E-cigarettes: no indoor smoking ban planned in England despite WHO call

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: Psynic

Who is advocating for exposing children to nicotine?

Obviously, all those "vaping" in public places.

Nicotine free Ecigarettes Do Not expose children to nicotine.

I can not even begin to tell you the size of your ignorance on this subject.

I've read every comment you left in this thread and you are not only misinformed on what "nicotine" does, you also have no clue on its effects or dangers.

Nicotine is about as harmful as caffeine. In other words, its basically harmless unless you are drinking the stuff.

Nicotine is actually beneficial to the human brain.

E-ciggs do not pander to children. Smoking or doing anything in public is not pandering to children.

Vaping is very safe compared to tobacco use.

And everything you have typed in this thread shows you are 100% clueless on this topic.

E-ciggs "with nicotine" is not creating nicotine addicts...and even if it was, that is perfectly fine. Again, a simple nicotine addiction is the same as someone who is addicted to caffeine. Nothing more. The drugs are both almost identical. A man addicted to drinking soda or coffee is most likely at a much greater risk than someone using e-ciggs.


50% of ALL smokers die of Tabaco use related illness.

Your nonsense is insane. E-ciggs are potentially set to save over a billion lives in the next 80 years.

You complete and utter "uninformed" poppycock preacher.

To those readinging this-

If you smoke ciggs...research vaping. See what almost "all doctors" are saying (that it is at least a thousand times healthier no matter the possible unknown effects to come)

Save your life. Save your money. Vaping is cheaper (a 5th of the price of ciggs) and healthier.

AND morte pleasurable.

People like Psynic know zero about all of this. Do not trust his advice. SAVE your life and vape.

MM

originally posted by: Mr Mask

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: Psynic

E-ciggs are potentially set to save over a billion lives in the next 80 years.

" E-ciggs are potentially set to save over a billion lives in the next 80 years"



This is the sort of thing I can see happening but it's down to social norms will society promote vapor and allow it's use everywhere or will it get the same treatment as the passive smoke campaign if the later, then I think this promising cure, because that is what it is if you consider the alternative, will be lost.
The fact that they can be used anywhere is the main reason smokers are turning to them in my opinion

edit on 28-8-2014 by crostkev because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-8-2014 by crostkev because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-8-2014 by crostkev because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-8-2014 by crostkev because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-8-2014 by crostkev because: (no reason given)

originally posted by: crostkev

originally posted by: Xaphan
At least E-Cigarettes are legal in other countries. Here in Canada we have an overbearing nosy government that outright banned the nicotine E-Cigs. Makes perfect sense huh? Keep the unhealthy tobacco product legal and ban the healthier alternative

I'm really sorry to hear that my friend it seams complete madness from what you are saying.
In your opinion who are the people putting on the pressure to keep it illegal?
At first I felt the tobacco company had a hand in the demoralization of people who use vapor smoke, Then a comment was posted that the same company's are producing the liquid.
I've noticed on a label I have that it is produced in Ireland and they have mimicked the names of big brands.
The whole point of this thread is to try and gain useful information on the risks and benefits of there use good or bad.
It would also be nice to know exactly who is behind this product and what there true intentions are?

Some people theorize that it's tobacco companies, or the pharmaceutical companies who produce nicotine gum/patches etc. I personally don't think either have a hand in that, because if that were true the E-Cigarettes would be illegal in the USA as well.

The most likely explanation is the Canadian government doesn't want people switching to nicotine E-Cigarettes, because they make a killing by taxing the original tobacco cigarettes. The average price for a pack of cigarettes is $9 - $10 where I am. So needless to say, the idea of people switching over to a non-taxed easier/healthier alternative is a nightmare to them. All that lost revenue would cripple them. Alcohol is also taxed to hell and back here.

I do like this country, but we are very heavily taxed, and have a nosy nanny-government. Our political system is something that was heavily influenced by... well, I won't name any names, but they used to own us, and their damn Queen is still on our money

originally posted by: Mr Mask

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: Psynic

Who is advocating for exposing children to nicotine?

Obviously, all those "vaping" in public places.

Nicotine free Ecigarettes Do Not expose children to nicotine.

I can not even begin to tell you the size of your ignorance on this subject.


AND morte pleasurable.

Yes you do seem to have a real problem.

Thanks go out to ATS moderator things were getting a bit out of hand there.
the issue in this thread has been mostly a positive one.
There have been people speaking from personal experience about passive vapor smoke to what company's are involved in the production of the liquids.
I was sad to hear that its illegal in a modern western country to use vapor instead of tobacco (what's that all about).
We have yet to name any harmful substance other than nicotine and there is debate as to how harmful it really is.
I may have insulted some one who took my comments as a personal thing and once again sorry for any injury felt.
On the whole most people on the thread seem to agree this is a good option for those who can't quit yet.
There has been mention that pharmacy and doctors are already in discussion over the roll out of these products by the NHS in the UK.
So all in all this has been a good discussion and I'd like to thank all for the S&F's I appreciate them .
This is my fist thread so thanks again this has been a good read

is this a gov don't do this coz it will kill ya but we don't want to pay to keep you alive thing?

so a heart attack from not smoking is better than one that does smoke?

oh! i eat bricks! i have stomach cancer, that guy smokes, he sucks!

kiss my butt.

well i just looked at the bloke and my toes fell off!

my sister in law gave me diabetes.

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Mr Mask

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: Psynic

Who is advocating for exposing children to nicotine?

Obviously, all those "vaping" in public places.

Nicotine free Ecigarettes Do Not expose children to nicotine.

I can not even begin to tell you the size of your ignorance on this subject.


AND morte pleasurable.

Yes you do seem to have a real problem.

Sorry, was rushing a reply before jumping on the truck. Typos are fun and all.

But facts are far more interesting on this subject.

E-Vape is going to save millions of lives. And it is most likely "almost" harmless.

And cheaper.

And more pleasurable.

And tasty.

And yummy.

And clean.

It is also the best chance at survival for millions addicted to a product designed to kill its users.

OH and as for passive vaping or public use on private property? Hey, owners can do as they please. I'm all for a proprietor's rights.

MM

originally posted by: Mr Mask

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Mr Mask

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: Psynic

Who is advocating for exposing children to nicotine?

Obviously, all those "vaping" in public places.

Nicotine free Ecigarettes Do Not expose children to nicotine.

I can not even begin to tell you the size of your ignorance on this subject.


AND morte pleasurable.

Yes you do seem to have a real problem.

Sorry, was rushing a reply before jumping on the truck. Typos are fun and all.

But facts are far more interesting on this subject.

Too bad you have none.

Debating addiction with addicts is an exercise in futility.

a reply to: Psynic

Didn't you say earlier you quit smoking with the aid of e-cigs? First you said:

Ecigarettes WITH nicotine should be banned completely.

Then you said:

I couldn't have quit smoking cigarettes if it wasn't for Ecigarettes.

I think you're confused. Really confused. So confused in fact, you don't even know what you're talking about. So is it e-cigs that should be banned or nicotine? Which is it? And what do you have to say about the 2000 chemicals in cigarettes that are carcinogenic and not the nicotine? Your "off topic" post was removed so I'm assuming you said nothing intelligent about it.

Ecigarettes don't HAVE to contain nicotine.

Is that really so hard for you to understand?

a reply to: Psynic

No, they don't have to have nicotine, but it's NOT the nicotine that kills you. Why can't you understand that?

originally posted by: FlySolo
a reply to: Psynic

No, they don't have to have nicotine, but it's NOT the nicotine that kills you. Why can't you understand that?

"Research over the last decade has identified nicotines carcinogenic potential in animal models and cell structure".

en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: FlySolo
a reply to: Psynic

No, they don't have to have nicotine, but it's NOT the nicotine that kills you. Why can't you understand that?

"Research over the last decade has identified nicotines carcinogenic potential in animal models and cell structure".

en.wikipedia.org...

Again, you demonstrate your lack of understanding on the subject and make yourself look foolish. Before calling me illiterate, perhaps you could brush up on you 'reading comprehension' skills.

First, why leave out the important part?

The IARC has not evaluated nicotine in its standalone form or assigned it to an official carcinogen group. No epidemiological evidence supports that nicotine alone acts as a carcinogen in the formation of human cancer

Second,

Indirectly, nicotine increases cholinergic signalling (and adrenergic signalling in the case of colon cancer[53]), thereby impeding apoptosis (programmed cell death),

Indirectly means...

N-Nitrosonornicotine (NNN) is a nitrosamine produced during the curing and processing of tobacco and has been classified by the IARC as a Group 1 carcinogen.[1] Although no adequate studies of the relationship between exposure to NNN and human cancer have been reported, there is sufficient evidence that NNN causes cancer in experimental animals.

NNN is found in a variety of tobacco products including smokeless tobacco like chewing tobacco and snuff,[2] cigarettes, and cigars. It is present in smoke from cigars and cigarettes, in the saliva of people who chew betel quid with tobacco, and in the saliva of oral-snuff users. NNN is produced by the nitrosation of nornicotine during the curing, aging, processing, and smoking of tobacco.[3] Roughly half of the NNN originates in the unburnt tobacco, with the remainder being formed during burning.

So, is NNN found in liquid nicotine form? No it isn't.

Table 2: Analysis of the electronic cigarette liquid used in the study
Analysis Quantity
Abbreviations. ND, not detected; NNN, N'-nitrosonornicotine; NNK, 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanone.

Nicotine 17.7 mg/ml
Propylene glycol 389 mg/ml
Glycerol 751 mg/ml
Diethylene glycol ND
Aldehydes (total) 18.17 μg/ml
Acetaldehyde 8.51 μg/ml
Crotonaldehyde 6.33 μg/ml
Formaldehyde 3.33 μg/ml
Diacetyl ND
Tobacco-Specific Nitrosamines (total) 2.08 ng/ml
NNN ND

Not Detected.
source

And that study was not done on vegetable glycerin which is exactly what I use. Chemical free, just like I said. Non-toxic.

a reply to: Psynic

Nicotine is found natural occurring in some foods. It is also being studied for its therapeutic benefits. NOT smoking but the ingredient nicotine. Even alcohol in moderation has benefits. Nicotine is so demonized as it is associated with cigarettes.

Vegetable Nicotine in ng/g g per 1µg nicotine
Cauliflower 16.8 59.5
Eggplant (Aubergine) 100.0 10
Potatoes 7.1 140
Green tomatoes 42.8 23.4
Ripe tomatoes 4.3 233.0
Pureed tomatoes 52.0 19.2
1µg of nicotine is the equivalent of sitting in a vaguely smoke filled room for three hours. Smoking a cigarette results in about 1mg absorbed nicotine. In other words, 100g of eggplant contains 0.01mg of nicotine, and 10kg of eggplant is equivalent to one cigarette. However, absorbtion rates from ingestion are low and nicotine is quickly metabolised, so the effect isn't nearly the same.

(I cannot get the list to line up)
Nicotine in Vegetables

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Mr Mask

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Mr Mask

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: Psynic

Who is advocating for exposing children to nicotine?

Obviously, all those "vaping" in public places.

Nicotine free Ecigarettes Do Not expose children to nicotine.

I can not even begin to tell you the size of your ignorance on this subject.


AND morte pleasurable.

Yes you do seem to have a real problem.

Sorry, was rushing a reply before jumping on the truck. Typos are fun and all.

But facts are far more interesting on this subject.

Too bad you have none.

Debating addiction with addicts is an exercise in futility.

I'm still wondering where you presume the right to tell other people what they can and can't put in their bodies. Regardless of the health consequences of the substance, you nor anyone else owns my body. I own my body, and I can put what I want into it.

Oh by the way, I've never smoked a cigarette in my life (a few cigars at times, but maybe like 10 total in my lifetime). I just get upset when some higher than thou type comes along and starts declaring that there should be laws outlawing this or that substance for "our health" like somehow THEY obtained the right to dictate how someone else lives their lives.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Mr Mask

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Mr Mask

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: Psynic

Who is advocating for exposing children to nicotine?

Obviously, all those "vaping" in public places.

Nicotine free Ecigarettes Do Not expose children to nicotine.

I can not even begin to tell you the size of your ignorance on this subject.


AND morte pleasurable.

Yes you do seem to have a real problem.

Sorry, was rushing a reply before jumping on the truck. Typos are fun and all.

But facts are far more interesting on this subject.

Too bad you have none.

Debating addiction with addicts is an exercise in futility.

I'm still wondering where you presume the right to tell other people what they can and can't put in their bodies. Regardless of the health consequences of the substance, you nor anyone else owns my body. I own my body, and I can put what I want into it.

I couldn't care LESS what you "put in your body".

I have advocated FOR Non-nicotine Ecigarettes as a means of quitting smoking.

That they should be banned so that Vapeheads can use their 'Drug of Choice' is an infringement on the rights of others, and a setback for all cigarette smokers who want to quit smoking cigarettes.

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Mr Mask

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Mr Mask

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: Psynic

Who is advocating for exposing children to nicotine?

Obviously, all those "vaping" in public places.

Nicotine free Ecigarettes Do Not expose children to nicotine.

I can not even begin to tell you the size of your ignorance on this subject.


AND morte pleasurable.

Yes you do seem to have a real problem.

Sorry, was rushing a reply before jumping on the truck. Typos are fun and all.

But facts are far more interesting on this subject.

Too bad you have none.

Debating addiction with addicts is an exercise in futility.

I'm still wondering where you presume the right to tell other people what they can and can't put in their bodies. Regardless of the health consequences of the substance, you nor anyone else owns my body. I own my body, and I can put what I want into it.

I couldn't care LESS what you "put in your body".

I have advocated FOR Non-nicotine Ecigarettes as a means of quitting smoking.

That they should be banned so that Vapeheads can use their 'Drug of Choice' is an infringement on the rights of others, and a setback for all cigarette smokers who want to quit smoking cigarettes.

How is that a setback for people wanting to quit smoking cigarettes? If someone wants to put nicotine in their vaporizer, how does that affect someone else who wants to just vape without nicotine?

I've written a lot of articles about e-cigs and the only chemical contained in most of them is propylene glycol, something commonly found in food products. The only thing they aren't sure about is whether or not the nicotine is passed onto others when someone exhales, but since nicotine is about as harmful as caffeine it's a moot issue as far as I'm concerned.

I agree that they could be the end of #ty tobacco altogether, and I can attest to their efficacy since it's the only smoking alternative I've tried that actually works. But one big problem at present is the lack of reuglation regarding their contents, which can easily vary from cartridge to cartridge.

The trillion dollar tobacco industry isn't just going to step aside on them though, unfortunately.

a reply to: Sharted This is a good point, just were will the big tobacco company's position themselves on this, as i have mentioned before the uptake on this product is huge.