The E-cig Thread

Izo, if you want to bitch about the semantics of the thread title, do so. A mod can change it to "Vaping your way, or vaping to a possible quit." Would that ease that pussy of yours?

Because that's all you've got. Straight up, the tar content alone of a normal cig makes an e-cig a much better choice, for those that feel they can't quit cold turkey.

Sabbat_sl said:

Izo, if you want to bitch about the semantics of the thread title, do so. A mod can change it to "Vaping your way, or vaping to a possible quit." Would that ease that pussy of yours?

Because that's all you've got. Straight up, the tar content alone of a normal cig makes an e-cig a much better choice, for those that feel they can't quit cold turkey.

Click to expand...

I don't think it's a solid foundation to rely on common sense or gut feelings alone as to what is safe or not. There are so many smokers. Don't you want the contents of the juice examined in more detail and regulated so you know what you're putting in your body? I sure do. There are numerous examples of this being a good idea. Try googling Thalidomide and pregnancy for instance for an extreme example of an unforeseeable side effect. Noone knew asbestos was dangerous either - it manifests in lung cancer 20-30 years later. It matters what we put in our bodies. It's not hard to think one method of nicotine uptake, e-cigs, are safer than cigarettes. So far this feeling is guesswork from a scientific pov. Coupling this with existing tested and documented smoking cessation devices makes it hard to recommend something with unknown long term effects. That's all I'm saying, Sabbat

The process of going from (A) cigarettes to (B) e-cigs is, I would assume, not difficult. The question is, is it beneficial from a cessation pov - (B) e-cigs to (C) clean? Does it offer an advantage over existing methods or is it simply moving the nicotine user to another platform? More studies are needed to generalize on this. I can see why it would be easier to go from point A to B with e-cigs, as it resembles smoking - it has many of the same characteristics. That's also an argument against it - it doesn't necesarily make B to C any easier. In fact the feeling it's 'safer' might have the reverse effect and prolong the abuse of nicotine. As long as we don't know if B is safer than A, then it is not really compelling as a substitute. Occam's razor. The substitute will need removal at some point as well, drug tapering.

Trollface_sl said:

BUT YOU CAN'T KNOW FOR SURE SABBAT. YOU NEED A CREDIBLE, 100% FOOL PROOF PEER REVIEWED JOURNAL FROM FIVE DIFFERENT PRESTIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS.

Click to expand...

Yes, shame on me for caring about humanity and not taking one study as the absolute truth. Curses!

Slaythe_sl said:

So there is a study though, right? And while you can take some jabs at its credibility, it still exists.

Given that the tone started with "there are no studies" and now has morphed to "yeah well, i guess there's a study but it isn't credible" how long until we're at "yeah...uhhh...I, like, guess e-cigs are probably not as harmful as actual cigarettes."

I just don't get the objection. We have people on the forum here that claim that e cigs helped them quit. You really want to filter the entirety of Rerolled into the scientific method? Why not just let people have a thread where they can talk about e cigs?

Click to expand...

You're either twisting my words or not understanding them. Yes, there are no double blinded randomized control trials, nor are thereany meta studies (Cochrane) beyond the protocol stage. This is what I mean when I say there are no studies. I posted earlier it's not hard to find an 'article' that points in either direction. Do you understand the difference now? One is an opinion, one is a gold standard for examining a subject and one is a study on multiple gold standards evaluating the trend - aka the evidence. They are not equal in value and it matters greatly.
I don't object to anecdotal evidence. It is however, anecdotal and of little real value to anyone, nor does it signify if the product is 'safe. I try to contribute with what little I know. You're free to do the same, by all means, but do try to not misrepresent what I write - argue with me instead. Who knows, I might learn something and be a better person for it

Slaythe_sl said:

In probably 100% of the cases people are vaping e cigs as an alternative to smoking cigarettes. Is inhaling vaporized nicotine healthy? I doubt anyone would make that claim. Is it healthier than smoking cigarettes? Is it ok if I say I think it more than likely is?

Your first post in the thread stated "I dont understand why anyone thinks e-cigs are safe." Can you perhaps understand why someone would think e cigs aresaferthan actual cigarettes, regardless of what studies currently exist?

Click to expand...

Nicotine is poisonous and harmful in the dosage needed for the wanted effect, regardless of uptake method, sure. A subset of this is realizing nicotine use is an addiction - it is not needed by the body in the first place. The want and need for it is induced by its introduction to the body in the first place. This is also one of many reasons the uptake method of choice of cessation should adds as little as possible to the equation beyond the nicotine - drug interactions, unknown effects and new learned addictions - what some might call physical addictions - should be minimized. This is not the case with e-cigs compared to existing smoking cessation products available. The e-cig is not made with this purpose in mind, simple put. Ask yourself why the juice has flavors for instance - many esthers not found in tobacco or at least not dominant - is this a noble trait or does it enhance the experience and discourage the user from progressing with cessation? Compare with existing medical cessation aids.

Yes, I understand very well why humans would make that connection. We act on gut feelings, we don't investigate anything fully before making a decision. When was the last time anyone checked a declaration on a consumer product thoroughly before buying it? Hair shampoo, pharmaceuticals, milk, fast food, anything? We do what we think is best, trust is important to us, not necessarily what is best or actually worthy of trust. That is what marketing people live of. This is what the e-cig business thrive on as well. It's human nature, sadly. It's the same mechanics that makes some think they're not abusers if they f.inst. swallow pills, but the very same equimolar substance injected is another story. Extrapolate to religion and any other life choice of importance with which we as humans give very little real thought on average. To the average Joe, E-cigs feels cleaner, safer, for no good reason. We commit equivocation fallacies en masse by simply assuming they're safer on the basis of previous lay mans experience and even some scientific. We know tar is bad, sure. But not knowing what we gain instead is potentially much more harmful - interactions, unknown effects. The effects of e-cigs and the juice in particular needs to be investigated on a scientific, biochemical level and it needs to be investigated over time - just like smoking and any other carcinogen. At least if one has the public health in mind.

TLDR; It's a logical fallacy to assume e-cigs are safer than cigarettes.

mkopec_sl said:

Funny thing is that there is more studies on vaping e cigs than there is real cigs. There is still some 2000 compounds in tobacco smoke which have not been recognized.

Click to expand...

Citation? The unknown number factors of one does not validate the other. Substances are not equal and are not equally damaging to your health. Dosage is important. Interactions are important. Carcinogenicity is important. Numbers alone, not so much

mkopec_sl said:

Speaking of vaping, quit being a vapid cunt. We get it.

Click to expand...

So you admit you're not trying to quit smoking, you're simply exploring new ways of your nicotine abuse? It's painfully obvious to everyone else, but it's nice to hear you say it yourself. If you really cared about your health or wanted to quit you'd explore other options. That's my biased opinion anyway.

mkopec_sl said:

Look, I have been trying to quit smoking for the past 10 yrs. Fuck who am I kidding, for the last 15 yrs. And each time with a relapse into full blown smoking. I have been doing this since I was 15, thats 25 yrs of smoking, give or take the years I have quit. You see, not all people can just up and quit. And this method, I have been clean for almost a month, and Im not craving smokes anymore. I have tried other methods, trust me. You think I was born yesterday and you are somehow educating me in here?

So if this is what it takes, this is what I will do. Im not stupid, I know vaping isnt 100% safe. But if its just 10% more safe than smoking sigs, I will do it, because its better than the alternative. And from what I gather, from all the crap I read, all the youtube videos of doctors saying its safe, for now, this leads me to believe that it is in fact safer. And If I die in the future because of vaping, oh well I would of died anyway from smoking anyway. You see where im coming from?

Not to mention that its cheaper. So even if it is a 1:1 tradeoff its still cheaper than smoking.

Click to expand...

I'm glad you went deeper with the subject. I feel for you and your fellow long term addicts, I really do. It's hard to quit a long term habit, I understand completely. No I don't pretend to be the omniscient elder of the two of us, not at all. But it's not healthy to delude yourself. You say you'll do it, a product, if it's marginally healthier. Why don't you have the same attitude towards existing products, I wonder? They're more than marginally healthy, not counting nicotine. Seems to me it's more of an attitude problem than finding the right product.

Can I ask you if you think the risk of relapse is less if you do not quit smoking entirely when switching to another product but instead make a gradual transition for instance? Do you think it's more realistic to make a gradual transition compared to a fast switch?

Your reasoning with regards to health and numbers are not en par with reality. It takes roughly a number of years smoke free equal to your smoking years for your health risks to be comparable to that of a non smoker. But that doesn't really say anything about quality of life. Your quality of life and health will improve dramatically once you get rid of cigarettes. It's not too late to quit, but it's about time - don't postpone it if you want to see your grand children grow up at least

Izo_sl said:

So you admit you're not trying to quit smoking, you're simply exploring new ways of your nicotine abuse?

Click to expand...

This is why I've pointed out the only horse you have in this race, is the word usage "quitting" in the thread title and the belief that e-cigs can be used as a cessation device. E-cigs CAN be used as a cessationaid, and they can also be used as a much lower risk delivery system for nicotine.

While nicotine is a poisonous substance, alcohol can kill you in a similar way because it too is a poisonous substance. Nicotine (as far as we know), does not cause cancer, and won't kill you in the very low doses we use it at. Do NOT confuse "nicotine" with the hundreds of damaging substances and by-products contained in the traditional delivery system of a normal cigarette.

If you really cared about your health or wanted to quit you'd explore other options. That's my biased opinion anyway.

Click to expand...

Why is your opinion biased? Do you work for Johnson & Johnson?

Personally, I wonder what the world would have been like if traditional cigarettes never existed and e-cigs were the only option. Would there be the same uptake? what would have the long term effects have been? how would culture have changed?

The only potential danger I see with ecigs is the solution being unregulated, so technically there could be anything in there. But I'm having a hard time wondering why they'd bother to add anything else to the solution, though I guess there's always accidental contamination. But the odds seem pretty low, compared to just how unhealthy we alreadyknowcigarettes are. It would have to be some really crazy horrible contaminant to make it worse for you than regular smoking already is.

Anyway I'm definitely ordering one in the next week or two. I'm not a heavy chronic smoker, but I enjoy a pack or two a month and e-cigs seem like a healthier and more economic way to take a break from my day and get my nicotine fix.

Sabbat_sl said:

This is why I've pointed out the only horse you have in this race, is the word usage "quitting" in the thread title and the belief that e-cigs can be used as a cessation device. E-cigs CAN be used as a cessationaid, and they can also be used as a much lower risk delivery system for nicotine.

While nicotine is a poisonous substance, alcohol can kill you in a similar way because it too is a poisonous substance. Nicotine (as far as we know), does not cause cancer, and won't kill you in the very low doses we use it at. Do NOT confuse "nicotine" with the hundreds of damaging substances and by-products contained in the traditional delivery system of a normal cigarette.



Why is your opinion biased? Do you work for Johnson & Johnson?

Personally, I wonder what the world would have been like if traditional cigarettes never existed and e-cigs were the only option. Would there be the same uptake? what would have the long term effects have been? how would culture have changed?

Click to expand...

You're conflating my poking at mkopec with my general interest in this thread.
You're asserting a use without backing it up or linking. How can I possibly argue with you then? Anecdotal evidence or common sense does not cary much weight. You're not making a case by using bold letters either. Please try harder

You're making an equivocation fallacy - alcohol and nicotine are very different substances, have different metabolism, effective dosage and receptors. I'm not conflating nicotine with anything. While nicotine is both toxic and causes cancer in human cells,read more here, it is the dependence forming that has my interest. The means to the uptake is - what a given device adds beyond nicotine - is interesting. E-cigs are not fully explored as of now. Claiming they are more or less healthy or damaging without sufficient data is asinine.

I'm biased on the side of causation because I'm well versed in field of health via academia and work, suffice to say.
Your thoughts on smoking are interesting. There are other means of tobacco use that are worrying as well, chewing it in various forms for instance. I'm at the ICU, I'll give it some thought