General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsE-cigarettes 'should not be marketed as smoking cessation aids'
The debate over the benefits and potential harms of e-cigarettes has raged on across the media in recent months. Now, research published in JAMA Internal Medicine finds that there is no association between e-cigarette use and reduced cigarette consumption.
Medical News Today recently ran a spotlight feature summarizing the controversies surrounding electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) - the popular cigarette substitutes that are often marketed as a smoking cessation tool.
In that piece, Dr. Maciej L. Goniewicz, from the Roswell Cancer Park Institute in Buffalo, NY, told us:
"Statistics provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention showed slight decrease in smoking prevalence among US adults between 2008 and 2011. We do not know whether it can be attributed to increasing popularity of e-cigarettes. We need to closely monitor this trend over the next few years to understand effects of e-cigarettes on population level."
Generally, medical professionals have argued that it is too soon to judge whether e-cigarettes are an effective tool for helping to quit traditional cigarettes, or whether they actually encourage smoking.
Earlier this month, JAMA Pediatrics also published a study highlighting an association between the use of e-cigarettes and conventional cigarettes in American adolescents, which suggested that e-cigarettes may contribute to nicotine addiction.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/274478.php
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)I see people vaping everywhere. My sense is people feel empowered when they switch, like they can control their nicotine levels and say a goodbye to $7-8 for a pack of smokes.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)They ARE a smoking cessation device.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)I don't understand for the life of me why you want to respect the wishes of "they" all do a sudden.
frylock
(34,825 posts)is that your argument?
LiberalAndProud
(12,799 posts)I missed that report.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)The manufacturer argued that e-cigs should be classified as a tobacco product (which allowed them to avoid the regulations that smoking cessation devices are subject to.)
http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/PublicHealthFocus/ucm252360.htm
The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009 (Tobacco Control Act), which amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act), was enacted on June 22, 2009, and it provides the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) with authority to regulate “tobacco products.” The FD&C Act, as amended by the Tobacco Control Act, defines the term “tobacco product,” in part, as any product “made or derived from tobacco” that is not a “drug,” “device,” or combination product under the FD&C Act.
Under the FD&C Act, the definition of “drug” includes articles intended: (1) for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment or prevention of disease, or (2) to affect the structure or any function of the body. Similarly, “device” is defined to include articles intended: (1) for use in the diagnosis of disease or other conditions, or in the cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease, or (2) to affect the structure or any function of the body.
Between 2008 and 2010, the FDA determined that certain electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) were unapproved drug/device combination products and detained and/or refused admission to those offered for import by Sottera, Inc. and other manufacturers. Sottera, Inc. challenged that determination in court.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, in Sottera, Inc. v. Food & Drug Administration, 627 F.3d 891 (D.C. Cir. 2010), recently issued a decision with regard to e-cigarettes and other products “made or derived from tobacco” and the jurisdictional line that should be drawn between “tobacco products” and “drugs,” “devices,” and combination products, as those terms are defined in the FD&C Act. The court held that e-cigarettes and other products made or derived from tobacco can be regulated as “tobacco products” under the Act and are not drugs/devices unless they are marketed for therapeutic purposes.
SNIP
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)The FDA seized their shipments as "unapproved drug delivery devices", Sottera sued.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)which allowed them to sell without having to prove their safety and efficacy as a drug delivery device. And the e-cig people won.
Tyhanna
(145 posts)Let me enlighten you.
When the FDA held the shipment of e-cigarettes it was done illegally.
The e-cigarette was not classified as anything at that point even by the FDA.
So they were taken to court. They (the then ecig community headed by NJoy) didn't want them to be classified as medical devices because that would make them have to be taken off the market, for years and years of testing, it takes millions and millions of dollars to bring a medical device or smoking cessation drug to market, and this is if the FDA approves it for market.
The only other classification it could go in was tobacco.
FDA only has 3 class for nicotine drug, tobacco or pesticide.
They are not a drug devise, nor a pesticide. They are an safer alternative to smoking. They are a Tobacco harm reduction product. THR. Nobody that sells them claims them to be a smoking cessation that would be against the rules of FDA as they stand. People that use them can claim it all day if they want that is not braking any laws. I can say as a user they are the best true smoking cessation product on the market right now, because they address the whole cessation where the NRTs don't, NRTs are simply Nicotine replacement therapy. And they have a horrible failure rate.
E-cigarettes in how they work address the two levels of addiction to cigarettes the mental addiction first then the physical addiction to, nicotine. NRTs only address the physical addiction to nicotine. These are two different things, and its the mental addiction that keeps people going back to "the cigarette".
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)they wanted to sell them on the market without having to have years of testing, as other nicotine-delivery systems, such as the patch and gum, have had to do. They also didn't want to have to spend the time to show that their processes produce a product with a specific, reliable amount of nicotine and without other toxins.
They are likely a safer alternative to smoking, though they haven't proved this to the FDA. But that doesn't mean there is negligible risk to second and third hand users, or to minors, which is what many people are most concerned about. If an adult chooses to use these things, fine. But they shouldn't be able to subject other people to an unknown risk. They shouldn't be able to claim they're a tobacco product in order to escape regulation; and then also claim they're safer than tobacco products, which should be allowed in public or work spaces, though they never submitted such research to the FDA.
Tyhanna
(145 posts)They are not a NRTs which is what the "other nicotine-delivery systems" are. E-cigarettes are an alternative to smoking.
http://zeenews.india.com/news/health/health-news/secondhand-exposure-to-nicotine-from-e-cigs-10-times-less-than-tobacco-smoke_25580.html
http://ecigarettereviewed.com/contaminants-in-e-cig-vapor-found-in-human-breath-and-outdoor-air
http://guidetovaping.com/2012/10/05/new-e-cigarette-study-shows-no-risk-from-environmental-vapor-exposure/
I know these have been linked to you before, so you must not have read them the last few times they were presented to you.
I guess you would just want all those millions of e-cigarettes users go back to smoking and getting all those thousands of chemicals right?
By making them a pharma product that would send them into years of testing and not be available to the market and costs millions and millions of dollars to do so, mean while all those people that have quit smoking due to the e-cigarette would still be smoking, now how smart is that.
FDA forced that issue buy holding up the shipments illegally. We don't just claim we know from research and studies that have been done that the main news sites choose to ignore. We know that e-cigarettes are 99% safer than smoking a cigarette, the data proves that. The same chemicals are a emitted from nicotine inhalers and they are approved by the FDA. Course FDA also approved the deadly drug called Chantix also. Just because FDA approves a product does it mean its 100% safe, nothing in life is. FDA just gives a false sense of security to people.
You really just don't understand the way things work, how the FDA works, and you have no idea what has been submitted to FDA by the e-cig community, so don't assume anything.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)They are an alternative to cigarettes but they have chosen to be classified as a tobacco product because tobacco products are the only nicotine delivery devices that don't need FDA approval.
You can post all the industry studies you want, but they make no difference unless and until the required studies are submitted to the FDA.
Tyhanna
(145 posts)FDA regulates tobacco products, nobody has to submit any studies or any thing of that kind to the FDA. That only is required when they are trying to get a drug devise approved. FDA has yet to deem e-cigarettes a tobacco product yet. So tell me what are these required studies you think the e-cigarette community needs to submit to the FDA?
FDA has already submitted their regulations on e-cigs, cigars and smokeless tobaccos in October to the OMB in Washingtion.
Now the e-cig community did have a few sit down learning hours with the FDA and with the OMB, they gave them information about studies and general information about e-cigarettes. But that was not required, was done to help FDA to understand what it is they are dealing with. Once the OBM approves the FDA regulations then they get posted for a pubic comment period, 60-90 days depending. Then the FDA has X amount of time to review all comments, change what ever it is that they feel needs to be changed, then it gets sent back threw OMB for final approval. That is how it works.
Again unlike a drug product where they have to have years of studies and approval from FDA before a product can go to market, Tobacco products do have all that. They will regulate e-cigarettes with their deeming regulations at some point. Regulations like labeling, bottling, manufacturing. A lot like they would with food. And im sure there will be other regulation visited like advertising and not selling to minors law.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)A judge did that, when the FDA tried to stop the importation of these devices without FDA approval. The court gave the e-cig producer what it wanted -- a ruling that they could be classified as a tobacco product.
Tobacco products are the only nicotine dispensers that till now haven't been required to submit studies to the FDA. So that's the classification the e-cigs asked for, and the judge agreed.
The e-cigs were not required to submit studies if they only want to market them as tobacco products; but if they want to do more than that, they will need to.
Tyhanna
(145 posts)They are a SAFER alternative to smoking combustion cigarettes.
BTW the FDA stopping the shipments was done illegally. They had no control over the e-cigarettes, FDA just tried to claim they were a drug product so they could stop the shipments. That is why they went to court.
Big pharma had a lot to do with that at the time, they don't want any competition to their high failure rate products because they are the gift that keeps on giving them more and more money.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)But the e-cig manufacturers objected, and the judge agreed with them, so that's where we are. They are now officially a "tobacco product" and should be treated as one -- including bans on use wherever other heated "tobacco products" are banned.
Tyhanna
(145 posts)or is it tobacco product, it does come from tobacco and many night shade plants.
Like I said and you simply ignore, there are 3 catigories for nicotine, drug, tobacco and pesticide.
why do you think it should be a drug? so it will be taken off the market for all those testings and millions of dollars? NOT going to happen!
E-cigs arnt going anywhere. SO get used to it. You don't care about anyone's health, and you don't realize how many peoples lives are being saved by e-cigs. But im getting used to you zealots that you really don't care you just don't want it in your sight. Shame on you!
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)Most drugs, at least in the past, were developed from natural substances. Nicotine was one of many. It is found in plants and processed into the pure form of nicotine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicotine
Nicotine is a potent parasympathomimetic alkaloid found in the nightshade family of plants (Solanaceae) and a stimulant drug.
http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/nicotine-dependence/basics/definition/con-20014452
Nicotine dependence — also called tobacco dependence — is an addiction to tobacco products caused by the drug nicotine. Nicotine dependence means you can't stop using the substance, even though it's causing you harm.
Tyhanna
(145 posts)it is a tobacco product, the pharma companies have marketed it as a drug, that is why there is 3 catigories.
there is no getting around it its a tobacco product when its deemed a tobacco product. Now if the FDA was really nice they would make an other category called THR, Tobacco harm reduction. And then it would be a tobacco harm reduction product.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)It's called "nicotine dispensing devices" -- and the e-cig manufacturers don't want to be put in that category. That's what the lawsuit was about. Why? Because to do so, they would have had to submit the same types of studies submitted by manufacturers of nicotine gum and nicotine patches.
There are NOT three categories because there is something special and different about nicotine, the drug, being processed from a plant. There are three because Congress decided long ago, for political reasons, that tobacco producers should be free of the constraints of the FDA; that they should be allowed to sell their product even if the health risks outweighed any benefits. At the same time, any municipality is free to ban the use of them in public places.
Tyhanna
(145 posts)lol for one thing the products that pharma make are called NRP or NRTs Nicotine Replacement products or Nicotine replacement therapy.
They are no Tobacco harm reduction products, the FDA as of right now does not have that category. I don't think you know what THR means, smokeless tobacco products would be in that category, for those that want to continue using tobacco but don't want the risk of smoking.
sorry that's all there is in the categories of nicotine are the 3 categories.
Congress gave the FDA the tobacco regulation control quite a while ago. They regulate anything having to do with tobacco, right now they regulate combustion cigarettes and will deeming regulation on smokeless tobacco and cigars. So you are very confused about all this. If a tobacco company wants to start up a new type of combustion cigarette they have to send in application to do so. Hum maybe that is where you got the application from.
Only Congress can ban tobacco and nicotine completely. Nobody is going to be ban the out right sales of tobacco, there is just to much money to be made in taxes for the feds and for the states.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)that hasn't gone through the same testing for safety and efficacy that any drug would have to go through. It's just not enough for the e-cig to fund a bunch of studies. They have to apply to the FDA for approval and submit the types of studies the FDA requires for any drug to get approval.
Tyhanna
(145 posts)of course they arnt they don't have a category of tobacco harm reduction.
I said we hope they make a new category for THR but they wont. For the last time the only thing that has to be proved with studies is when its a drug product and those are normally made my pharma companies.
To have a new tobacco product they don't do any testing they just submit an application for a new tobacco product. You really need to read up on the FDA in what they do. There are different divisions in the FDA the tobacco and the drug and the food and all other things. Different people do different things.
Now your sending this whole thing around in circles, Its very obvious you don't understand the whole thing, Im finished with this until you can understand what is told to you. Ive explained it to you over and over.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)because they are a tobacco product and Big Tobacco has a lot of power. Otherwise, cigarettes would have been pulled from the market decades ago, as a harmful product containing a highly addictive drug, nicotine.
Now e-cigs are tagging along on the same exemption. But that won't last forever. The FDA is already in the process of drafting new regulations.
Tyhanna
(145 posts)first cigarettes are not under any exemption im not sure where you get that. There are many regulations on cigarettes from FDA.
Only an act of Congress can ban cigarettes and/or nicotine. probation never cured anything remember alcohol went that way at one time. Black market takes over and the Congress realizes this. Just like there was bootlegging with alcohol. They want to make their taxes off cigarettes they don't want to do away with them.
When nicotine is not in burning tobacco its not that addictive, its the chemicals in the cigarettes that causes it to be more addictive. I don't think you would understand the medical part of why. People that use patches for other medical problems are found not to get addicted to the nicotine, those that never smoked that is.
Ok im going to say this once, e-cigs are not tagged as you put it as any thing, there is no exemptions in place for e-cigarettes as you say.
FDA has already drafted regulations for e-cigarettes, smokeless tobaccos and cigars and those regulations are sitting at OMB in Washington DC. Stop making up stuff.... I have told you that a number of times now in other posts.
again stop making up stuff along the way!
It would be nice if you would read what I have said in my posts and we would not be going around in circles.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)drugs that are marketed must be proven to be safe and effective. Cigarettes contain a highly addictive drug, nicotine, and cigarettes are not safe EVEN WHEN USED PRECISELY AS DIRECTED -- unlike alcohol, for example, which is safe when used the way most people use it, in low or moderate amounts.
Under normal circumstances, a dangerous addictive drug product -- like cigarettes -- would be illegal. But the tobacco industry is powerful and that is why cigarettes contain to remain on the market, despite the risks.
If e-cigs want to make the claim that their pure nicotine is LESS addictive than combusted nicotine, as ridiculous as that seems, they are welcome to do so -- with research submitted to the FDA.
E-cigs are currently classified as tobacco products, because of the lawsuit brought by an e-cig maker. And the FDA has been working on drafting new regulations for years -- but as of today, those regulations are only in DRAFT form. They have not been approved and they are subject to change.
Here is more information about the current law. Note that it places new regulations on tobacco products, but it does not require the manufacturers to provide safety and efficacy data, as the FDA does with other addictive drugs. That exemption is the only reason the cigarette industry still exists, since they will never be able to prove that their product is safe, even when used as directed.
http://publichealthlawcenter.org/sites/default/files/fda-1.pdf
On June 22, 2009, President Barack Obama signed into law the Family Smoking Prevention and
Tobacco Control Act, giving the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) comprehensive authority
to regulate the manufacturing, marketing, and sale of tobacco products.The new law represents
the most sweeping action taken to date to reduce what remains the leading preventable cause of
death in the United States. Before enactment of the new law, tobacco products were largely exempt from regulation under the nation’s federal health and safety laws, including the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. The FDA has
regulated food, drugs and cosmetics for many decades, but not tobacco products, except in those rare circumstances when manufacturers made explicit health claims.
In addition to the FDA’s new powers to regulate the structure of tobacco products, the agency has
wide-ranging authority to regulate tobacco products and tobacco product marketing. The new law:
Restricts tobacco advertising and promotion in order to promote overall public health (the
judicial system will almost certainly be asked to determine whether any of the legislated
advertising restrictions unconstitutionally interferes with free speech under the First
Amendment)
Stops illegal sales of tobacco products to minors
Bans all cigarettes that have a characterizing flavor, including all fruit and candy flavors,
other than tobacco or menthol
Prohibits health claims about purported reduced-risk products, where such claims are not
scientifically proven or would cause net public health harms (for example, by discouraging
current tobacco users from quitting or encouraging new users to start)
Requires tobacco companies to disclose the contents of tobacco products, changes to their
products and research about the health effects of their products
Requires much larger, more visible, and more informative health warning labels, including
color and graphics, on cigarette and smokeless tobacco product packages
Similarly requires much larger, more visible, and more informative health warning labels on
advertisements for cigarettes and smokeless tobacco
Prohibits terms such as “light,” “mild” and “low-tar” on tobacco product packages and
advertisements, while authorizing the FDA to restrict additional terms in the future
The law also imposes certain limits on FDA authority. The agency cannot ban conventional tobacco
products, such as cigarettes and smokeless tobacco, or require the total elimination of nicotine in
tobacco products. However, the FDA may order the reduction of nicotine to non-addictive levels in
some or all tobacco products. The agency could also order an increase in nicotine levels in some
or all tobacco products if it determined that doing so would promote overall public health. For
their part, states retain the authority to ban all or some tobacco products or the sale of tobacco
products containing nicotine
The law also prohibits the FDA from using its new authority to increase the new federal minimum
age of 18 to a higher level, require prescriptions for the purchase of tobacco products, ban tobacco
product sales in any particular type of sales outlet, or regulate tobacco farming directly. In all of
these areas, the FDA could ask Congress either to take these actions or to provide the agency
with new authority to do them. Moreover, states have the authority to take such actions without
congressional approval
Tyhanna
(145 posts)pnwmom
(110,261 posts)And the nicotine in regular cigarettes is also a drug. It is a powerful stimulant, to be specific.
Tyhanna
(145 posts)First of all do you even know what PURE nicotine is? Nobody has pure nicotine in any e-cigarette. They are not called vape pens those are what people use for vaporizing marijuana oil for medical use.
Ours are called either e-cigarettes or Personal vaporizers, or mods. Or we call them by name The SID, or what ever the name brand is.
Back to the nicotine, the average mg that is used is 18mg/ml. There is 24mg/ml sold and in some case (very few) people use 36mg/ml. Now pure nicotine is 1000mg/ml, most is a little less than 100% pure after processing.Nobody but certified labs can buy pure nicotine, where they check it for purity, put it in lots after they have cut it with PG, they keep track of the lot numbers buy law. The highest that can be sold to a manufacture is 100mg/ml.
Its very obvious to me you have no idea about any of this, so why do you try.
What part of the FDA has three categories for nicotine don't you understand? BTW nicotine is no more of a stimulant than caffeine is. Little do you know and you keep trying to show that you do, but for me someone that does know can see right threw you.
And so what if its a drug? what does that get you? Caffeine is a drug also. Its still a tobacco product, because it comes from tobacco.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)Last edited Sun Mar 30, 2014, 06:56 AM - Edit history (1)
And so is nicotine in tobacco leaves. In every case, in every form, nicotine is a drug. An addictive stimulant, as a matter of scientific fact.
How can you not understand that?
Just because you personally use certain names, doesn't mean that your use is universal. The fact is that the basic technology is the same, for e-cigs and e-pens and vape pens and hookah-pens -- all are devices that produce heated water vapor that usually contains nicotine and sometimes adds flavoring. (Though, as you point out, some of these devices could be used to dispense marijuana oil -- which is not the subject of what I'm talking about.)
Yes, caffeine is another stimulant, but that doesn't make nicotine NOT a stimulant. Nicotine is a powerful, addictive stimulant with risks beyond that of caffeine. Reports of accidental nicotine poisonings among children are "soaring." Liquid nicotine can also be absorbed through the skin, and accidental exposure through the skin has put people in the hospital.
From the New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/24/business/selling-a-poison-by-the-barrel-liquid-nicotine-for-e-cigarettes.html?_r=0
These “e-liquids,” the key ingredients in e-cigarettes, are powerful neurotoxins. Tiny amounts, whether ingested or absorbed through the skin, can cause vomiting and seizures and even be lethal. A teaspoon of even highly diluted e-liquid can kill a small child.
SNIP
Reports of accidental poisonings, notably among children, are soaring. Since 2011, there appears to have been one death in the United States, a suicide by an adult who injected nicotine. But less serious cases have led to a surge in calls to poison control centers. Nationwide, the number of cases linked to e-liquids jumped to 1,351 in 2013, a 300 percent increase from 2012, and the number is on pace to double this year, according to information from the National Poison Data System. Of the cases in 2013, 365 were referred to hospitals, triple the previous year’s number.
SNIP
The surge in poisonings reflects not only the growth of e-cigarettes but also a shift in technology. Initially, many e-cigarettes were disposable devices that looked like conventional cigarettes. Increasingly, however, they are larger, reusable gadgets that can be refilled with liquid, generally a combination of nicotine, flavorings and solvents. In Kentucky, where about 40 percent of cases involved adults, one woman was admitted to the hospital with cardiac problems after her e-cigarette broke in her bed, spilling the e-liquid, which was then absorbed through her skin.
SNIP
“You wouldn’t leave a bottle of Ajax out,” she said. Advocates of e-cigarettes sometimes draw comparisons between nicotine and caffeine, characterizing both as recreational stimulants that carry few risks. But that argument is not established by science, and many health advocates take issue with the comparison.
“There’s no risk to a barista no matter how much caffeine they spill on themselves,” said Dr. Neal L. Benowitz, a professor at the University of California, San Francisco, who specializes in nicotine research. “Nicotine is different.”
_____________________
What we know about the effects of using nicotine dispensing products during pregnancy (other than cigarettes, which carry additional risks) comes from animal studies and from studying nicotine replacement products such as gum and patches. The consensus is that these products are safer than smoking cigarettes during pregnancy, because they don't contain all the toxins of cigarettes; but that nicotine alone, in any form, poses serious risks to the developing fetus. It isn't a good idea for any woman who thinks pregnancy is in her future to risk becoming addicted to nicotine, whether by smoking cigarettes or using e-cigs or e-pens.
http://www.quit.org.au/about/frequently-asked-questions/faqs-pregnancy-and-quitting-smoking/faq-pregnancy-quitting-medications.html
Nicotine gum and patches cause increases in the mother's blood pressure and heart rate, and a smaller increase in foetal heart rate, but other nicotine replacement products produce a smaller effect than smoking. Nicotine (from cigarettes or by itself) changes hormone patterns, affecting the endocrine profile of the infant. It affects the structure and functioning of the oviduct (fallopian tube) in ways that may impair fertility and complicate the pregnancy. Nicotine impairs the transport of essential nutrients across the placenta. Nicotine can alter embryonic movements that are important in the early development of the organs. It may interfere with foetal brain and lung development, although the long-term effects are not clear.
Tyhanna
(145 posts)If you want to call it a drug that is up to you. SO what. Its can be a drug, again so what. There are many things that are drugs that are a lot worse than nicotine could ever be.
You can link me all you want, but I can also link you back many things.
tell me why is it that people that use the patch for other things than smoking cessation, don't get addicted to the nicotine?
No nicotine is not very addictive when its not in burning tobacco, because when its not in burning tobacco there is no chemicals that causes it to be so very addictive. You choose to believe articles that are against e-cigarettes, you choose to because it backs your own opinion. By it self its no worse than caffeine.
You should know by now that the mental addiction to "the cigarette" is different than the physical addiction to the nicotine. Nicotine is out of the system in less than 48 hours. The physical withdraw only takes a few days, where the mental addiction for many takes a life time to get over.
Far more children are poisoned in the house by the different chemicals everyone has for cleaning, far more children are poisoned by eating cigarettes. Its up to the parents to keep all those thing out of children's hands.
I never said anything about smoking or vaping when pregnant. Im not sure why you are going off about that. I agree one who is pregnant shouldn't smoke or vape. Drs will tell the pregnant to work down off the cigarette or vaping not to go off it cold turkey its to much of a shock to the body and baby for them to.
Nicotine is not diluted with water, its diluted with Propylene glycol.
Not all the tech is the same in the vape pens used for medical marijuana, they are not exactly the same. And they have been around longer than the E-cigarette, they came out in the 90s.
At the very low levels of nicotine we use spilling a drop or even a few is not going to do anything. If that were the case there would have been a lot of dead people. Yes parents need to use caution around children, because the amount for them to get sick is lower than an adult, but there is real now scientific studies done to what the actual levels of to much is, nobody would show up to that study, so they have taking antidotal information from hospitals and emergency rooms. So the NY Times has taken to scaring people with this information they write about. Its not fact.
Only one person has died from e-liquid here in the US.. he committed suicide by injecting it, not intended use. How many people to date have died from the FDA approved Chantix? 500 and counting. How many children have been sent to the hospital from the FDA approved nicotine gum and lozenges? How many preteens and teens use nicotine gum and lozenges? It all relative, you cant just pick one product and ignore the other ones that have caused many sicknesses in children.
Should we ban swimming pools because a child might drowned. Or should parents be held responsible for what they do instead of the product. I could list a long list of products that could kill a child, do we ban any of those products? Look to see what is the top 5 things that cause poisoning in children.
Lets be completely clear here its not only water vapor, its Propylene glycol, vegetable glycerin, water (in some cases) and a food grade flavoring. All except the flavoring and water are pharmaceutical grade.
You don't have to like it, its not for you to decide what others do with their bodies, you should be very happy for these people they are no longer smoking.
15 months smoke free after 40 years smoking.....But I know you don't care. The e-cigarette are saving lives right now regardless if people like it or not. And you should be very careful judging, there are those that don't use any nicotine in their e-liquid at all.
Now im done with this, you just want to argue and you don't want to understand. You would rather see these people die from smoking than use something that can get them away from smoking for good, I have no time in my life for people like you.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)"tell me why is it that people that use the patch for other things than smoking cessation, don't get addicted to the nicotine?"
I don't know why a person would do that, but someone could certainly get addicted to nicotine through using a patch.
"No nicotine is not very addictive when its not in burning tobacco, because when its not in burning tobacco there is no chemicals that causes it to be so very addictive. You choose to believe articles that are against e-cigarettes, you choose to because it backs your own opinion. By it self its no worse than caffeine."
Heating nicotine makes it more addictive, not less.
http://www.livescience.com/41392-e-cigarettes-addicting-safer.html
A top concern is the nicotine delivery rate, Leone said. With nicotine patches and gum, the nicotine delivery is regulated, with small amounts of nicotine released slowly into the bloodstream. But with traditional cigarettes and now e-cigarettes, heat creates a freebase form of nicotine that is more addictive — or what smokers would call more satisfying. The nicotine goes right into the lungs, where it is quickly channeled into the heart and then pumped into the brain.
Once addicted, the body will crave nicotine. And although nicotine isn't the most dangerous toxin in tobacco's arsenal, this chemical nevertheless is a cancer-promoting agent, and is associated with birth defects and developmental disorders.
"You should know by now that the mental addiction to "the cigarette" is different than the physical addiction to the nicotine. Nicotine is out of the system in less than 48 hours. The physical withdraw only takes a few days, where the mental addiction for many takes a life time to get over. "
What information do you have to back up your idea that nicotine alone is less addictive?
"Far more children are poisoned in the house by the different chemicals everyone has for cleaning, far more children are poisoned by eating cigarettes. Its up to the parents to keep all those thing out of children's hands."
It is much, much harder for a child to get a lethal dose from eating cigarettes than from e-juice. What small child would eat dozens of cigarettes? But a single teaspoon of a sweet, nicotine-containing e-juice could kill a small child.
"I never said anything about smoking or vaping when pregnant. Im not sure why you are going off about that. I agree one who is pregnant shouldn't smoke or vape. Drs will tell the pregnant to work down off the cigarette or vaping not to go off it cold turkey its to much of a shock to the body and baby for them to."
I am glad you agree on that. Unfortunately, it is very hard for women who are dependent on nicotine to discontinue it, especially when they are pregnant. And the e-cig and vape pen manufactures make no claims that their products will help.
"Nicotine is not diluted with water, its diluted with Propylene glycol.
Not all the tech is the same in the vape pens used for medical marijuana, they are not exactly the same. And they have been around longer than the E-cigarette, they came out in the 90s. "
E-juice does contain water -- which is a good thing. Water vapor is something we know is safe to inhale. Some other ingredients have been tested as safe in foods, but not as products to inhale. Here's what one vape company has to say:
http://www.vapehut.com/E-liquid-Wilmington-s/23.htm
"What are the ingredients in E-liquid? E-liquid contains only a few ingredients. PG based liquids contain mostly propylene glycol, which produces the vapor emitted by the electronic cigarette and it is the carrier of the nicotine, another ingredient in E-liquid (if you choose a liquid with nicotine). Propylene glycol is considered generally safe for human consumption by the FDA, and is an ingredient in many food items that we eat. It is also found in shampoos, soaps, and medicines. (There is an interesting article about propylene glycol listed below.) E-liquid also contains water and artificial flavorings. In rare cases, allergies to PG have been reported, so E-liquids are also sold that do not contain it. They use vegetable glycerin, or VG, which is a plant based substance. VG is used in many products that moisturize and clean the skin and is made from coconut or palm oil. In rare instances, people report allergies to PG and may use VG based E-liquid as an alternative.
E-liquid also contains some natural extracts from tobacco in small amounts and natural flavorings."
"At the very low levels of nicotine we use spilling a drop or even a few is not going to do anything. If that were the case there would have been a lot of dead people. Yes parents need to use caution around children, because the amount for them to get sick is lower than an adult, but there is real now scientific studies done to what the actual levels of to much is, nobody would show up to that study, so they have taking antidotal information from hospitals and emergency rooms. So the NY Times has taken to scaring people with this information they write about. Its not fact."
The concentration of nicotine in e-juices varies widely. You may use a very low level, but some people use high levels. Also, the number of people who have shown up in emergency rooms for treatment of nicotine poisoning is a fact based on data collected by hospitals.
"Only one person has died from e-liquid here in the US.. he committed suicide by injecting it, not intended use. How many people to date have died from the FDA approved Chantix? 500 and counting. How many children have been sent to the hospital from the FDA approved nicotine gum and lozenges? How many preteens and teens use nicotine gum and lozenges? It all relative, you cant just pick one product and ignore the other ones that have caused many sicknesses in children. "
The point would be to require child-proof containers before there are any deaths of children, not afterwards. Do you have a problem with that?
"Should we ban swimming pools because a child might drowned. Or should parents be held responsible for what they do instead of the product. I could list a long list of products that could kill a child, do we ban any of those products? Look to see what is the top 5 things that cause poisoning in children."
Most municipalities require that swimming pools be in fenced-in areas not accessible to children. But in many of our states, we allow vape products to be sold to children, and without childproof packaging that would protect small children.
"Lets be completely clear here its not only water vapor, its Propylene glycol, vegetable glycerin, water (in some cases) and a food grade flavoring. All except the flavoring and water are pharmaceutical grade."
Wrong. All the ingredients are NOT pharmaceutical grade. Most of these products are made in China and no one has any idea how they are processed there or how pure the ingredients are.
"You don't have to like it, its not for you to decide what others do with their bodies, you should be very happy for these people they are no longer smoking."
I am happy if these nicotine products have helped some people stop cigarettes. I just don't want their off-gas polluting shared public indoor spaces, and I don't want the products sold to children.
"15 months smoke free after 40 years smoking.....But I know you don't care. The e-cigarette are saving lives right now regardless if people like it or not. And you should be very careful judging, there are those that don't use any nicotine in their e-liquid at all."
Good for you. I do realize some people don't use nicotine, but there's no way for a non-user to know when they see these things being used in public spaces (1) who's using nicotine (2) who's not, (3) who's using safe preparations made in the US and (4) who is using vape pens from China that produce nano-particles of metals in the vapor stream, or other toxins.
Tyhanna
(145 posts)"Wrong. All the ingredients are NOT pharmaceutical grade. Most of these products are made in China and no one has any idea how they are processed there or how pure the ingredients are."
The PG and VG are USP. There are thousands of vendors here in the US making e-liquid, not all are made in China, yes China has a couple brands but not many use them. You are just parroting something you have read some where.
If you truly wanted to learn about all this you would. You are parroting what you have seen from people that are anti-ecigs and Zealots. The new sources love to create news that is going to sell.
Read this....
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-amy-fairchild/liquid-death-from-ecigare_b_5044145.html?utm_hp_ref=tw
here is plenty of reading and information if you really care to understand.
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B7kLclUGbuA6bXNadjI0SjhXRG8/edit?pli=1
http://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/10/12/7272
http://www.ecigarette-research.com/EUROECHO2013-ecigs.pdf
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691512005030
http://acsh.org/2013/11/new-study-shows-vaping-promotes-quitting-smokers-ex-smokers/
http://publichealth.drexel.edu/SiteData/docs/ms08/f90349264250e603/ms08.pdf
http://blog.casaa.org/2013/08/new-study-confirms-that-chemicals-in.html
http://www.ecigarette-research.com/web/index.php/2013-04-07-09-50-07/123-anti-tobacco-activists
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/232007243_Comparison_of_the_effects_of_e-cigarette_vapor_and_cigarette_smoke_on_indoor_air_quality
http://www.ascpjournal.org/content/pdf/1940-0640-8-5.pdf
http://www.ecigadvanced.com/blog/study-tobacco-behavioral-social-addiction/
http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/early/2013/03/05/tobaccocontrol-2012-050859.short
http://www.palgrave-journals.com/jphp/journal/v32/n1/pdf/jphp201041a.pdf
http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1471-2458-11-786.pdf
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/add.12235/abstract
http://www.ecigadvanced.com/blog/e-liquid-makes-the-grade/
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/add.12150/abstract
http://www.ecigadvanced.com/blog/research/
http://stevevape.com/top-10-studies-on-e-cigs-you-need-to-know-about/
http://www.cocktailnerd.com/debunking-the-myth-of-inadequate-e-cig-research/
http://www.ecigadvanced.com/blog/simple-statistics-to-defeat-the-biggest-arguments-against-e-cigs/
http://ecigarettereviewed.com/top-20-rebuttals-to-win-an-e-cigarette-debate
http://archest.fsm.it/pne/pdf/79/01/pne79-1-04-caponnetto-polosa.pdf
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0066317
http://www.escardio.org/about/press/press-releases/esc12-munich/Pages/acute-effects-electroniccigarettes-heart-damage.aspx
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0761842513000855
http://www.ecigadvanced.com/blog/electronic-cigarettes-dont-cause-secondhand-vaping/
http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/08958378.2012.758197
http://www.ecigadvanced.com/blog/study-no-acute-respiratory-effects-for-e-cigs/
http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/08958378.2013.793439
http://www.ecigadvanced.com/blog/study-no-evidence-electronic-cigarettes-cause-cell-damage-death/
http://journal.publications.chestnet.org/article.aspx?articleid=1714565
http://press.thelancet.com/ecigarettes.pdf
http://acsh.org/2013/09/ground-breaking-study-supports-e-cigarettes-superiority-over-nicotine-patches/
http://www.journalnow.com/business/business_news/local/article_b921af9a-f61e-11e2-ac1f-001a4bcf6878.html
http://www.ecigarettedirect.co.uk/ashtray-blog/2013/04/how-electronic-cigarettes-affect-lungs.html
http://www.ecigarettedirect.co.uk/research/ecig-lung-survey-analysis.pdf
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23467656
http://blog.casaa.org/2013/08/french-e-cigarette-study-media.html
http://www.ecigarette-research.com/web/index.php/2013-04-07-09-50-07/126-a-new-study-onchemical-analysis
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22672560
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23358230
http://www.news-medical.net/news/20091104/Propylene-glycol-in-e-cigarettes-might-keep-us-healthysays-researchers.aspx
http://www.healthnz.co.nz/ECigsExhaledSmoke.htm
http://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/10/6/2500
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23033998
http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/early/2012/11/30/tobaccocontrol-2012-050483.short/reply#tobaccocontrol_el_12237
http://www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/10/1/19
Studies and articles on nicotine:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8614291
http://www.statepress.com/archive/node/7194
http://www.gwern.net/Nicotine
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00204-013-1127-0/fulltext.html
http://ecigarette-research.com/web/index.php/2013-04-07-09-50-07/132-nicotine-lethal-dose-inhumans
http://www.tobaccoharmreduction.org/faq/nicotine.htm
http://health.howstuffworks.com/wellness/drugs-alcohol/nicotine-health-benefits.htm
http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2007/06/nicotine
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199308053290619?keytype2=tf_ipsecsha&ijkey=09174147c440b96900667f3fef93fd3cd0100cee&&
http://ejuiceconnoisseur.com/2013/07/25/10-things-you-might-not-know-about-nicotine/
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-204_162-57583731/eating-nicotine-containing-produce-like-pepperstomatoes-may-lower-parkinsons-risk/
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/10/101013095331.htm
http://www.forces.org/evidence/hamilton/other/nicotine.htm
http://www.news-medical.net/news/2006/09/12/20091.aspx
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2014383/
http://www.neurology.org/content/78/2/91.abstract
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1528-1167.2012.03715.x/full
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0028390813001688
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002937813009538
http://digital.grinnell.edu/ojs/index.php/pnsj/article/view/185
http://www.omicsonline.org/2155-6105/2155-6105-S6-007.pdf
http://www.alcoholjournal.org/article/S0741-8329(13)00067-0/abstract
Studies and articles on youth ecig usage:
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6235a6.htm
http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2013/09/electronic-cigarette-experimentation.html
http://antithrlies.com/2013/09/07/cdc-lies-about-kids-using-e-cigarettes/
http://acsh.org/2013/09/62202/
http://www.rstreet.org/2013/09/06/irresponsible-e-cigarette-theatrics-from-federal-officials/
http://www.ash.org.uk/files/documents/ASH_891.pdf
http://www.jahonline.org/article/S1054-139X(12)00409-0/fulltext
http://www.ecigadvanced.com/blog/new-study-kids-dont-care-about-e-cigs/
http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2013/05/american-cancer-society-opposes-banning.html
http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2013/05/sacrificing-childrens-health-for.html
http://heartland.org/policy-documents/research-commentary-age-restrictions-electronic-cigarettes
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)And that most of the products are still made in China because they originated there, and it's cheaper to produce them there?
http://community.vapage.com/what-you-probably-didnt-know-about-e-cigarettes/
Many companies claim their e-liquid is made in the U.S. What they don’t tell you is that after it’s made, its shipped to China to be filled – so the quality, purity, and cleanliness is potentially compromised depending on which factory is doing the filling. Also, just because its “made” (AKA blended together) in the U.S. does NOT mean all the ingredients originate from the U.S. — and in fact, often they aren’t USA-made at all. US law allows the import of raw materials. Mixing foreign-sourced materials here in the U.S. technically means USA-made, but not (Cig2o?/ Vapage?).
http://guidetovaping.com/2012/04/10/the-good-and-the-bad-of-china-and-ecigs/
Though the majority of e-cigarettes, atomizers, cartomizers are made in China, we do have a small but ever rising climb of U.S. electronic cigarette makers.
Tyhanna
(145 posts)you realize more people fill their own carts or clearos than don't.
There are hundreds of PVs that dont even look like a cigarette.
People may start with the look alikes but they don't stay with them for the most part.
Blu's liquid is made here in the US from Johnson Creek. https://www.johnsoncreeksmokejuice.com/
NJOY e-liquid is made here in the US at their facility in AZ.
DOW chemical makes PG and I believe they also make VG. They are an American made product.
And yes PG and VG are pharmaceutical grade. USP.
Yes the majority of hard ware is made in China, but thousands of vendors make their own e-liquid here in the US. About every vape shop makes their own and have their own brand. There are those that license their e-liquid to others to sell.
All of this much larger than the ones you see in the gas stations or walmart. MUCH MUCH bigger than you could ever imagine.
BTW do you eat shrimp or fish, you might want to check where it comes from. Where its farmed from.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)and there is no law whatsoever that requires their ingredients to be pharmaceutical grade. Only their gullible customers would think that.
show me proof they arnt using pharmaceutical grade ingredients. There maybe no laws but there is self imposed standards in making e-liquid here in US, we don't need FDA or anyone to have good standards in making the liquid. Also I don't know of any vendor making e-liquid right now that doesn't use safety caps, that is an other standard that has already been set.
As far as kids buying them, 99.9 % of all vendors require being 18 years of age. Law or not. We have had laws in buying cigarettes for years and kids seem to still get their hands on them every day. How is that law stop them? If they want to get them they do. Same with alcohol. and all those things that are over 18-21 things to do and they still are able to get past the law.
I know for a fact the ingredients are in my e-liquid. And I don't fall for the whole propaganda and rhetoric being passed around the internet and news media. You can if you want but Im way more informed than you are obviously.
The only gullible person around here is you.
I don't feel you know anything about any of these really. What more you don't really care about any of this. Just as long as nobody using one around you because you think they are so dangerous because you have fallen for all propaganda. Well you can think what you want, I really don't care. You are just one more useful idiot for the ANTZ to use. 14 million around the world using e-cigarettes think you are wrong.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)You were the one who claimed, on no basis at all, that e-juice manufacturers used pharmaceutical grade products. There is no law that requires them to do so and I've never seen any evidence that they all did. So if you know otherwise, show me.
You're also wrong about the safety caps. They have childproof packaging, but as soon as the seal is broken, there is no more childproof packaging. The tips are not child-proofed. This isn't the case with other drugs. For example, an aspirin bottle has a safety cap. Even after you break the seal, the safety cap is still usable, and is in place between every use.
And you're wrong about 99.9 percent of vendors requiring the purchasers to be 18. Online vendors ask their customers to assert that they are over 18, but there is nothing in place to require it -- any 13 year old could claim he was 18. And in many states teens can easily buy these things in retail stores, too. No one's stopping them.
This is from a pro- vape site. It explains that even the products that say made in the USA almost always have ingredients that come from China.
http://blog.e-cigexpress.com/2013/03/made-in-usa-e-liquid-well-sort-of.html
There is an even bigger, far more serious problem with American e-liquid that nobody ever talks about, though. As you may have noticed above, I have placed words like "American-made," "manufacturer" and "Made in the USA" in quotes for a reason. Despite adamant assertions that their E-liquid is "100% American made" (there I go with the quotes again), not one of these companies has been able to answer the questions I always ask when the whole U.S.A. made e-liquid claim is made ...
"How exactly do you go about extracting the liquid nicotine from the tobacco? Where is your factory that does that? What is its address? Can I tour your factory?" If you aren't actually manufacturing the nicotine, where does it originate from?" When pressed, many of them will admit that they don't actually manufacture the liquid nicotine portion of the e-juice, adding, "but we add flavors made here in the USA and we are the ones who are doing the mixing." If I wanted to, I might even question whether the flavors, themselves, which may have been bought from a U.S. company, were actually manufactured in the United States. If I really want to nail them down (which I rarely do anymore - I've grown bored with the game), some of them will admit that they are buying either unflavored liquid nicotine from China or unflavored propylene glycol-based e-liquid from China (which they then cut with the cheaper vegetable glycerine).
In other words, "Made in the USA" really means "flavored in the USA." Ironic, isn't it, that the one and only component in e-liquid that has the potential to be toxic - the nicotine - is still being supplied by China - especially when you consider the fact that so many people are purchasing the "USA E-Juice" because they are uneasy about how well the e-liquid in China might be regulated? Now, I could be wrong; there very well could be some plant here in the United States that is producing pure liquid nicotine. I've never found such a place and I have searched! Even if that place does exist, it still does not solve the most worrisome problem ...
Pure nicotine is an incredibly dangerous substance - nearly twice as toxic as cocaine! I have no problem agreeing with the point that we may have less corrupt regulators here in the U.S.A. and that the regulators here might have more stringent guidelines than the regulators do in China. That is, if there was any actual regulation of e-liquid being done in the United States. The fact is, there is nobody at all regulating the stuff being produced in this country. Maybe I'm just crazy, but I think I'd rather have suspect Chinese regulation being done than none at all! And, we're not talking about some simple battery and heating element device that isn't being tested here; we are talking about places that are mixing and measuring flavors with poison!
Tyhanna
(145 posts)I don't have to prove anything. You have made a statement you need to prove it.
E-cigarettes by the FDA will be deemed a tobacco product. So when they do its a tobacco product.
How many kids do you know that have credit cards to buy on line. And isn't it up to the parents to know what their children are doing. I know it was my job to know what my kids were doing as they grew up.
Really? Pushers, its a legal product, nicotine is a legal product, you try and make it sound less than so. I guess those that make caffeine products are pushers also, that is a drug and is not regulated.
Im am done, this is becoming over the top ridiculous. I really don't care what you think like I said before and Im not going to get pulled back into this again, to try to help you understand any of this because you don't want to understand.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)I assumed that's what you were referring to when you claimed that sellers only sell to adults. That's not true in states without laws banning the sale to minors.
Tyhanna
(145 posts)what is it you think they get from china? the hard ware is made in china yes.
beevul
(12,194 posts)Hardly the whole industry.
I'm sure that you leaving out that detail, as you always do, was purely incidental. 
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)The whole industry benefited by being able to sell without proving safety and efficacy.
beevul
(12,194 posts)So what.
It still doesn't explain why you seem, habitually, unable to be forthcoming or tell the whole truth in these e-cig threads.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)beevul
(12,194 posts)You, in other threads, claim "the industry" sued.
That's flat out false.
Oh, and have you ever heard of a lie by omission?
Like I said in the other thread, quit while you're behind.
Glitterati
(3,182 posts)no matter how many times you correct with facts.
beevul
(12,194 posts)Correcting them on it does give a trail of crumbs to follow, though, and it establishes a pattern that can be pointed out to folks who unlike you and I, may not have seen it.
Glitterati
(3,182 posts)I spent a few days correcting the propaganda but fell off when I had to work some 8 hour shifts.
It's nice to see others taking up the campaign to make sure the truth counters this propaganda.
Thanks!
SomethingFishy
(4,876 posts)Regardless of what the freak outs are claiming...
pipoman
(16,038 posts)Isn't what it used to be. I believe the medical community does great disservice to humanity with their refusal to acknowledge the effectiveness of some treatments not produced by big pharma. The ama, to this day, is taking the position that marijuana has no medical benefits and they oppose testing. They further advocate leaving it on the list of schedule 1 drugs, which is unconscionable. my incredulity leads me to wonder if their position on this is driven by their love for prescribing chantax or treating the effects of long term inhalation of tar and carbon monoxide.
redqueen
(115,186 posts)GeorgeGist
(25,570 posts)
tridim
(45,358 posts)Same ingredient as E-cigs.
Not fooled by the propaganda. It's pathetic.
Glitterati
(3,182 posts)against e-cigs. Someone is losing big money when smokers have real effect using e-cigs.
Propaganda is exactly right. And DU has been exposed to a well funded propaganda campaign lately.
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)and/or were using them to cut down or quit smoking cigarettes.
So the OP title and highlighted sentence is misleading in the extreme.
Apologies- I didn't bookmark that study. Darn.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)the finest cessation product ever, hands down.
MindPilot
(12,693 posts)Every year about 1000 people die from fires caused by smoking, and of course the property damage is tens of millions.
Nobody is going to toss an e-cig out the car window and start a wildfire.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Burn down a few years ago due to an errant butt.
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)I'm absolutely disgusted every time I see a smoker simply toss a cigarette butt out of their car window into the street or into a parking lot. The world is not your garbage can...
Even if they leave people addicted to nicotine, I'd far rather have addicts quit littering all over the place. (And possibly starting fires to boot.)
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)It took a number of cigarette smokers and singled out the 88 who said they had ever used e-cigarettes even if only ONCE.
And then they followed up a year later.
Only 9 of the 88 who had at least tried the e-cigarette once quit smoking.
So this asinine study didn't bother to recruit tobacco smokers who were INTENDING to quit, or INTENDING to use e-cigarettes regularly.
It didn't even ask if those who had at least tried e-cigarettes if they now used them at all and/or smoking tobacco cigarettes less frequently.
It is such a dishonest "study" one wonders if those who designed it and carried it out have an agenda.
………………………………………...
For the baseline survey, participants were asked if they had used electronic cigarettes in the past 30 days (even once); how many conventional cigarettes they smoked per day; time to first cigarette (less than or more than 30 minutes after waking each day); and whether they intended to quit smoking with the next six months, if at all.
Only 88 participants said they used e-cigarettes…...
Participants were asked the same questions at the one-year follow-up, with only those answering both sets of questions included in the study.
The researchers found e-cigarette smokers at baseline were not significantly less likely to quit smoking regular cigarettes one year later than people who did not use the products.
While 13.5 percent of the total study pool quit smoking, only nine of the 88 e-cigarette smokers quit.
"There was no association between having tried an e-cigarette and quitting smoking at one-year follow up," study author Dr. Rachel A. Grana, a postdoctoral scholar at UCSF School of Medicine, told CBS News' Adriana Diaz.
E-cigarette smokers overall did not express more intent to quit in their initial baseline interviews than other adults surveyed. E-cigarette use also did not reduce the number of regular cigarettes smoked.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/electronic-e-cigarettes-wont-help-smokers-quit-study-claims/
NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)So this asinine study didn't bother to recruit tobacco smokers who were INTENDING to quit, or INTENDING to use e-cigarettes regularly.
I don't understand where people pull this bs from
blogslut
(39,167 posts)Autumn
(48,962 posts)I went down to the zero nicotine juice for a few weeks and now I rarely think to pick up my e cig to take a puff. I figure I've spent about 16 dollars on juice since I started vaping, That beats the hell out of buying a carton of cigarettes every 9 days for 36 dollars or buying a 7 day supply of patches for 29 dollars, which never worked.
tridim
(45,358 posts)By getting me addicted to a nicotine product that costs more than twice as much as cigarettes. I can't believe how much cash I gave Glaxo Smith Klein for that crap.
Autumn
(48,962 posts)nothing to help my craving they burned my skin I started with the first step for the recommended time went down to step two and after three weeks on that I realized I still want to smoke it had done nothing for that. With my e cig I have not had any urges to smoke a tobacco cigarette since I started vaping. When I switched to the zero nicotine juice I had no irritability no withdrawals. I might have picked up my e gig three or four times yesterday to take a puff.
Tyhanna
(145 posts)tridim
(45,358 posts)Tyhanna
(145 posts)
jbond56
(410 posts)Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons Benzo[a]pyrene, Benzofluoranthane, Benzo[j]fluoranthane, Benzo[k]fluoranthane, Dibenzo[a,i]pyrene, Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene, Dibenz[a,h]anthracene, 5-Methylchrysene
Asz-arenes Dibenz[a,h]acridine, 7H-Dibenzo[c,g]carbazole
1,3-Butadiene, Ethyl carbamate, Nickel, Chromium, Cadmium, Polonium-210, Arsenic, Hydrazine
being the most documented and the list is as high is 81 depending on which addatives/brand
Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)Shouldn't we be happy that people are trying to quit smoking?
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)
RobinA
(10,478 posts)at all. Smokers must be punished for their habit by feeling miserable. Now with e-cigs they get to have cool little gadgets that come in colors and a zillion flavors, have their own web sites and this whole semi-cult status not seen since the bong days, and it's all legal and FUN. And they might even be able to quit while having this fun. Where is the justice???? 
bunnies
(15,859 posts)Exactly!!! Well done. 
Demit
(11,238 posts)Also, the puritans are pissed b/c THEY CAN'T EVEN TELL who are the people still getting their nicotine so that they can disdain them publicly. They're not standing outside huddled around an ashtray anymore! They don't smell of smoke anymore! They're not coughing & wheezing anymore! And they're even saving money using these devices and it's just not FAIR!
tammywammy
(26,582 posts)so therefore should be banned and the person should be shunned for life.
AND THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!!
Or something like that.
Mariana
(15,626 posts)That just can't be permitted. Smokers (and former smokers) are supposed to be miserable.
SomethingFishy
(4,876 posts)pushing this "e-cigs are just as dangerous" line... It's unbelievable.
I'm sure I'm just an anecdote but I haven't bought a pack of cigarettes in almost 6 months... I'm on the lowest level of nicotine you can get in the juice. I'm saving a fortune and I feel way better... I say vape away!
Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)If e-cigs can help people quit smoking, I'm all for them.
Mariana
(15,626 posts)These things really are saving lives.
Tunkamerica
(4,444 posts)not sure i'm saving a fortune, but it's definitely been a godsend for me.
Revanchist
(1,375 posts)don't conform to their lifestyles and choices.
Smoking and e-cig's are just one example, other's include television viewing, eating at chain restaurants, eating meat, gun ownership, a person's choice of automobile, the list is pretty long.
I put the word some in all caps because it isn't everyone here but those who hold some of the viewpoints can be quite vocal and at times obnoxious when they try to push their beliefs on others.
LordGlenconner
(1,348 posts)"Oh, you eat THAT?"
or
"Oh, you don't buy organic?"
or
"I wouldn't feed that to my dog."
Insufferable snobs every last one of them.
Revanchist
(1,375 posts)But then again I wish I also had a job so there's that also.
LordGlenconner
(1,348 posts)A few people are afraid that somewhere out there someone else is having a good time.
And we can't have that.
Ever.
I suspect it will be the new Pit Bull wars, if it isn't already.
Mariana
(15,626 posts)Smokers should never be permitted to enjoy themselves, not even after they've quit.
Marr
(20,317 posts)in lots of places simultaneously, it seems.
It's very suspicious, imho, as the proposed regulations seem designed to destroy the e-cig retail market. I have to wonder if Big Tobacco isn't pushing this whole thing, to be honest.
logosoco
(3,211 posts)my niece, my nephew, a neighbor and several of my husband's co-workers have used e cigs to get off of regular cigs. And i have yet to see any advertisements for them. (But I don't watch tv either).
Also, it would be an ideal thing for fire departments to encourage the use of electronic cigs. No fire hazards there. I think the technology here can save lives, don't know why so many are against them.
Mariana
(15,626 posts)Those few have really big mouths, though, and try very hard to drown out the voices of all the reasonable people.
angstlessk
(11,862 posts)One was right beside her head, her mattress was fuming, and when I put it out she woke up and said she would have woken up...
I also smoked for too many years...40? Then I discovered ecigs...and one of my first delights..."I GET TO 'SMOKE' IN BED"
Which still does not appeal to me...laying down stops my desire for anything except sleep 
Still doing the vape...and don't care if I vape till I am dead...I can BREATHE I still cough, but not every hour of every day, and can carry on a long conversation on the phone without having to hope the other party cannot hear me coughing up my lung
Mariana
(15,626 posts)that you stop coughing. My doc told me it's very normal for people to cough for a long time after they've quit smoking. It takes time to get better.
Congratulations, by the way. Well done.
angstlessk
(11,862 posts)Silly me, I thought because I did not inhale deeply, I could get away with smoking forever...then I got bronchitis...
I quit for a month...the longest I had EVER quit..then, I saw a cig and a lighter..and lit up...smoked more per day than I did before I quit...to make up for my sin of trying to quit.
Then got bronchitis again...decided to quit again..but this time I bought a cigalike...ecig...now I am doing the more sophisticated ecigs...not for show..I am home bound..but because they satisfy more..and I do NOT want to smoke again......EVEAH
Mariana
(15,626 posts)But I liked the e-cig so much that every time I had a choice whether to smoke or vape, I chose to vape. Now I haven't smoked for almost 3 years.
Tunkamerica
(4,444 posts)But they're the disposable type you buy at gas stations.
Kurska
(5,739 posts)Good to know that was just a meaningless coincidence. Thanks OP.
RobinA
(10,478 posts)You haven't quit smoking have you? Nooooooooo. E-cigs have not helped you quit, you still smoke. Therefore, they are worthless.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)What about the CHILDREN???
Revanchist
(1,375 posts)But it shouldn't be all that difficult to stop the analogs completely. I made a full transition and had a tobacco smoke a few months later because I was out of juice and almost puked.
angstlessk
(11,862 posts)I pray that those 10 cartons, I bought just before I got sick, do not call me if my batteries fail me
fizzgig
(24,146 posts)but that doesn't seem to matter to the anti-vaping crusaders.
Mariana
(15,626 posts)that you are marketing e-cigs as smoking cessation aids when you post here about your experience with them.
And you're right, it doesn't matter to them that you've stopped smoking. They don't care. I really think some of them would rather have you continue smoking, rather than quit using e-cigs. Fortunately, most people aren't like that.
Congratulations!
fizzgig
(24,146 posts)and everyone has been wonderfully supportive. thank gods this crap hasn't migrated over there. i think some people just need someone to look down on.
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)They just checked randomly with 80-something *current smokers* who had "tried" e-cigs to see if they'd quit?
Why ... wouldn't you examine a group of people trying to QUIT in various ways, and see how e-cigs did compared to cold turkey, the prescription inhalers, gums, patches, etc.?
Sounds REALLY squirmy.
Warpy
(114,615 posts)It's just safer than skipping their lunches to buy the real thing and suck concentrated smoke into developing lungs.
As for not leading to nicotine reduction and eventual smoking cessation, unless they've measured cotinine levels in a person who has switched 100% to the e cigs over a period of months, they're just not in a position to say whether or not the person has tapered down. They really haven't had the time to do a proper study of this.
Yes, people are going to keep using the e cigs. Some will drop down to less potent juice and a few lucky and motivated people will drop down so far they're just using the non nicotine juice, the e cig allowing them the comforting habit without the drug dependence.
I expect better data from the CDC, honestly.
Tyhanna
(145 posts)It has been shown that those that never smoked, that have used nicotine patches for other medical conditions do not get dependent on the nicotine. That with out the burning tobacco, nicotine is not as addictive as once thought, and if a person never smoked may not be addictive at all.
Warpy
(114,615 posts)A lot more people are dependent on drugs than are actually addicted to them.
Dependency means when you stop suddenly, you feel like shit and you want to stop feeling like shit. You'll take only as much of a new supply as you need to stop feeling like shit.
Addiction means there's a craving there, whether or not you have a supply and that you'll keep using the drug beyond all reason until you run out. Look at chain smokers to find the real addicts.
Earth_First
(14,910 posts)The first three comapnies I found via Google broadly display a similar warning on the very first page (not buried in the website somewhere) that they are not a smoking cessation tool.
But dont let the facts get in the way of the DU E-cig pile on.
blu eCigs® electronic cigarettes are not a smoking cessation product and have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration, nor are they intended to treat, prevent or cure any disease or condition.
http://www.blucigs.com/
This product is not marketed for use as a smoking cessation product and is not intended for use by non-smokers. This product and the statements made herein have not been evaluated by the FDA, or any other health or regulatory authority. WARNING: V2 Cigs products with nicotine contain a chemical known to the state of California to cause birth defects or other reproductive harm.
http://www.v2cigs.com/
WARNING: This product is intended for use by existing smokers 18 or older, and not by children, women who are pregnant or breast feeding, or persons with or at risk of heart disease, high blood pressure, diabetes, or taking medicine for depression or asthma. If you have a demonstrated allergy or sensitivity to nicotine or any combination of inhalants, consult your physician before using this product. This product is sold purely for recreational purposes - it is not a smoking cessation product and has not been tested as such. You must be over the legal age in your state to buy or use this product.
Nicotine is highly addictive and habit forming. Keep out of reach of children. This product contains Nicotine, a chemical known to the state of California to cause birth defects or other reproductive harm.
http://www.greensmoke.com/electronic-cigarette-starter-kits/pro-kit.html
zappaman
(20,627 posts)"I got an asthma attack around one of these just the other day. "
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4646698
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)I trigger when I know my inhaler is getting low, or realize I've left it at home.
So it's very possible that the sight of an e-cig triggered an attack, even though the vapor probably never touched a lung.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)And the ever popular, "you're not allergic, it's only an irritant" as if a physical irritant that triggers asthma doesn't matter. Of course it's all in the asthmatic's head.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)of cigarette smoke and ecig vapor are exactly the same, therefore the situations are exactly the same!
1) Some perfumes and flowers will trigger me. You're of course putting the same massive effort into banning those, right? Since they affect far more people? I mean, I don't have comparative numbers, but I suspect there are a lot more people affected by floral pollens and perfume chemicals than there are allergic to propylene glycol mist.
Of course you're not, because there's no billion-dollar industry waging a mass media campaign against flowers and perfumes, is there? Therefore my allergic reactions don't matter, because flowers and perfumes don't vaguely resemble a cigarette. Am I right? Of course I am. Your deep concern for asthmatic triggers seems to begin and end with nicotine products.
2) It's completely possible that we may have an outlier who is genuinely so violently allergic to either PG or vegetable glycerin that even the most minute amount will set off an attack. How they managed to still be alive considering that PG is used in their rescue inhaler and VG in many food, medical and hygiene products is beyond me, but we'll suspend disbelief for a moment. There's still a slim possibility that these same compounds that they use every day somehow manage to trigger their asthma when placed in a vaguely cigarette-looking device. However, gien all of that, what do you think is more likely to have happened- that they triggered off a chemical found in their rescue inhaler, lunch and shampoo, or that they triggered off the sight of what looked like smoke? Be honest, now.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)but that's not saying much. And of the more than 250 brands, we don't know what specific toxins, in what amounts, are in their different off-gasses.
Perfumes could be a concern, too, IF they were heated and turned out to release nano particles of tin, copper, and other metals into the air -- as researchers at the University of California/Riverside discovered for some e-cig products. But no one's pouring perfumes into their vape pens, as far as I've heard.
The issue isn't whether that particular person was triggered by something in that vape stream or had a somatic reaction. The issue is that none of the manufacturers, a large number of whom rely on factories in China for either their production or their ingredients, have proven their products' safety to second-hand users with research submitted to the FDA -- which they are free to do, and would allow them to make safety claims.
From a pro-vape site:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/blogs/envithyx/2569-diacetyl-butter-popcorn-flavoring-dont-vape.html
You might know this already, but just in case you don't (you said you were new to vaping). From wherever you order check that they guaranty all of their flavors are diacetyl free. Diacetyl is used for a buttery/popcorn flavors and when vaporized at high temps and inhaled it, it can cause popcorn lung/Bronchiolitis obliterans which is not curable without a lung transplant. Anyways I know it use to be in some buttery flavored e-juice and should not be in any anymore. Any reputable places juices is likely ok. Just it is good to check or stay away from buttery flavors if you are really concerned.
SNIP
OH, and what I found most interesting when I did some additional research on the topic:
Diacetyl is approved by the Food and Drug Administration as a safe flavor ingredient, but there is evidence to suggest that inhalation in large amounts is dangerous. There are currently no warnings from federal regulators about dactyl.
http://www.abc15.com/news/local-news/investigations/are-e-cigarettes-safe-to-use-new-research-shows-metals-found-in-vapor-of-electronic-cigarettes
Dr. Stanton Glantz is a professor at the University of California at San Francisco and one of the leading researchers on e-cigarettes.
He believes calling ‘vaping' safe is a lot of smoke and mirrors.
"If you are around somebody who is using e-cigarettes, you are breathing in ultra-fine particles and you are breathing in nicotine," he said.
SNIP
"Nanoparticles in general can be toxic," she said. "In the case of e-cigarettes, the nanoparticles would tend to go deeper into the respiratory system."
"These particles are so very small they go from your lungs straight into your blood stream, and carry the toxic chemicals into your blood, and then appear in various organs," said Dr. Glantz.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)That's an area I wouldn't even bother with trying to regulate and inspect. Too many problems from too many different areas of manufacture coming from that country- dog treats and chicken, anyone?- just block them and only allow juice sold in the States that has been manufactured in the States. Added safety with the bonus of local job creation, win and win. From your OMG DANGEROUS! and very poorly spelled for so-called "professional journalism" (seriously, how hard is it to run spell check on a published article??) ABC article:
Mistic
Smoking Everywhere
Both tested brands, which contained metal particles, were a) of Chinese manufacture and b) the cheap ones built to resemble cigarettes with the disposable prefilled cartos, which most vapers ditch very quickly in favor of the more economical and tastier refillable tanks, and which I would really like to see disappear from the market in favor of refillables/rebuildables with locally made liquid. They mysteriously failed to name the brands tested that, to quote the "professional journalism" article, "had a different result", or state what the "different result" was (presumably because they had no metal particles and therefore didn't suit the article's agenda).
Your complaint was that vape acted as an asthma trigger. So is perfume, which is used on a much larger scale. You managed to make my point for me by being uninterested in perfume as a trigger unless it is poured into a vape pen. It's the idea of vape pens, not the possible health issues, that bothers you. Thank you for that.
"The issue isn't whether that particular person was triggered by something in that vape stream or had a somatic reaction." -actually, yes that was what my post was about. Post 67 above, the one you answered with a response that was also specifically about asthma triggers. That post. Yes, that was what we were discussing.
I'm not new to vaping, I switched over two years ago: I posted it to the cessation forum at the time. Either you're thinking of someone else or you caught my reference to my recent relapse. I quit again, three days ago. Am sitting here puffing peacefully on my Cinnamon Red Hots ejuice as I type- a fairly painless transition that took one whole day. Beat that with a box of patches or gum.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)It is the process of heating the liquid that releases the vapor containing chemicals into the air. Just dabbing on perfume doesn't heat it and vaporize it -- sending whatever toxins it contains into breather's lungs.
"The issue isn't whether that particular person was triggered by something in that vape stream or had a somatic reaction."
What I meant to say is "the issue for me." There is no way for me to determine the truth in that case. What I do know is that I can't be confident when I'm sharing air space with a vaper that that person has the same concern for safety that you do. For all I know, the person is vaping something made in China, which you yourself acknowledge poses unknown risks.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)The vape pen heats and releases, in controlled amounts at controlled times, a stream of vapor, of which most of the components stay in the lungs of the user, who is directly inhaling it. A person putting on perfume is releasing the perfume in uncontrolled amounts, at an uncontrolled rate, into the air around them until the stuff simply runs out of oomph, and EVERYONE around them inhales that uncontrolled release, like it or not- which, for all you know, might be made in China with toxic ingredients, and is a known risk to asthmatics and others with lung problems.
Let me know when you plan to start your campaign to regulate perfume on a public health basis.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)And it doesn't contain nicotine or other addictive components. Yes, it can trigger asthma in suspectible individuals, but it doesn't carry metals or nicotine into other people's lungs.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)but your own dislike of one specific type of product.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)So I have no idea what you are saying.
Egnever
(21,506 posts)Ecigs didn't really start catching on till 2012 at the earliest and they were pretty worthless even then. It wasn't till the last year or two they started to become really usable by the average person. How would there be any change before that?
ErikJ
(6,335 posts)phleshdef
(11,936 posts)In either event, every single study, even the ones focused on Chinese products, have found them to be thousands of times safer than cigarettes.
I don't want to quit nicotine. So for me its been a replacement. I haven't touched a cigarette in 4 years. I can smell one a mile away and it makes me nauseous. I can breathe great. I've experienced no bad side effects. I get a physical with blood work once a year, and nothing has turned up to suggest any problems from it. My doctor believes that these are great devices for smokers who want to quit or replace with something less unhealthy.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)who don't want to breathe the outgas of products that haven't been proven safe for people exposed second hand.
Vapers should be able to decide to take the risk for themselves -- but not for everyone around them.
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)When I smoked, I always went outside and made an effort to keep a distance from people who I either knew didn't want to be around it or people I wasn't sure about. Of course there were friends who didn't give a shit, but I was always polite regardless.
But lets be clear, vaping is very different, the vapor dissipates very quickly. I tend to blow mine up in the air or away from people anyway, but it all disappears very quickly. Sometimes people can smell the flavor I'm vaping, but they always say it smells good. There is no burning involved so it smells very pure if you smell it at all.
Also, the stuff I buy, the ingredients have all been thoroughly tested. PG is the chemical that makes the vapor part happen, its the same thing that fog machines use and many inhalant based medical products use. Its also in a lot of food. It was proven safe for human consumption ages ago. It actually has a sterilizing quality.
The flavorings are flavorings used in common food/dessert flavoring products. No problems there.
The juice I buy for my vaping device is 100% made in the USA and has all ingredients listed on the bottle.
The only thing in question is nicotine and thats been thoroughly researched. Nicotine's effects are very well understood. Its a stimulant like caffeine and works in a very similar fashion. If you have a heart problem, just like caffeine, you should stay away from it. In the grand scheme of things though, its fairly benign if you don't overdo it.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)Last edited Sun Mar 30, 2014, 06:53 AM - Edit history (1)
not everyone will be as careful or considerate as you are.
Different vape pens release different amounts of nicotine into the air, along with various flavors and toxins, not all of which have been proven safe. Doctors at University of California/Riverside have found nano-particles of metals in some brands of e-cigs. There is no way for me, as a non-user, to know what the vaper at the restaurant table next to mine is using. If these became commonplace, what seems like an insignificant amount of off-gas could become significant, as it was in the days when cigarette smoke was allowed indoors. (I once had to work in a small room with about ten people and six were chain smoking all day.)
The fact is that the makers of these products haven't submitted research to the FDA demonstrating the safety of e-cigs and e-pens to second and third hand users. And until they do, other people shouldn't have to be exposed to them.
From a pro-vape site:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/blogs/envithyx/2569-diacetyl-butter-popcorn-flavoring-dont-vape.html
You might know this already, but just in case you don't (you said you were new to vaping). From wherever you order check that they guaranty all of their flavors are diacetyl free. Diacetyl is used for a buttery/popcorn flavors and when vaporized at high temps and inhaled it, it can cause popcorn lung/Bronchiolitis obliterans which is not curable without a lung transplant. Anyways I know it use to be in some buttery flavored e-juice and should not be in any anymore. Any reputable places juices is likely ok. Just it is good to check or stay away from buttery flavors if you are really concerned.
SNIP
OH, and what I found most interesting when I did some additional research on the topic:
Diacetyl is approved by the Food and Drug Administration as a safe flavor ingredient, but there is evidence to suggest that inhalation in large amounts is dangerous. There are currently no warnings from federal regulators about dactyl.
http://www.abc15.com/news/local-news/investigations/are-e-cigarettes-safe-to-use-new-research-shows-metals-found-in-vapor-of-electronic-cigarettes
Dr. Stanton Glantz is a professor at the University of California at San Francisco and one of the leading researchers on e-cigarettes.
He believes calling ‘vaping' safe is a lot of smoke and mirrors.
"If you are around somebody who is using e-cigarettes, you are breathing in ultra-fine particles and you are breathing in nicotine," he said.
SNIP
"Nanoparticles in general can be toxic," she said. "In the case of e-cigarettes, the nanoparticles would tend to go deeper into the respiratory system."
"These particles are so very small they go from your lungs straight into your blood stream, and carry the toxic chemicals into your blood, and then appear in various organs," said Dr. Glantz.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)And this research could have just as easily been applied to the patch, the lozenge, the gum and the pharmaceutical inhaler but big Pharma can afford to get approval to market as such even with even lower success rates.
And nobody seems to be able to tell me why the big Pharma nicotine inhaler should be allowed around the public while the e-cig shouldn't.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)This is the first I've heard about a Big Pharma nicotine inhaler. Do you have a link for that? But assuming there is such a thing, and that it's FDA approved, it must have gone through the same kind of FDA process used by gums and patches.
Mariana
(15,626 posts)Do you have information that some of the people on these threads are being paid by the manufacturers and/or the vendors to promote these things?
fizzgig
(24,146 posts)i don't give a rat's ass how it's marketed, what i care about is that i've been smoke-free for 16 days thanks to vaping. i don't get the hate.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)I mentioned it to you before. It is basically the same thing as an e-cig except that it works poorly, costs more and requires a prescription.
http://www.nicotrol.com/
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)So should any nicotine dispensing device, except they're currently classified as "tobacco products" thanks to the lawsuit won by n-joy.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)These were start up companies, not established medical companies like Pfizer that saw a way to make millions by patenting a method to stop smoking. Should every person that designs a product to sell be required to spend billions on an approval process? The companies were NOT marketing it as a medical product primarily and therefor have no reason to pursue such approval.
However, the products are essentially the same. Here are the instructions for the inhaler:
As you inhale or puff through the mouthpiece, nicotine turns into a vapor and is absorbed into your mouth and throat
Use Inhaler longer and more often at first to help control cigarette cravings
Sounds eerily familiar, huh?
By the way it is just as toxic as e-cigs per their warning:
And yet these are permitted inside and cannot be legislated against. So like it or not you will just have to put up with those vapers!
There can be no logical reason to accept the inhaler and advocate against e-cigs unless one is working for big pharma.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)of drugs sold on the market, including nicotine.
Unlike vape pens, this inhaler doesn't heat the nicotine, and it doesn't add miscellaneous flavorings. And, since it was approved by the FDA, we can assume it also doesn't release nano-particles of metal, unlike two of the vape pens tested by the UCal/Riverside researchers.
I'm not advocating for big pharma. I'm advocating for the lungs of second hand users and children. There's no reason that all nicotine dispensers shouldn't be subject to the same rules.
Response to morningfog (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
fizzgig
(24,146 posts)just as it has for many others. explain to me how it's not a smoking cessation device.
Mariana
(15,626 posts)to determine how effective they are for that purpose. You know it's effective, and I know it's effective, but the tests haven't been done so claims of effectiveness in helping people stop smoking can't be made in ads and such (which isn't being done anyway).
I'm cool with that. Everybody already knows what e-cigs are good for. They don't have to say "smoking cessation aid" on the box.
fizzgig
(24,146 posts)i've never been one to pay attention to marketing, anyway. you are right, though, it doesn't change the reality of the situation.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)Not until these things are tested and approved by the FDA, like other nicotine products.
fizzgig
(24,146 posts)and i don't think you've once acknowledged that they do help people stop smoking cigarettes.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)sold to minors.
But I don't care what adults decide to do that only affects themselves.
The people who have switched from tobacco to these things are most probably much better off. But that doesn't mean they belong in public spaces.
fizzgig
(24,146 posts)http://sync.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4620254
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)what it's off-gassing -- so until that is possible, now that you mention it, I guess they should all be subject to the same ban in public spaces.
You are right. A non-user wouldn't be able to tell whether a vape pen was off-gassing nicotine or another toxic substance. The distinction is unenforceable, so they all need to be banned from public places. Thanks for helping to clarify this point.
fizzgig
(24,146 posts)pnwmom
(110,261 posts)I don't care what's in them as long as I don't have to breathe it, and as long as children can't buy them.
fizzgig
(24,146 posts)but we're supposed to believe that's what it's about.
and i don't think anyone is advocating selling such products to minors.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)With an absence of federal regulations, many states and cities have adopted their own e-cigarette regulations, most commonly to prohibit sales to minors, including Maryland, Kentucky, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Hampshire, Tennessee, Utah, Wisconsin, and Colorado. Other states are considering similar legislation.[101]
California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed a bill that would regulate the sale of electronic cigarettes within the state on grounds that "if adults want to purchase and consume these products with an understanding of the associated health risks, they should be able to do so."[102] Senate Bill 648(Authored by Senator Ellen Corbett), proposed a bill that would classify eCigarettes as tobacco products, thus banning their use wherever smoking was banned. In August 2013, SB648 was shelved for the session, just hours before its hearing in the State Assembly. It has not been determined if Sen Corbett will revise the bill and re-introduce it next year.[103]
New Jersey voted in 2009 to treat the electronic cigarette in the same category as tobacco products by including them under the New Jersey Smoke-Free Air Act, which prohibits smoking in indoor work and public places. Assemblywoman Connie Wagner sponsored the legislation, claiming "that young people who use these things will get hooked on the nicotine and eventually move onto the real thing".[104]
In New Hampshire, the sale of electronic cigarettes to minors is illegal as of July 2010.[105]
Arizona is planning to ban the sale of electronic cigarettes to minors.[106]
In Maryland, sales to minors are banned.[107]
New York State banned the use of e-cigarettes within 100 feet of a public or private school entrance in September 2012, and banned e-cigarette sales to minors starting on 1 January 2013.[108]
On 30 December 2013, New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg signed a bill regulating e-cig usage in the same way as that of normal cigarettes. The bill was signed on his second to last day in office after the council approved regulation. One of the arguments from proponents of the bill was a need for contrast between on one hand claiming usage "safe" and on the other "safer than cigarettes, but still potentially dangerous."[109][110][111]
In Pennsylvania, SB 1055 was introduced by Sen. Tim Solobay in 2013 and would ban sales to minors.[112] That same year physician members of the Pennsylvania Medical Society called upon the state legislature to pass electronic cigarette laws that have safeguards equivalent to existing tobacco laws.[
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)since I have never run across a place that sells to minors. If you are really worried about that, why don't you stop expending your energy harassing adult users and start working on legislation to prohibit sales to minors in the states where you perceive a problem?
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)heated, aerosolized, nicotine products, whether cigarettes or e-cigs or vape pens, in public indoor places; and for a Federal ban on selling to children.
Just because you, personally, haven't gone to a place that sells to minors doesn't mean they're not buying them. The use among middle schoolers has doubled in a few years.
fizzgig
(24,146 posts)according to the journal of pediatrics, energy drinks pose a health risk to children and young adults.
yet many jurisdictions have not banned the sale of such products to minors. does that mean they advocate the sale of those products to minors?
krawhitham
(5,072 posts)Electronic cigarettes and nicotine patches are equally effective at helping smokers quit, according to findings from what's thought to be the first clinical trial to compare the two methods.
However, e-cigarettes were more effective in reducing cigarette use among smokers who didn't quit.
E-cigarettes are battery-powered devices that deliver nicotine, flavorings and other chemicals. They turn these substances into vapor that is inhaled by the user.
The new study included 657 smokers who used either e-cigarettes, fake e-cigarettes (they didn't contain any nicotine) or nicotine patches for 13 weeks. At the end of the six-month study, about 6 percent of the participants had successfully quit.
Rates of those who successfully quit were 7.3 percent in the e-cigarette group, 5.8 percent in the nicotine patch group and 4.1 percent in the fake e-cigarette group.
These differences were not statistically significant, according to study leader Chris Bullen, director of the National Institute for Health Innovation at the University of Auckland in New Zealand, and colleagues.
The findings suggest that e-cigarettes are comparable to nicotine patches in helping people quit smoking for at least six months.
Among participants who did not quit smoking, 57 percent of those in the e-cigarette group had reduced their daily consumption of cigarettes by at least half after six months, compared with 41 percent of those in the nicotine patch group, according to the study published online Sept. 7 in The Lancet and presented at the annual meeting of the European Respiratory Society, held in Barcelona, Spain.
About 90 percent of those who used e-cigarettes -- including the fake version -- would recommend them to family and friends, compared with 56 percent of those in the nicotine patch group, the researchers said. They also concluded that e-cigarettes are comparable to nicotine patches in terms of safety.
"While our results don't show any clear-cut differences between e-cigarettes and patches in terms of quit success after six months, it certainly seems that e-cigarettes were more effective in helping smokers who didn't quit to cut down," Bullen said in a journal news release.
"It's also interesting that the people who took part in our study seemed to be much more enthusiastic about e-cigarettes than patches, as evidenced by the far greater proportion of people in both of the e-cigarette groups who said they'd recommend them to family or friends, compared to patches," he added.
Bullen continued: "There is still so much that is unknown about the effectiveness and long-term effects of e-cigarettes. Given the increasing popularity of these devices in many countries, and the accompanying regulatory uncertainty and inconsistency, larger, longer-term trials are urgently needed to establish whether these devices might be able to fulfill their potential as effective and popular smoking cessation aids."
This is a "pioneering study" that suggests e-cigarettes have the potential to increase the number of smokers who quit and to reduce costs to quitters and health care systems, Peter Hajek, a professor and director of the tobacco dependence research unit in the Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine at Queen Mary University of London, wrote in an accompanying journal commentary.
https://healthcare.utah.edu/healthlibrary/related/doc.php?type=6&id=679932
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)Revanchist
(1,375 posts)This deserves more exposure than being a post in a nearly week old thread.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)Response to morningfog (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed