining, neurotoxicity was seen almost exclusively in the axons of the medial habenula and its output tract, the fasciculus retroflexus, in all treatment groups except the lowest dose. Within the habenula, the damage was noted in the ventral-medial-most portion of the nucleus which is thought to be dense with the alpha 4 beta 2 and/or alpha 3 beta 4 receptor subtypes. Past research has shown the medial habenula to be highly sensitive to the effects of nicotine, and these findings, in conjunction with related research using dopaminergic stimulants, indicate that the habenula may be a weak link in the neurotoxicity seen following stimulant drugs of abuse.

[Touchdown]

84. What's the Median Habenero and Fascist Retroflex?

parts of the brain? :shrug:

[unblock]

10. i've seen it in action and TOTALLY encourages smokers to smoke more.

the reaction when a friend unveiled one was, hey, that's cool, can i try, where can i get one, can you get away with smoking in this situation or that situation? etc.

nobody, including the friend who had it in the first place, was looking to quit or even cut down. they were looking for a way to smoke more often and in more settings than they can now.

[anigbrowl]

15. I got it to help with quitting, and it did, big time.

May not be typical but they do have an upside. there is a clinical version licensed by the FDA and sold for this purpose but it's ridiculously expensive, like $150+.

[laughingliberal]

24. "clinical version licensed by the FDA ... but it's ridiculously expensive, like $150+"

And this is the precise reason the FDA has been after them. The pharmaceutical companies that sell nicotine replacement products want them off the market.

[anigbrowl]

75. I'm inclined to agree, although it's true there's no quality control on the imported ones. nt

[laughingliberal]

20. It cut my husband's and my smoking way down. Way down.

and it is a lot safer than a cigarette.

[laughingliberal]

23. btw, it's not 'smoking' when people use an e-cig

There's no smoke involved. It's a vapor and is free of about 600 or more chemicals contained in cigarettes. I found that when I could use one in places I couldn't smoke during long stretches, I did not then come home and chain smoke to 'catch up' as I had in the past after having to go long periods of time without a cigarette. My smoking has gone way down. A lot of times now I use them even when I'm somewhere I can smoke.

[proudohioan]

38. Chain smoke to "catch up"......

shit, I do that very same damn thing!!!!! My boyfriend just ordered some of these "e-cigs"..... glad to hear from someone that they do actually help cut down on smoking. We're looking at what we are now paying for cigs, and it's significantly impacting the budget. These e-cigs are a fraction of real cigs.

[laughingliberal]

49. They do save money and a lot of people report being able to give up cigarettes altogether with them

I have not been able to and it took some working with the different strengths of 'smoke juice' to find one that worked for me but it has cut our smoking way down. I even, sometimes, pull mine out in a casino where I could smoke if I wanted to.

[Touchdown]

25. And this is a bad thing how?

"Oh' those sneaky smokers! Trying to get around our rules for them by inventing electronic cancer sticks, just so they can spite us with MORE USAGE! They will be PUNISHED!"

[unblock]

26. i'm not the one who came up with the argument that they promote LESS usage.

i'm just sayin', if the argument is that these things are good because they help people cut down, my own personal experience (aside now from a few du replies) is that they don't help people cut down, and if anything, they promote greater social acceptance, which will lead to more people smoking (or vaporizing, or whatever you want to call it) more often.

fwiw, i have no problem with people getting their nicotine through other "sneaky" delivery systems, such as the patch or gum. i do have a problem with people polluting the air i breathe. therefore i don't want to see any greater social acceptance of e-cigarettes than there is or regular cigarettes. they may expose me to fewer toxins, but what does that matter? if they get it down to one toxin, that's still one too many.

[Touchdown]

81. Ok, thanks. You confirmed for me what I always thought.

It's not about the smoking. It's not about chemicals. It's not even about the pollution.

It's about the "social acceptance". As I always said. It's always been about the smokers, and not the smoke.

[unblock]

98. that's funny.

i said it's about the pollution put into the air i breathe, and take that as it's not about the chemicals or the pollution.

[Touchdown]

108. I know what you said.

Others have already told you there is no pollution or chemicals in e-cigearettes. This is verifiable, yet you still hold to the irrational belief that they do, and think that smokers who are switching to these are being insolent to your authority.

Hense... for you, it's about smokers.

[unblock]

109. well, you may have a point, it probably is irrational for me to take the fda at its word

[seabeyond]

27. so? nt

[Lyric]

29. Bullshit. It's NOT "smoking" to use one.

There is no smoke involved. Just a nicotine-laced water vapor.

[unblock]

32. pardon my terminology. how about "using and polluting".

i meant to be talking generically about nicotine delivery systems that put nicotine in the open air.

[Lance_Boyle]

37. Do these 'pollute' more than people who sneeze germs into the air in water vapor?

Do they "pollute" more than Axe body spray? I'm pretty sure they pollute a LOT less than all those trees with their pollen...

[unblock]

99. ugh, the same old tired arguments.

the point is, the idea that it's putting it in the air with water vapor instead of paper/leaf smoke is a minor technical improvement, but doesn't change the ethics one bit. it's still putting chemicals into the air that other people breathe. so if you figure ordinary cigarette smoking is fine, then so is this; if not, then this is not ok either.

[Liberal In Texas]

56. Oh for chrissake. The amount of nicotine in the air from an e-cig is unmeasurable.

It's also almost odorless. Some people think they can detect an odor some can't.

[blogslut]

58. I'm a bit rusty on my chemistry

But I'm pretty sure there's a difference between smoke and vapor - meaning that smoke distributes much further. In other words, if a person were in the vicinity of someone vaping and e-cig, I seriously doubt they're going to unwittingly inhale that vapor because vapor is heavier than air - smoke is not.

[Tailormyst]

68. It's no more "polluting then the steam coming off a hot cup of tea or coffee.....

[unblock]

100. well, steam from a cup of tea of coffee doesn't have nicotine or diethylene glycol

or nitrosamines or anabasine or myosmine or beta-nicotyrine.

[Tailormyst]

103. Really now, your reactions are absurd.

You are not being polluted if someone has an e-cigarette going across the room from you. If you were truly worried about all that you would live in a sterile bubble and never ever leave it.

[Kalyke]

55. And that's your business how???

The point here isn't if it facilitates quitting or makes one smoke more - the point is that the ALA are being sanctimonious jerks - as the OP pointed out, they're part of "let's ban everything that annoys me" crowd.

[Tailormyst]

69. If they are using E-cigs why the heck would you care?

[Touchdown]

85. She cares because the smokers are being insolent by being seen vaping!

[unblock]

101. because i don't want to breathe e-cig pollution any more than regular cig pollution

i have no problem with people smoking in the privacy of their own homes, but when other people are around, please use a patch, gum, or chew -- anything that doesn't involve unwilling participants getting nicotine and toxins in their bodies.

[Tailormyst]

102. Okay now you just look silly

[TheWraith]

11. Yep. The ALA should back off here.

Even if people DO simply switch, it's better for a bunch of reasons: FEWER chemicals, no smoke, and very importantly, no secondhand smoke. I for one wouldn't be bothered if somebody chooses to take a drag on one of these things around me, but actual cigarette smoke gives me a very bad reaction.

[grace0418]

13. That's lame. I'm completely in support of smoking bans because the smoke can not be contained to

just the smoker. But e-cigarettes? That's just silly. As long as you're only harming yourself, I don't give a rat's ass what you want to smoke or pretend to smoke.

[Dr Morbius]

16. They should ban fat people from wearing thongs.

I mean, while they're at it.

[Touchdown]

18. I tried them. The Blu brand. They didn't work for me.

I still wanted regular ones periodically through the day. Cutting down on smoking wasn't my intention. REplacing regular cigarettes with e-cigs was.

So, I got my Doc to script me Chantix instead. Sold the Blu Cigs to someone who really liked them and I'm on my 20th day of neither... hopefully forever, knock on wood.

Not that I agree with these people. I just watched a Dan Rather Reports about Fracking shale for natural gas, and how it's poisoning water supplies in Wyoming, and farmers/ranchers are coming down with diseases, and that the Natural Gas industry has an exemption from the clean water act. Where are these goody-goodies for that?

[laughingliberal]

22. "Natural Gas... has an exemption from the clean water act. Where are these goody-goodies for that?"

Well, that's always been a contention of mine. The over the top focus on smoking and other personal behavior is carried to such an extent it leaves me wondering what they are trying to distract us from.

[Kalyke]

57. Have you gained any weight on the Chantix?

I've got some muscle damage from having children (yes, seriously, and I'm trying to get insurance to cover it because it's causing GERD, lower back pain and can cause hernias). In any case, I have to fight like HELL to loose weight. My nutritionist says she doesn't think I CAN lose anymore until I get this stomach seen to.

I have put off quitting smoking because of this. I'm only 5'1" and am only about 10 pounds overweight. Gaining any more weight - at all - would kill my back.

[Touchdown]

79. Umm. I've only been on it for 3 weeks, so not yet.

... but I'm not watching what I eat right now. I bought some Lemon and Orange pound cakes the other day. I figured I shouldn't be trying both losing weight and quitting smoking, cuz you usually fail at both.

Insurance does pay for it... unlike that other stuff from years ago. It costed me $70 for a month, which is a far cry from the $1000 a month for Zyban years ago.

My big problem is that it gave me acid reflux. So I also have a script for Prevacid, which fixed that. I don't think it would be that big of a weight gainer as opposed to cold turkey. You just have to keep conscious of what your snacking on.

[RedCappedBandit]

30. No business banning these while the real thing is legal

And the real thing shouldn't be banned either... so....

[Redbear]

33. ALA general rationale

http://www.lungusa.org/associations/states/new-york/publicpolicy/assets/memo9529.pdf

[laughingliberal]

50. It's ridiculous

There is no scientific evidence that e‐cigarettes are safer for consumers than regular tobacco products. In fact, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) conducted one initial and limited study into the products in July of 2009, which confirmed that concern about the safety of the products is valid. FDA scientists found that the products contained carcinogens and toxic chemicals, including the ingredients found in anti‐freeze.

http://www.lungusa.org/associations/states/new-york/publicpolicy/assets/memo9529.pdf

The studies the FDA did found one of the smoke juice products contained a 'trace' of tobacco specific nitrosamines which is the 'carcinogens' to which this refers. The fact is all cigarettes in America contain much more TSN. I believe it was also one product they found a trace of the antifreeze substance in. The faulty logic (purposeful, AFAIC) of the FDA is they are comparing the use of the e-cig to using nothing. The proper comparison is between the use of these and the use of cigarettes. BTW, TSN's are only found in American cigarettes and are responsible for a type of lung cancer found here which is not seen in smokers from other countries. I notice since this was proven in the past year, the FDA has not moved to force cigarette manufacturers to remove them from American cigarettes. It's not our safety that concerns them.

[frustrated_lefty]

35. jeebus.

I've smoked for about 30 years now. At the worst, I was going through 4-5 packs of Luckies a day, and I'm glad to be down to 1-2 packs of filtered camels now. The patch never appealed. The gum never appealed. I took a stab at quitting once in my life, and made it 24 hours. That was 20+ years ago.

I've actually looked at e-cigs, been reading forums about them and am slowly moving my mind towards the idea of getting one. I really don't give a flying fart what anyone thinks of my smoking, and rabid anti-smokers just make me want to puff in their general direction (I don't, but the desire is certainly there). But, the health issues are real. And, the tobacco industry needs a swift kick in the ass for what it's done to promote a nasty addiction.

Hmm. Thinking about this, I'm going to order one now. Maybe it's time to quit, or at least cut the addiction? I'll give it a shot and post the results in a few weeks. It seems expensive, at $120-150 to buy everything. But, 2 $6 packs a day comes out to $360 a month. *boggle*

[blogslut]

48. PM me

:)

[Solomon]

72. Just do it.

You will definitely cut down on your smoking. I haven't smoked a cigarette in 6 months now, mostly because I have the security blanket of an e-cig. Sometimes I don't even bother "smoking" the e-cig -
it really is a security blanket.

It helps if you can get completely off the cigarettes though. You can't really compare the e-cig to a real cigarette in terms of satisfaction if you're doing both. If you can get to the point where you not smoking real cigarettes anymore, then the e-cig becomes much more satisfying.

It took me awhile after I got my e-cig, to stop smoking the real thing. Until I did, I rarely used the e-cig. I don't see the point of doing both except that obviously to the extent that you use the e-cig when you would have smoked a real one, it cuts down on your smoking.

The fact is, it's pleasant wonder when I get up in the morning now. No more hacking and hacking trying to get air.

I was paying at least $200 bucks a month for cigarettes so I really don't understand why anybody would complain about the cost of e-cigs.

[NeedleCast]

36. BAN MORE THINGS!

Things are dangerous and can hurt us!

[supernova]

40. You can also get e-cigs with NO-nicotine

Those are just flavored steam. What does the ALA propose to do about them?

I've considered using the no-nic ones at restaurants to keep myself from overeating in the breadbasket before my entree arrives. And I have never smoked!

[Solomon]

73. And you know what? I really can't say that I taste a difference

between the no nicotine cartridges and the nicotine ones. The no nicotine cartridges seem to satisfy me just as much as the nicotine ones. The amount of vapor produced seems to be more important (rto me at least) than whether or not I'm getting nicotine.

Of ocurse the theory is you will use lower nicotine cartridges until you get to the no nicotine ones.

[supernova]

83. That's what I understand from

smokers who want to quit and have used e-cigs.

to get ever lower dose cartridges, just like you do with the patch.

[Solomon]

95. My initial problem with using e-cigs to quit smoking is that

the act of putting a fake cigarette in your mouth reinforces the oral habit and routine of smoking a real cigarette. One of the biggest helps in quitting is changing your routine about everything. The e-cig doesn't help with the oral habit thing. Thus, I had my e-cig for months before started really using it as a substitute. I would go back to a real cigarette and stop using the e-cig.

As I said in another post on this thread, for me, you can't do both at the same time if you want to quit because the e-cig won't really satisfy you. But once I got completely off the real thing, I found the e-cig to be quite satisfying in stopping the cravings. Now I have to learn to get off the e-cig by not putting sticks in my mouth and sucking. LOL

[Statistical]

42. It would be like banning hybrids not Hummers because Prius emit less toxins. n/t

[iris27]

77. Exactly. n/t

[Kalyke]

52. Groan...

The American Lung Association is an... ASSOCIATION!! What fucking legal right do they have to legislate or lobby for legislation.

ENOUGH!

[iris27]

78. Well, they have the same legal right to lobby as any other group.

They're just incredibly stupid on this issue.

[krabigirl]

53. ugh...so what if people want to use them as an alternative to smoking?

So tired of the US and its wars on everything.

[Matariki]

61. Long suspected - it's some sort of pearl clutching thing about how it LOOKS

[laughingliberal]

63. "pearl clutching" Perfect description! nt

[frustrated_lefty]

67. Yes, when I want to impress a lady, I stick a phallic object in my mouth.

[Hello_Kitty]

62. It's like MADD.

They started out as an organization dedicated to stopping drunk driving but have morphed into prohibitionists.

[SeattleGirl]

70. Ridiculous! They should use their energy (and their money)

more wisely.

I have an e-cigarette. There's no nicotine in it, and the "smoke" is water vapor. Oy.

[Romulox]

74. Just so people understand--nicotine is the most dangerous chemical in cigarettes.

I'm not looking to ban anything.

[iris27]

80. Yeah, but if it's not coming near my lungs like regular 2nd-hand cigarette smoke does,

I honestly don't give a shit. No smell associated with nicotine either.

[Touchdown]

86. Really? I thought carbon monoxide was.

:shrug:

[Solomon]

87. So they should get rid of the gum, the patches

and the lozenges.

While nicotine might be (and I don't know if it is) the most dangerous chemical in cigarettes, I don't think that nicotine is the most dangerous thing about cigarettes.

[Romulox]

96. No way. I'm not looking to ban anything.

The biggest cause of mortality in smokers is cardio-vascular disease, which is primarily caused by the nicotine.

[laughingliberal]

90. Nicotine is not the most dangerous chemical in cigarettes

It is the most addictive. Nicotine is a problem for those with cardiovascular disease but it poses no danger to the lungs, at all. OTOH, there are around 600 other chemicals present in tobacco smoke which are damaging to the lungs. Even those with CV disease would do a little better without the lung damage even though the nicotine is still damaging to the heart and vascular system. Better oxygenation would still benefit the heart if the lung damaging chemicals were eliminated.

[Solomon]

92. This is what I thought as well.

So what I need to do is use the non-nicotine vapor and hope there's nothing else about the vapor that's deadly. Although unlike what a lot of people here are saying, I fully intend to stop altogether, even the e-cig. I don't use it much as it is, just to get over the cravings now and then.

[Romulox]

97. None of those 600 chemicals are the primary cause of you sucking on the thing in the first place...

Nicotine is the most insidious part of their nature. Would -anybody- get up at 5 am, hack violently until some gooey brown issue came forth, then eagerly light up if not for the nicotine?

All of this aside from the fact that cardio-vascular disease causes as many deaths in smoker as cancers...

Bottom line, e-cigarettes aren't safe. I'm not looking to ban anything!

[Solomon]

104. Well, to keep it square, you made the statement that nicotine

was the most dangerous chemical in the cigarette. The fact is, that is debatable. But since I am able to avoid smoking cigarettes by "smoking" non-nicotine vapor, on the way to not inhaling anything at all, your declaration that e-cigarettes aren't safe is debatable as well. So you can take that bottom line somewhere else.

I'm just saying, it's pretty high and mighty of you to have that opinion, when a lot of people are able to use the e-cigarette to stop smoking. I think too much credence is being given to the view that everybody is using it as s substitute with no intention of quitting.

[laughingliberal]

106. I said it was the most addictive but it is not the most damaging chemical in them

Many of the smokers with cv disease are the same ones as those with the chronic lung diseases like emphysema it is better for them if they avoid the lung damaging chemicals. And lung damage does make cv disease worse. In fact, many smokers with heart disease are classified as having Cor Pulmonale which means heart disease that arose from lung disease. Presumably, if these people had not contracted lung disease, they would not have heart disease.

The point is not whether they are safe. The point is whether they are safer than cigarettes. There is no doubt. The FDA's push is another example of their sell out to PhRMA. The manufacturers of the nicotine replacement products want them off the market. They work better than the gum or the patch and they cost less than the prescription nicotine inhaler. Then, there's the government who has been using us as an ATM machine for a while, now. They can't be happy to see us vaping away and not paying them for the privilege. Lol. I'm gonna start stocking up on 60 juice and read up on how to extract it myself, just in case.

BTW, the rate of lung cancer among smokers is between 10 and 20%. COPD rates are 15-30% among smokers. After so many years as a nurse, I know the general public thinks the rates of these diseases among smokers is much higher. In one class I used to teach I would ask what percentage of smokers get emphysema. I never had a single person respond anything less than 50%. Most thought it was 80% or more. I also found most thought 50% or so of smokers get lung cancer. I can tell you as a smoker from a long line of smokers, the rate of lung cancer, emphysema, and heart disease in my family is 0%. We tend to smoke our whole lives and die of unrelated causes in our late 90's or early 100's. I probably won't live that long but it is due to illnesses unrelated to my smoking. My husband's family, OTOH, is the opposite. Every last one of them who smokes has emphysema. I am glad to see the recent research proving the genetic connections with all this. I have long believed it to be the case.

[Digit]

107. You can also go to the Vapers Forum to learn more

I vape using the model 510 and love the portability. The e-cig I have is black with a blue light on the end and currently my favorite juice is Caramel flavored. I also have Mocha, Cinnamon, Coffee, and Marlboro flavors. (the flavors available are wild..lemonade, waffles, french toast, cherry, grape, etc!) The juices come with differing strengths of nicotine...0, 11, 18, 24, and 36.

A 510 kit will run you about $50. I purchased that model over others because you can refill the carts yourself which is a big savings.

I also have a 901 model with a usb connector to use when I am on the computer. Yes I am "tethered", but it saves on batteries.

You can go to the Vapers Forum and jump on chat if you wish to learn more. The people there were very helpful when it came to choosing something suitable for a newbie.

Go to YouTube if you wish to see people vaping and see reviews of different models.