Vaping Not As Safe?
- Thread starter Bonez007
- Start date
Very interesting
Will wait to hear more. Great post. Thanks!
Will wait to hear more. Great post. Thanks!
I like this guys reply
Glen Appleton • 5 minutes ago
Ah yes, this "study" rears it's ugly head again. Let's see...
When you use a product in a manner in which it is not meant to be used, and disregard the parameters of normal use, it produces negative results. I hate it when that happens!
In other words, nobody would use the combination of liquid and power that was used in this "study" and find it enjoyable. Once the liquid was heated to the degree in which the potentially harmful byproducts were released, it would have a very burnt and nasty taste. This does not constitute anything even close to normal use within the expected parameters.
Have a nice day.
Glen Appleton • 5 minutes ago
Ah yes, this "study" rears it's ugly head again. Let's see...
When you use a product in a manner in which it is not meant to be used, and disregard the parameters of normal use, it produces negative results. I hate it when that happens!
In other words, nobody would use the combination of liquid and power that was used in this "study" and find it enjoyable. Once the liquid was heated to the degree in which the potentially harmful byproducts were released, it would have a very burnt and nasty taste. This does not constitute anything even close to normal use within the expected parameters.
Have a nice day.
I liked this comment
Dogmudgeon • 18 minutes ago
A big part of this is a moral panic. E-cigarette use is a form of *Harm
Reduction*, which our puritanical society hates. We don't permit harm
reduction efforts at raves to reduce the harm of party drugs, although
where it is permitted, there is both less of a number of bad reactions,
and less drug consumption, anyway. Keeping people mindful of their health tends to do that.
I'm a non-smoker and I'm *highly* allergic to tobacco -- not merely averse to the smell, but I have an anaphylactic reaction to tobacco proteins. So, my dislike of cigarettes is as close to absolute as it's possible to be. Being born in 1958, nearly all my peers smoked. It made dating painfully difficult; non-smoking single girls have always been much more desirable than those who smoke.
As you might suspect, I fully and unconditionally approve of e-cigarettes. Yes, they do have risks of their own, but nearly all of their users are using them to quit cigarettes and stay quit.
"Vapers" would do well to keep up with the studies of the effects of vaping, and eventually quit, or at least to reduce their habit to a minimum. And that goal is, at last, within the abilities of the mere mortal.
Dogmudgeon • 18 minutes ago
A big part of this is a moral panic. E-cigarette use is a form of *Harm
Reduction*, which our puritanical society hates. We don't permit harm
reduction efforts at raves to reduce the harm of party drugs, although
where it is permitted, there is both less of a number of bad reactions,
and less drug consumption, anyway. Keeping people mindful of their health tends to do that.
I'm a non-smoker and I'm *highly* allergic to tobacco -- not merely averse to the smell, but I have an anaphylactic reaction to tobacco proteins. So, my dislike of cigarettes is as close to absolute as it's possible to be. Being born in 1958, nearly all my peers smoked. It made dating painfully difficult; non-smoking single girls have always been much more desirable than those who smoke.
As you might suspect, I fully and unconditionally approve of e-cigarettes. Yes, they do have risks of their own, but nearly all of their users are using them to quit cigarettes and stay quit.
"Vapers" would do well to keep up with the studies of the effects of vaping, and eventually quit, or at least to reduce their habit to a minimum. And that goal is, at last, within the abilities of the mere mortal.
In conclusion:
Rubbing your face on a carpet is safer than falling onto tarmac off a moving motorcycle, but seeing as there are dustmites in the carpet, it is the newest sensationalist craze to grab torches and pitchforks and kick up headlines about mass-mob-carpet-burnings.
/reminds everyone about the mass cancer-causing agents the Chinese put into toothpaste... I've not heard about even a SINGLE toothpaste related death since then, and that was 20 years ago!
Rubbing your face on a carpet is safer than falling onto tarmac off a moving motorcycle, but seeing as there are dustmites in the carpet, it is the newest sensationalist craze to grab torches and pitchforks and kick up headlines about mass-mob-carpet-burnings.
/reminds everyone about the mass cancer-causing agents the Chinese put into toothpaste... I've not heard about even a SINGLE toothpaste related death since then, and that was 20 years ago!
- Joined
- 10/6/14
- Posts
- 114
- Awards
- 11
i find it funny how many times i've heard lately people saying in conversation that "i've read somewhere that e-ciggies are so bad for you". the article posted above is just one of many floating around lately. all about those exact same studies.
what's funny about this article, and all the similar ones to it that i read, is that it seems to be really putting e-ciggies in a bad light. it's as if the authors are either after sensationalism, or want to purposefully ignite mass hysteria. but, getting to the funny part for me is, they point out how e-ciggies CAN produce formaldehyde and acetaldehyde and then try to make it out as if this makes e-ciggies such a terrible thing. it's almost like they are trying to make cigarettes look like the better option, even though, cigarettes are a gazillion times worse.
so now, the uneducated, read that crap, and then bring it up in conversations and by word of mouth, suddenly every says "i heard e-ciggies are so terrible".
now, i hate conspiracy theories, i really do, especially the kind of dumb asses that pass them around without really knowing what the facts are. so, i don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist when i say this, but i am quite positive, those articles floating around, like the one above, are very probably distributed by anti e-ciggie lobbyists, like Big Tobacco and Big Pharma with their "quit smoking wonder drugs".
anyway, just my two cents worth. i came to this section of the forum wanting to actually post about that article and then found this post, and now had my say
what's funny about this article, and all the similar ones to it that i read, is that it seems to be really putting e-ciggies in a bad light. it's as if the authors are either after sensationalism, or want to purposefully ignite mass hysteria. but, getting to the funny part for me is, they point out how e-ciggies CAN produce formaldehyde and acetaldehyde and then try to make it out as if this makes e-ciggies such a terrible thing. it's almost like they are trying to make cigarettes look like the better option, even though, cigarettes are a gazillion times worse.
so now, the uneducated, read that crap, and then bring it up in conversations and by word of mouth, suddenly every says "i heard e-ciggies are so terrible".
now, i hate conspiracy theories, i really do, especially the kind of dumb asses that pass them around without really knowing what the facts are. so, i don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist when i say this, but i am quite positive, those articles floating around, like the one above, are very probably distributed by anti e-ciggie lobbyists, like Big Tobacco and Big Pharma with their "quit smoking wonder drugs".
anyway, just my two cents worth. i came to this section of the forum wanting to actually post about that article and then found this post, and now had my say
i find it funny how many times i've heard lately people saying in conversation that "i've read somewhere that e-ciggies are so bad for you". the article posted above is just one of many floating around lately. all about those exact same studies.
what's funny about this article, and all the similar ones to it that i read, is that it seems to be really putting e-ciggies in a bad light. it's as if the authors are either after sensationalism, or want to purposefully ignite mass hysteria. but, getting to the funny part for me is, they point out how e-ciggies CAN produce formaldehyde and acetaldehyde and then try to make it out as if this makes e-ciggies such a terrible thing. it's almost like they are trying to make cigarettes look like the better option, even though, cigarettes are a gazillion times worse.
so now, the uneducated, read that crap, and then bring it up in conversations and by word of mouth, suddenly every says "i heard e-ciggies are so terrible".
now, i hate conspiracy theories, i really do, especially the kind of dumb asses that pass them around without really knowing what the facts are. so, i don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist when i say this, but i am quite positive, those articles floating around, like the one above, are very probably distributed by anti e-ciggie lobbyists, like Big Tobacco and Big Pharma with their "quit smoking wonder drugs".
anyway, just my two cents worth. i came to this section of the forum wanting to actually post about that article and then found this post, and now had my say
I do agree with you entirely on the conspiracy front. Losses due to lost tax revenue, cigarette sales and pharmaceutical products. Not to mention all the NGO's involved in the "clean air/anti smoking" group etc..
There is much at stake for all these people, and they will fight tooth and nail to keep a hold on that.
Very true. But for a person like me, a noob, i don't know much about watts and volts chemicals which relates to ecigs. Now with a mod device in my sights, were i can change watts and all that, i would have been pretty scared (and would have thrown out my gear), if it wasn't for this forums knowledge.
So i am glad that i have posted this article here, for the flipside of the story
So i am glad that i have posted this article here, for the flipside of the story
When you fire your mod, if the coil doesnt burst into flames then you are coolVery true. But for a person like me, a noob, i don't know much about watts and volts chemicals which relates to ecigs. Now with a mod device in my sights, were i can change watts and all that, i would have been pretty scared (and would have thrown out my gear), if it wasn't for this forums knowledge.
So i am glad that i have posted this article here, for the flipside of the story
Flames = carcinogenic
Forgive my question, but how does this relate to the 4,8volts they mention? Im confused about this. A mod like an SVD, that i wanna buy, goes past this voltage, unless i am missing something in the article?
I was playing on the unfounded allegations they are making about high volts triggering toxic substances
Voltage is but only one of the four factors that make up an electrical current.
Without knowing the other variables, its a pretty useless number. The amps, volts, ohms and watts all matter at the end of the day.
You need at least two of those values to make any declaration of electrical current, and thus the mere value of xxx.xxxV is utterly useless, and actually further proves just how vague and sensationalist this shit has bcome.
Similar threads
