We may use cookies to help customize your experience, including performing
analytics and serving ads.
Learn More
Forums → WEPR → E-Cigarettes
| 36 | 5108 |
"Tobacco is a dirty weed. I like it.
It satisfies no normal need. I like it.
It makes you thin, it makes you lean,
It takes the hair right off your bean
It's the worst darn stuff I've ever seen.
I like it. "
~Graham Lee Hemminger, Tobacco
E-cigarettes - tricky little buggers that are the latest fad. Battery powered, vaporizing a mixture of nicotine and flavourings or a vapour without the nicotine. Proclaimed as the invention that will save smokers from a choking, painful, shortened life.
Well, they sound very tantalising, but should they be cracked down upon harder than what is currently the norm? It would make a very good alternative for smokers, and definitely go a long way in helping them quit overall. But it glamorises smoking to a new degree, much like the Malboro Man. They're relatively cheaper, have a much less stained reputation, and are well....sexier? They're manufactured in newer, savvier flavours, Cherry, Pina Colada, Peach Schnapps just to name a few, and undoubtedly it draws in the curious, especially the young. And whilst undeniably they're much healthier than a pack of Camels, lighting something on fire and inhaling the smoke for years will still have health repercussions. And studies are still in short supply since they've only recently came into the limelight.
So, your thoughts?
- 36 Replies
It was recently found in NL or the EU or somesuch that so far at least, too little evidence has been produced to show that they are not harmful -- potentially to a degree similar or equal to just smoking tobacco.
And so sales or advertizing or so were curbed pending such. Sorry for being conveniently undetailed about it, I didn't follow it more closely. I'm sure e.g. a Google News search may corroborate.
(In fact a search now on +"e-cigarettes" +EU yields an amazing nr. of results criticizing such proposed measures, from the looks of it not rarely quite vehemently. I guess either the EU must have it all wrong, or the industry is fully up in arms about it.)
This coming from a devoted chain smoker, btw, just so we all know where we're coming from Would I claim it's good for you? Nope.
It would make a very good alternative for smokers, and definitely go a long way in helping them quit overall.
Not exactly. Their main advantage is that, when properly manufactured and regulated, they do not damage lung tissue or induce oncogenesis. The addictive quality is still there, but it's also in the gum, and the patch.
lighting something on fire and inhaling the smoke for years will still have health repercussions.
Most (if not all) of them function by electrically heating a liquid, so no smoke is involved. I'm in favour of these devices, as I can actually have a conversation with someone who "smokes" in person without being overcome by noxious fumes.
it's funny, my college campus has just banned e-cigs (for no real reason I might add). I'm glad someone is talking about it.
so far, if it's harmful, it's significantly less so than regular cigarretes due to the fact that it's liquid vapor.
-Blade
I think, as an new 18 year old here in the USA, that they are an awesome alternative to real cigarettes. You can get them with as much or as little nicotine as you want (I vape 12 milligrams per 3 fluid ounces, whereas the guy who owns the shop I buy from vapes 26 mg/3 fl. oz.). They are also useful in other ways. You can add caffeine to the liquid, and it absorbs the same way that the nicotine does. The shop I buy from is currently in the process of perfecting that system. Also, people who require medicinal marijuana can get THC based E-Juice so that they can toke in public without people flipping a ****.
I do still smoke my Camel Blues every now and then, though.
they do not damage lung tissue
This one I'm not sure about, but,
or induce oncogenesis
so far, if it's harmful, it's significantly less so than regular cigarretes due to the fact that it's liquid vapor.
To repeat myself, the current position this side of the pond seems to be that so far, none of these industry claims or assumptions have any basis in studied fact.
It was recently found in NL or the EU or somesuch that so far at least, too little evidence has been produced to show that they are not harmful
because of this are e-sigarets since 1 jan. 2014 prohibited until 18 year here in NL. the e-sigaret is more healty then a sigaret. but it's still no good for you. as nicho said. inhaling smoke is never good...
They're relatively cheaper,
my brother stoped normal smoking and went use the e-sigaret... befor smoking costed him 7 euro per day. now it costs him 6,45 euro for a full week. he doesn't smoke less then befor...
anyway to come to nicho's point of what do i think:
i think they are a wonderful invention for people to stop smoking. much much better then those stickers. =P
however because of the flavours it does attract children. but every parent that allowes their child to use it, simply does not feel any responsibility as a parent... and they are to blame. the kids just dont know any better. it's something fancy that they want....
protect children from smoking, both e-smoking and normal smoking...
but it's still no good for you. as nicho said. inhaling smoke is never good...
Smoke is not an issue. It's just a heated vapour that looks like smoke.
i think they are a wonderful invention for people to stop smoking. much much better then those stickers.
I have to disagree with this. This product is certainly not designed with that intention. It simulates the use of an actual cigarette but without all of the negative social connotations, legal restrictions, and health risks related to smoking. It would have to be at least as addictive as tobacco.
however because of the flavours it does attract children. but every parent that allowes their child to use it, simply does not feel any responsibility as a parent... and they are to blame. the kids just dont know any better. it's something fancy that they want....
I can't agree with their decision to add flavouring agents. It might promote the transition from actual cigarettes, but it shouldn't be necessary.
Here in Ksa, they are considered douchy and show offy.
Then what are cigarettes?
Smoke is not an issue. It's just a heated vapour that looks like smoke.
uhmm no.
the liquid gets vaporized and you inhale this smoke.
I have to disagree with this. This product is certainly not designed with that intention.
youtube wasn't designed as a video website but as a dating website...
stuff does not always get used for where it is designed for..
a car isn't designed to drive over people. but it sometimes gets used for that purpose.
this is a very weak reason to disagree for.
It simulates the use of an actual cigarette but without all of the negative social connotations, legal restrictions, and health risks related to smoking. It would have to be at least as addictive as tobacco.
you think absolutely no health risks... you think that because it once was promoted like that by the producers and inventors of it... but they cant make it hard that it has absolutely no health risks...
they have done their job well tho, befor it got out that it might not be so super friendly for your health to use it. they got the vast majority of the people already believing and acknowledging and even promoting that their product is health risk free.
I can't agree with their decision to add flavouring agents. It might promote the transition from actual cigarettes, but it shouldn't be necessary.
why not? their are also flavored normal cigarets... cherry, cola, chocolet... you name it. in the middle east and asia their are many places where you can have a smoke with some kind of flavor. it's even a big part of some cultures in this world to have a flavored smoke...
or did you think that waterpipes are only used by weed and hash smokers FishPreferred?
uhmm no.
the liquid gets vaporized and you inhale this smoke.
Water vapour is no more synonymous with smoke than hailstones are with dust.
youtube wasn't designed as a video website but as a dating website...
stuff does not always get used for where it is designed for..
a car isn't designed to drive over people. but it sometimes gets used for that purpose.
this is a very weak reason to disagree for.
In this case, it is best to read the paragraph as a whole. By considering each part individually, you've evidently lost sight of the context altogether.
Much like its predecessors, the product in question supplies nicotine (an addictive substance) to its consumers. It fills the same psychological role and provides many of the same cues as a cigarette. If it's more convenient to use and comes in a variety of flavours, it becomes even more attractive to addicts. What reason have you to expect this to be easier to let go of?
As to health risks...
but without all of the
There are actually five words here, six if you include the compound "without". Hopefully, by now you are aware of the distinction between "smoke" and "steam", so you should be more than capable of understanding why I say that one is less harmful in this sense.
The jury is still out on whether or not nicotine and the other liquids in the vapors cause cancer. If they do, then ecigs will only lead to people picking a different poison.
They certainly make it easier for people to get their fixes. I don't think these things are really for helping people to stop the drug intake....just a seemingly healthier alternative. I'm in class all day in auditorium style seats. Instead of going out for a smoke during a break the esmokers sit there and partake right in the middle of class (they try to hide it, but everyone knows what they're doing). It's more of an enabler than it is a helpful tool for stopping. If the chemical vapors do happen to be problematic, then it just opens up the second hand vapor smokers to more of a problem than when they were inhaling the flame ash. It's just so much easier to hide and less noticeable.
If they're not problematic, then they're a great thing to have... but if they do have problems associated with them, then they're only catalyzing the problem for those specific problems at a faster rate than their original fire based counterparts. I guess we'll find out in a few years
Water vapour is no more synonymous with smoke than hailstones are with dust.
you think it is water? your wrong.
nobody would pay 6,45 a week if you can refill it at home.
sorry your wrong.. very wrong.
what they're getting at is that smoke has all sorts of flame by products that heated liquids do not. The ash and soot are a major player in what makes smoking cigarettes bad for the body. Those PARTICULAR (gettit? particles...) aspects of smoking are not found in ecigs... but that doesn't mean that all of chemicals are gone from the mixture.
you think it is water? your wrong.
How do you keep missing the point? Nicotine is a toxin. a single gram of pure nicotine can kill an adult, even one with high tolerance. The liquid contents stored in the "electronic cigarette" consist of a small quantity of nicotine dissolved in a solution along with any other agents, such as the flavouring. This solution is generally known to the layman as water.
You must be logged in to post a reply!