If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(MN Vapers)   Why is the American Lung Assn against e-cigs? Because one of their major donors makes money from smoking cessation drugs   (mnvapers.com) divider line 300
    More: Obvious, American Library Association, March of Dimes, Chantix, electronic cigarette, harm reduction, charity, safety concerns, smoking  
•       •       •

4559 clicks; posted to Main » on 26 Mar 2014 at 12:12 AM (18 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



300 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-26 06:51:42 AM

hardinparamedic: Gunther: No offense dude, but I'm pretty sure you lose the right to be smug and condescending in a thread where you claimed that the vast majority of smoking related deaths are caused by heart disease from nicotine.

I mean; that's some anti-vacc level nonsense right there.

Except that smokeless tobacco products majorly increase cardiovascular, heart attack, heart disease, and stroke risks.

"Vast majority" ARE caused by smoking tobacco. Pretending that smokeless tobacco or nicotine delivery systems are safe, and not just less dangerous, is the anti-vaxx level of nonsense.

Cardiovascular disease is a 149 Billion Dollar annual burden on the American People (and that's just cost to State and Federal programs) - with diet and tobacco product use being two of the most readily modifiable risk factors.


you really should go tell the AMA and FDA to pull those patches and gum off the shelves... they are gonna kill everyone!!!

oooooga boooooga

/don't bother hitting me with a clever plastic dick picture - I don't smoke.
 
2014-03-26 06:57:35 AM

HindiDiscoMonster: /don't bother hitting me with a clever plastic dick picture - I don't smoke.


people.virginia.edu

upload.wikimedia.org

...ladies and gentlemen of this  supposed jury, I have one final thing I want you to consider. Ladies and gentlemen,  this is . Chewbacca is a wookie from the planet Kashyyk . But Chewbacca  lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it;  that does not make sense! Why would a Wookiee, an 8-foot-tall Wookiee, want to live on Endor, with a bunch of 2-foot-tall ? That does  not make sense! But more important, you have to ask yourself: What does this have to do with this case? Nothing. Ladies and gentlemen, it has nothing to do with this case! It  does not make sense! Look at me. I'm a lawyer defending a major record company, and I'm talkin' about Chewbacca! Does that make sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am not making any sense! None of this makes sense! And so you have to remember, when you're in that jury room deliberatin' and conjugatin' the Emancipation Proclamation, does it make sense? No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does  not make sense! If Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must acquit! The defense rests
 
2014-03-26 06:59:09 AM

hardinparamedic: Okay. And before you protest, I've cut out the second part because it's truly irrelevant at this point.

Let me condense what you have just said: "I don't like the results of the study, so it must not be true!"

The Journal of the American Medical Association is a high impact, peer reviewed journal which has been known for decades as a source of high quality science and guiding information for both policy makers and practitioners in a clinical setting.

If you have evidence the study is "BS" as you claim,   please present it as such. At the current time, the only evidence we have otherwise is the word of   HindiDiscoMonster, which I'm not sure of your peer review, your journalistic impact, or your renown as a reliable source of health or health policy information.


http://ecigarettereviewed.com/top-20-rebuttals-to-win-an-e-cigarette- d ebate


HindiDiscoMonster: do you really have no concept of history or are you being purposely obtuse?

Please provide, with a link to the full text source, the quote of the person who is saying e-cigs are outright just as dangerous as cigarettes, or should be entirely banned.


never said that... what I did say (and what you were responding to) is that people have said that historically, people nibble away through legislation to outright ban things they don't like... if you don't believe me, how about looking at one in particular (in recent history): Marijuana. That was banned with nothing more than herpaderp and ooogaa booogaa.

/Propaganda is a powerful tool.
 
2014-03-26 07:01:55 AM

Egoy3k: HindiDiscoMonster: Farkingwhatever: devildog123: My FIL used to cough constantly when he had his 2 pack a day habit.  6 months into his e-cig, no more coughing.  He actually has started running, and is doing a 5K next month.  fark you ALA, e-cigs are awesome.

Same with me. I previously smoked 2 packs a day (insane). I usually coughed like the devil clearing out shiat... now, never.
The negative effects with smoking are due to TOBACCO, NOT NICOTINE. Research this, I dare you farkers.
Same reason why chewing tobacco sucks!

I used to smoke almost 2 packs of these a day (for about 25yrs):

[kraftstobaccoblog.files.wordpress.com image 360x640]

I tried e-cigs, not for me, so I just quit... but then again, I have always been able to do that (which is unusual)... most people can't simply quit.

I was the same way. I finished my last pack one day and decided I didn't want to buy another. I argued with my wife about how to cook the eggs for breakfast the next morning, told my brother off that afternoon. I woke up the next morning, apologized to both of them, and that was that.  Two temper tantrums from me in a single day was pretty damn significant so I have great sympathy for people who have a harder time.  It is remarkably addictive.


god help anyone who tries to ban coffee...
 
2014-03-26 07:03:26 AM

HindiDiscoMonster: Irrelevant.



Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Nam laoreet, enim posuere placerat adipiscing, quam neque sollicitudin nibh, sed luctus eros magna in nunc. Donec et lorem nisi. Mauris non eleifend dui. Curabitur adipiscing mi a erat varius, id dapibus dui sollicitudin. Vivamus eget felis quam. Duis ut fermentum diam. Nullam dictum elit in fringilla suscipit. Morbi tempus, arcu in bibendum imperdiet, justo quam facilisis lacus, congue condimentum ante sapien sit amet eros!

Vivamus pulvinar leo nibh. Integer sit amet dapibus purus. Morbi vitae scelerisque arcu, non gravida sem. Vivamus faucibus sem sapien, sed iaculis nunc auctor eu. Curabitur ultricies rhoncus ipsum eget commodo. Aliquam feugiat metus sem, a cursus nulla consectetur ut. Etiam vitae blandit enim. Nullam eget orci felis.

Praesent sed ipsum id mauris ultrices egestas. Curabitur at convallis ipsum, a porta nisl. Curabitur feugiat, augue quis porta tristique, tellus lorem suscipit nisi, vel tristique eros quam id tortor. Praesent congue rutrum erat ut convallis. Quisque vel tempus nunc. Sed venenatis erat est, sit amet vestibulum justo facilisis mollis. Integer et aliquam sem. Nunc velit risus, placerat sit amet libero ut, tincidunt condimentum erat. Donec quis augue lectus. Praesent odio dolor, blandit ac mauris et, porttitor convallis lacus. Integer tortor arcu, tincidunt a aliquet hendrerit, pretium pharetra leo?

Nunc id iaculis felis, vitae sollicitudin eros. Integer porttitor sapien eget laoreet pretium. Aenean ut tellus ut odio gravida condimentum eget sed lectus. Aenean sit amet orci lacus. In auctor dolor vel tristique feugiat. Proin mattis dolor felis, non bibendum risus feugiat at. Donec nec commodo turpis. Quisque eleifend velit ac ultricies congue. Morbi pretium felis molestie porta luctus. Proin ut interdum dolor. In imperdiet mi quis nibh condimentum, ut auctor leo elementum. Proin quis orci sit amet neque auctor eleifend. Nullam ornare id justo et accumsan. Donec venenatis, mi ac ullamcorper imperdiet, nibh lorem venenatis metus, blandit ultricies massa augue ac risus. Nam tortor sem, convallis non pulvinar a, varius a sem. Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae;

Mauris tortor nisl, rhoncus eu auctor sit amet, sodales accumsan nibh. Mauris et euismod nunc, adipiscing faucibus leo. Quisque pellentesque tellus ut eleifend consectetur. Curabitur blandit elit et turpis hendrerit, eget aliquet sapien accumsan. Suspendisse hendrerit risus feugiat feugiat varius. Maecenas risus sem, feugiat eu sem quis, elementum aliquet nisl. Donec fermentum ipsum sapien, sit amet vestibulum nibh aliquet vel. Suspendisse pharetra elementum rutrum. Integer malesuada porta laoreet. Morbi nec dui ac urna volutpat fringilla.

So take that!
 
2014-03-26 07:03:36 AM

hardinparamedic: HindiDiscoMonster: /don't bother hitting me with a clever plastic dick picture - I don't smoke.

[people.virginia.edu image 500x75]

[upload.wikimedia.org image 250x184]

...ladies and gentlemen of this  supposed jury, I have one final thing I want you to consider. Ladies and gentlemen,  this is . Chewbacca is a wookie from the planet Kashyyk . But Chewbacca  lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it;  that does not make sense! Why would a Wookiee, an 8-foot-tall Wookiee, want to live on Endor, with a bunch of 2-foot-tall ? That does  not make sense! But more important, you have to ask yourself: What does this have to do with this case? Nothing. Ladies and gentlemen, it has nothing to do with this case! It  does not make sense! Look at me. I'm a lawyer defending a major record company, and I'm talkin' about Chewbacca! Does that make sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am not making any sense! None of this makes sense! And so you have to remember, when you're in that jury room deliberatin' and conjugatin' the Emancipation Proclamation, does it make sense? No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does  not make sense! If Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must acquit! The defense rests


I see my initial instinct was correct.... adios

You are an extremist.
 
2014-03-26 07:04:41 AM

HindiDiscoMonster: I see my initial instinct was correct.... adios

You are an extremist.


No. I'm giving you the exact level of seriousness you deserve to garner after your i nitial comment in this thread to me.
 
2014-03-26 07:14:45 AM

HindiDiscoMonster: hardinparamedic: HindiDiscoMonster: /don't bother hitting me with a clever plastic dick picture - I don't smoke.

[people.virginia.edu image 500x75]

[upload.wikimedia.org image 250x184]

...ladies and gentlemen of this  supposed jury, I have one final thing I want you to consider. Ladies and gentlemen,  this is . Chewbacca is a wookie from the planet Kashyyk . But Chewbacca  lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it;  that does not make sense! Why would a Wookiee, an 8-foot-tall Wookiee, want to live on Endor, with a bunch of 2-foot-tall ? That does  not make sense! But more important, you have to ask yourself: What does this have to do with this case? Nothing. Ladies and gentlemen, it has nothing to do with this case! It  does not make sense! Look at me. I'm a lawyer defending a major record company, and I'm talkin' about Chewbacca! Does that make sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am not making any sense! None of this makes sense! And so you have to remember, when you're in that jury room deliberatin' and conjugatin' the Emancipation Proclamation, does it make sense? No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does  not make sense! If Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must acquit! The defense rests

I see my initial instinct was correct.... adios

You are an extremist.


He's more of a fedora-wearing, brony, nurse but yeah, probably the best course of action.

Go on hardin, I know you've got an adhominem.jpg you've been saving for those who clicked your handle and burst out laughing.
 
2014-03-26 07:14:57 AM
But the people who get physically aroused by the prospect of banning things assure me that ecigs are at least as bad for you as cigarettes because feelings, not science.
 
2014-03-26 07:16:28 AM

sjcousins: He's more of a fedora-wearing, brony, nurse but yeah, probably the best course of action.


I'm not your mother last night.

Men have been murdered for less horrendous accusations, Sir. The Holocaust was established on less offensive pretenses.
 
2014-03-26 07:18:08 AM

hardinparamedic: SuperTramp: Unless I've been only dreaming that I read this thread, YOU have been arguing BUT NICOTINE!!!!1111!!

I've been arguing against people who think nicotine is safe or harmless.

Sorry. No sell.



Plus, it makes you look gay.


Ban gays and e-cigs
 
2014-03-26 07:18:20 AM

GoldSpider: But the people who get physically aroused by the prospect of banning things assure me that ecigs are at least as bad for you as cigarettes because feelings, not science.


thank you for that... you always give me a great laugh. :)
 
2014-03-26 07:19:56 AM
cdn.theatlantic.com 

Novart: Ban gays and e-cigs

 
2014-03-26 07:22:07 AM
4 years tobacco free because of the ecig. That's it. Nothing more to say.
 
2014-03-26 07:23:02 AM

hardinparamedic: The Holocaust was established on less offensive pretenses.


Wow, I'm saving that, and there's nothing you can do to stop me!
 
2014-03-26 07:23:20 AM
I think it would be completely valid for them to be against e-cigs since it still involves people inhaling unknown quantities of chemicals into the lungs, making a person (or keeping them) addicted to nicotine and potentially leading them smoking cigarettes at other times.

Personally I think e-cigs should be heavily regulated, at least as much as cigarettes and alcohol are. Instead they're being sold from stands in malls and such like. The ads for these things are like some bizarre throwback to the days when cigarettes were promoted as sexy lifestyle choices.
 
2014-03-26 07:24:03 AM

GoldSpider: Wow, I'm saving that, and there's nothing you can do to stop me!


Absolutely. I'd support the positive defense of the holocaust before I'd support the wearing of Fedoras.
 
2014-03-26 07:25:08 AM

aszure: 4 years tobacco free because of the ecig. That's it. Nothing more to say.


The important thing is that you can still blow smoke in my face and offend my delicate sensibilities.

/Sorry, I'm still a cup of coffee away from decent trolling.
 
2014-03-26 07:27:42 AM
"Big Pharma"


Stoppedreadingrightthere.jpg
 
2014-03-26 07:28:35 AM

hardinparamedic: sjcousins: He's more of a fedora-wearing, brony, nurse but yeah, probably the best course of action.

I'm not your mother last night.

Men have been murdered for less horrendous accusations, Sir. The Holocaust was established on less offensive pretenses.


Sounds like something this guy would say.
img.fark.net
Consider yourself favourited.
 
2014-03-26 07:29:05 AM

drxym: and potentially leading them smoking cigarettes at other times.


Just like I said, "because feelings".
 
2014-03-26 07:32:34 AM

sjcousins: Consider yourself favourited.


And to you, Sir.

i1.ytimg.com
 
2014-03-26 07:43:30 AM

wavion: If you say 1/3 of heart disease is influenced by smoking, that's still more than lung cancer.


Sure, assuming we're ignoring every other way cigarettes can kill other than lung cancer, and assuming "influenced" means "caused to the same degree that cigarettes cause lung cancer".

Face it; it was a dumb thing to say.
 
2014-03-26 07:57:38 AM

GoldSpider: But the people who get physically aroused by the prospect of banning things assure me that ecigs are at least as bad for you as cigarettes because feelings, not science.


And clearly the American Lung Association is all about banning things to achieve sexual gratification. I think it's in their charter.
 
2014-03-26 08:05:16 AM

Adolf Oliver Nipples: vygramul: Eddy Gurge: [CSB]
Smoked 1-2 packs a day for 35 years.  Had my last Marlboro on January 30'th of this year after a scare with pneumonia from some strange bacterial infection.   I love(d) smoking and knew I'd never quit.  While in the hospital (for a week) I had my wife bring me a couple of the Blu cigs from 7-11 (used them in the bathroom in my room).  I was pleased enough with them that I had her get me a Halo starter kit for my return home. There's been no looking back.  Currently puffing on an iTaste 134 mini with a Kanger Aero Tank.  I'm not going back, and I don't hack and cough any more.  Oh, and I can breath, smell and taste.  Screw the ALA.
[/CSB]

I'd be fine if eCigs would let people know what chemicals they're using. DEG causes kidney failure and was found in some eCigs. I'm all for people putting things in their bodies... so long as they know what they're putting in their bodies. The Free Market can only work with information available to everyone in the transaction.

Do you understand the absurdity in what you're saying? The people who are switching to e-cigarettes are people who are no longer smoking. There are so many carcinogenic compounds in cigarettes that dismissing e-cigarettes because of some potential health hazard utterly misses the point. Furthermore, if you don't deal with Big Tobacco to get your e-cigarettes, they tell you exactly what is in them. The people I deal with use propylene glycol, vegetable glycerin, nicotine extract, and a flavor compound, ingredients on demand, no secrets kept.

The controversy about e-cigarettes exists not because they are harmful, but because of control. It's the same impulse that causes people to get involved in your sex life, or what you eat. A healthy dose of anti-smoking vengeance is included, the whole "we had to deal with you smokers for years, now it's OUR turn!" nonsense. People are demonstrably using e-cigarettes to get off the cancer sticks, they are becoming healthier by the day, and the alleged smell isn't even remotely as cloying as a typical person's deodorant/cologne/perfume and should be deemed a welcome trade-off for people coming back in to work smelling of cigarette smoke or making you smell like ass when you're out and about.

There's simply no legitimate objection to adults using e-smokes. There just isn't.


I'll give you one legitimate objection:

We run a manufacturing facility where a sign says "no smoking, eating or drinking". A vendor came in to do service work on a device and midway thru the job, whipped out an e-cig and started dragging on it. Then he began preaching the benefits of e-cigs. I had to ask him to put it away. He said "Why? I'm not really smoking?" Then I had to explain: "You are standing in the middle of a manufacturing lab area posted for the control of exposure to hazardous chemicals. You can't put stuff in your mouth while you are in this lab. That means - no eating, no drinking, no nose picking, no bubble gum, no toothpicks, no smoking and yes, no e-cigs."

So, I'm fine with e-cigs but like texting, there can be times where they are not appropriate and maybe indirectly harmful to your health.
 
2014-03-26 08:06:37 AM

HotWingConspiracy: GoldSpider: But the people who get physically aroused by the prospect of banning things assure me that ecigs are at least as bad for you as cigarettes because feelings, not science.

And clearly the American Lung Association is all about banning things to achieve sexual gratification. I think it's in their charter.


they took it out of the charter, it's now in the employee handbook, page 18 section 2F titled "Propensity for banning to achieve sexual gratification."

I hear it's a very short section.
 
2014-03-26 08:09:13 AM

itsaidwhat: I'll give you one legitimate objection:We run a manufacturing facility where a sign says "no smoking, eating or drinking". A vendor came in to do service work on a device and midway thru the job, whipped out an e-cig and started dragging on it. Then he began preaching the benefits of e-cigs. I had to ask him to put it away. He said "Why? I'm not really smoking?" Then I had to explain: "You are standing in the middle of a manufacturing lab area posted for the control of exposure to hazardous chemicals. You can't put stuff in your mouth while you are in this lab. That means - no eating, no drinking, no nose picking, no bubble gum, no toothpicks, no smoking and yes, no e-cigs."So, I'm fine with e-cigs but like texting, there can be times where they are not appropriate and maybe indirectly harmful to your health.


Like when the security guard tazes and beats you up while dragging your ass out for violating the company policy?
 
2014-03-26 08:19:55 AM

hardinparamedic: sjcousins: Consider yourself favourited.

And to you, Sir.

[i1.ytimg.com image 850x531]


Using gay a pejorative makes you a farking doubhebag. Grow up.
 
2014-03-26 08:33:50 AM

HotWingConspiracy: And clearly the American Lung Association is all about banning things to achieve sexual gratification.


And what of various local legislatures who insist on applying tobacco laws to ecigs despite the total absence of tobacco in them?
 
2014-03-26 08:36:03 AM

Egoy3k: hardinparamedic: sjcousins: Consider yourself favourited.

And to you, Sir.

[i1.ytimg.com image 850x531]

Using gay a pejorative makes you a farking doubhebag. Grow up.


Wow coffee deficiency....

*ahem*

Using gay as a pejorative makes you a farking douchebag. Grow up.
 
2014-03-26 08:43:43 AM

hardinparamedic: doglover: Because abstinence only works so well.

Careful lighting those strawmen on fire. It's been dry this year.


There's actually a pretty good analogy in there:
Smoking cigarettes = unprotected sex.
E-cigs = protected sex.
Banning e-cigs =  abstinence only education.

It's safer not to do them at all, but if you really must have a cigarette...
 
2014-03-26 08:47:00 AM

GoldSpider: HotWingConspiracy: And clearly the American Lung Association is all about banning things to achieve sexual gratification.

And what of various local legislatures who insist on applying tobacco laws to ecigs despite the total absence of tobacco in them?


Responding to the will of their constituents? Do you carefully examine their genitals when they pass these measures?
 
2014-03-26 08:50:57 AM

HotWingConspiracy: Responding to the will of their constituents?


cdn.vanillaforums.com
 
2014-03-26 09:04:46 AM
My mom has COPD from almost 40 years of smoking, and in the year she's been using the eCig, every time she smells tobacco she wants to hurl. Her doctors are pleased that her lungs aren't getting worse, and she's on the lowest dosage available. The only thing she complains about it not enjoying coffee as much as she used to. I've also seen the rest of my family fail to quit using the eCig, but they don't have the motivation my mom does.
I get that we don't know exactly how bad they might be, but I have a hard time believing that it can be worse than tar, formaldehyde and the rest of the poison in brand name cigarettes. I'm thrilled my mom can breathe again.
 
2014-03-26 09:22:34 AM
If you have said any of the below, it automatically disqualifies you from further comment because you are an idiot:

-Ecig users don't know what's in the stuff they're vaping
-Ecigs are just another way for big tobacco to hook you
-Nicotine is dangerous in and of itself
-There are no real scientific studies of ecig use.


Also not surprised hardinparamedic wants people to keep smoking. If he doesn't have sick people to help, where will his smug sense of self-importance and superiority come from?

Start here:
peer reviewed meta review of around 100 other studies on ecig use that finds there is no significant health or cancer risk from ecig use

And then there's this:

Electronic cigarette vapor appears chemically incapable of causing cancer as cigarette smoke has done. E-cigarette vapor contains toxicants concentrations averaging less than one percent of the concentrations in tobacco cigarette smoke.


And this:
Monkeys and rats were exposed continuously to high concentrations of propylene glycol, a common component of e liquids for periods of 12 to 18 months. Results of the research state "air containing these vapors in amounts up to the saturation point is completely harmless".

And this:
Recent research indicates that electronic cigarette use does not affect the oxygenation of the heart. Lead by principle investigator Dr Konstantinos Farsalinos; results of the research were presented at the European Society of Cardiology annual congress in Amsterdam in August, 2013.

And this:
High nicotine e-liquids were vaporized in a series of experiments and the emissions compared to tobacco smoke. The study results indicate "no apparent risk to human health from e-cigarette emissions based on the compounds analyzed".

Want more? I have tons more.

Bottom line: if you are against an open and thriving ecig industry - if you want to see it regulated "like tobacco," and if you want the same limitations put on ecig use as tobacco use - you are part of the problem.

You are helping big tobacco keep their hooks in society and profit from their oligopoly and people's misery.

Stop being part of the problem.
 
2014-03-26 09:25:18 AM

Cagey B: vygramul: I'd be fine if eCigs would let people know what chemicals they're using. DEG causes kidney failure and was found in some eCigs. I'm all for people putting things in their bodies... so long as they know what they're putting in their bodies. The Free Market can only work with information available to everyone in the transaction.

Yep. Go and e-cig it up. Just do it with the understanding that nicotine is toxic and that there is no meaningful regulation of what goes in these things. And don't make bullshiat claims like those in TFA that e-cigs "save lives".

Also, the fact that an advocacy group feels the need to put out a horseshiat-laden press release on the subject should probably raise a couple of red flags for people.


Nicotine is as harmless as caffeine. Stop with the lies. It is NOT toxic.
 
2014-03-26 09:33:27 AM
It's nice to see that Hardonparamedic rushes in to all these threads to 'educate us'. Why not just mind your farking business. Your schtick has been farking stale for a long time now. People choose a healthier alternative to smoking and you still want to rule the farking world.
 
2014-03-26 09:38:28 AM
You guys all seem to have this debate all taken care of.

I'll just add this: the only e-cigarettes I have ever seen are people using them in public places where they can't usually smoke, a few very young looking kids (16-18 year olds I'd guess) using them in front of a convenience store, people using them for THC delivery and one time out in front of a club with other smokers. Oh, and in douchey commercials with Jenny McCarthy and Stephen Dorf.

Based on my very limited anecdotal evidence, I have jumped to this conclusion, which I am 100% OK with embracing and taking to the races:

While some people (I'm told and I will believe) have successfully used e-cigarettes to significantly reduce their smoking habit or even quit altogether (which I fully endorse and applaud), the majority of e-cigarette use is people using them to be able to smoke in area that were previously restricted to them, young kids who probably wouldn't or couldn't smoke before, stoners championing them as a way to get high in a secretive and/or socially acceptable way, one guy who got the hairy eyeball from a pack of "real" smokers and a crazy anti-vaccination chick who likes that she can smoke in clubs again and some C-List former celebrity trying to equate smoking with a great fundamental freedom that has been stripped from the Founding Fathers by phantom hordes of marauding fascists.

Yeah, e-cigarettes appear to be the lesser of two evils, are infinitely less offensive than typical second hand smoke and may even help some people reduce or quit smoking, but be honest in your defense of them. They are still a way to deliver an harmful addictive substance into you body, aren't regulated for sh*t, allow people to do this in places they couldn't before and are perfect for marketing to the next generation of nicotine consumers (and the fruity flavor appeal to impressionable young people, especially women ... many of us remember the underage girl who would never try drinking a beer or hard liquor but decided "Say, these wine coolers are tasty ... it's like fruit punch, really, not an alcoholic drink!") .

I'd bet that for every person who used a vaporizer to help quit, 100 more users like them because they can smoke in clubs again. Again, a stat I pulled out of my ass that I'm comfortable using as a fact!

Plus, the biggest knock against e-cigarettes: they look absolutely moronic. There is no defense in this debate for that.

I personally don't want them banned, I just want people to be honest with their motives in the debate. Just say "I might use them to reduce my habit and I guess I like that it is removing a lot of the added harmful chemicals regular smoking has, but mainly I like them because I can smoke anywhere now and I don't stink as bad." That's not a bad thing. But jeez, just be honest. Regulate them to minors. Have clearly stated ingredients for the juice or whatever you call it. And still restrict their usage to areas where smoking is allowed only (that last one is just for me, because while I still prefer e-cigarette vapor 100 times to none over second hand smoke, I still hate that stupid scented crap. Like a bunch of women which bad fruity perfume on. Oh, and because I think it looks stupid and I like restricting stupid looking stuff. Add fedoras and beards on men under the age of 40, while you're at it)
 
2014-03-26 09:40:13 AM

YOU'RE ALL GOING TO DIE, BECAUSE SOMETHING YOU DO IS KILLING YOU.

 
2014-03-26 09:42:29 AM

GoldSpider: HotWingConspiracy: Responding to the will of their constituents?

[cdn.vanillaforums.com image 186x140]


Well good news, they'll be voted out if they aren't doing that.
 
2014-03-26 09:47:21 AM

HotWingConspiracy: Well good news, they'll be voted out if they aren't doing that.


"Won't somebody please think of the children?!?"

Problem solved.
 
2014-03-26 09:54:08 AM

Elegy: Ecigs are just another way for big tobacco to hook you


Just the opposite. Big Tobacco is what's keeping e-cigs being banned for obvious reasons.

/doesn't smoke anything
//annoyed that co-workers get to go on smoke breaks every 20 minutes
///try to go on vodka breaks and they get all pissed off
 
2014-03-26 09:57:02 AM

hardinparamedic: Because, in the end, that's what it is


You are so focused on sucking cock that you can't have a conversation without bringing up your love of sucking cock.

hardinparamedic: All snark aside, can you link to those studies? I'd be genuinely interested in their quality, impact, and source publication.


No, you wouldn't.  You're a lying asshole.  You have no interest in actual facts.  You just like sucking dick and biatching.
 
2014-03-26 09:58:52 AM

GoldSpider: HotWingConspiracy: Well good news, they'll be voted out if they aren't doing that.

"Won't somebody please think of the children?!?"

Problem solved.


You should reach out to the voters that hate children. If you've got a majority, your problematic notions of freedom will win the day.
 
2014-03-26 09:59:48 AM

autopsybeverage: 433: I don't know how wise it is to be inhaling vegetable oil (or whatever) either.  Sure, you can exhale it, but plenty was left behind.  Nicotine is crazy addictive, too.  You're pledging to suck the cock of your favorite vaporizer company until you put it down for good.  I don't think a company marketing a nicotine delivery device outside of gum and patches has that many scruples.  Nicotine is not good for a body.

There are many things that are not good for a body.  Not too many of those things are addictive drugs like nicotine.

Would you be putting vegetable oil in your lungs under regular circumstances?

Smoking sure is great, though.  Dammit!  Why must it be so awful for us!

Before you go white-knighting the gum snd patch manufacturers, please consider that 98% of smokers who attempt to quit using these two methods will be active consumers of cigarettes again within two years of the quit attempt, and they know it. They are selling snake oil.


Citation please.
I went on the patch in 94 and was on for 6 months and went off and been off since then. I have had cigars every couple months (keeps the mosquitos away when camping) and a handful of cigarettes since but have still been off.
 
2014-03-26 10:06:05 AM

Mugato: Just the opposite. Big Tobacco is what's keeping e-cigs being banned for obvious reasons.


Lol wat? Big tobacco wants ecig regulated like regular cigarettes. It's a way of regulating anyone out of the market that isn't big tobacco.

Amd if you're tired of your coworkers going outside for smoke breaks, what is keeping you from walking outside for a des hair break? Sounds like you have a problem and want to blame your coworkers for it. Classy.
 
2014-03-26 10:11:57 AM
Des air?

Fresh air. Go fark yourself autocorrect.
 
2014-03-26 10:16:06 AM

Elegy: Mugato: Just the opposite. Big Tobacco is what's keeping e-cigs being banned for obvious reasons.

Lol wat? Big tobacco wants ecig regulated like regular cigarettes. It's a way of regulating anyone out of the market that isn't big tobacco.

Amd if you're tired of your coworkers going outside for smoke breaks, what is keeping you from walking outside for a des hair break? Sounds like you have a problem and want to blame your coworkers for it. Classy.


Why would you think the tobacco industry wouldn't want to stamp out e-cigs? People are quitting tobacco for e-cigs.
 
2014-03-26 10:24:25 AM
Same old arguments.

Nicotine is addictive, but it is not ad addictive alone as it is inside a cigarette.  The tobacco in cigarettes contain additional alkaloids (notably anatabine, anabasine, nornicotine) that function as MAOIs (antidepressants) that, co-administered with the naturally occurring nicotine, greatly enhance the addictive properties because of the pleasure/reward mechanism.  E-liquids do not contain these alkaloids.  (There are two companies that I know of that do produce "whole tobacco alkaloid" E-liquid that is intended for those sensitive to the absence of these alkaloids who can't quit using regular E-liquid, but these are rare, more expensive, and not recommended to anyone who's fine with regular E-liquid.)  Absent these alkaloids however, nicotine in isolation is actually not nearly as addictive, and it is far easier to wean yourself off of nicotine altogether (if that is your goal) from a platform of E-cigarettes than it is from tobacco cigarettes.

As for what's in the E-liquid?  Well, I can't speak for the cigalikes put out by a bunch of different companies (including the major tobacco companies) but every single respectable maker of E-liquid (especially those who belong to a standards organisation like AEMSA, ECTA, ECITA, etc.) uses pharmaceutical grade (USP) bases (vegetable glycerine, propylene glycol, USP-grade (99.5%+ pure) nicotine) and food-grade flavourings that use only a propylene glycol, alcohol,or triacetin base.  There are a few that use essential oils that I'm aware of, but I'm not too sure about the safety of that, and try to avoid them myself just out of an abundance of caution.

Proponents of E-cigs raise red flags when they bring up pro- arguments?  Have you seen the sort of stuff the anti e-cig lobby have been throwing up?  "E-cigs are being marketed to kids!" "E-cigs contain deadly poison!"  "E-cigs contain antifreeze!"  (my particular favourite -- PG is also a water-line antifreeze because of it low freezing point, so yes, it's an antifreeze -- one you pour right in the water supply, not the poisonous stuff you buy for your car at gas stations.)  Our reaction is simply a reaction to their mis- and dis-information.  Especially with the latest NYT hit piece "Selling poison by the barrel" where the "journalist" neglects mentioning that stuff like toothpaste accounts for more than 1000 times the number of annual poisonings in the USA, or that the only person who has ever died from E-liquid drank it deliberately to commit suicide.

Do E-cigs need regulation?  Damn right they do.  So does E-liquid.  Nobody is debating that -- the debate is over how much.  But is there any question that E-cigs save lives and are far more effective at getting people to quit cigarettes than any other method to date by a very wide margin?  No.  There is zero question.  "More study is needed" is the worst you'll hear from even the most sceptical, but reputable and honest, health professionals, but even they will admit that they think they're "probably"  better than smoking.  Even the peer-reviewed studies that are coming to the fore more frequently these days state that E-cigarettes are orders of magnitude safer than tobacco.

/Ex-smoker of 3.5 years.
//Still vape because I enjoy it, and I've never felt better.  Best thing I've done for myself.
 
2014-03-26 10:26:39 AM
Big tobacco doesn't want e-cigs made illegal.  They want them highly regulated so the only people who can sell them are, by coincidence (and for our safety, I'm sure), owned by the big tobacco companies.
 
Displayed 50 of 300 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report