Big tobacco take on e-cigarette's health issue - Page 2
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 42
Like Tree52Likes

Thread: Big tobacco take on e-cigarette's health issue

  1. #11
    PV Master Verified Member
    ECF Veteran
    Racehorse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    7,101
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Dalr is a fellow vaper. Let's remember that before we call somebody a troll?

    We have some resident chemists etc. here on the board who have, in the past, admitted there are a few things they find worrisome about ecigs, but can't say for sure. Just because they have 5,000+ posts, are they spared the "troll" label?

    I think it's going to look bad for us as a community if nobody can EVER bring up possible problems they see with vaping. We will then be as close minded as the ANTZ, right?

    As a person who is open minded and capable of some critical thinking, I like to think of myself as open to information.......I can afterwards do my own research, and then go to my doctor, my friends who are pharmacists and chemists, etc. and say "what does this theory sound like to you? Possible or not possible?"

    I mean, the ONLY confirmed research we have so far is that which has been done, with actual test subjects. Everything else is still on the table and up in the air, isn't it?
    bcme and kimran73 like this.


    TC's given: ~9/27/12~ ~ 11/17/2012~~04/01/2013/TC rec'd: 03/09/2013

  2. #12
    Ultra Member Verified Member WillyZee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    2,858

    Default

    are you sure your buddy doesn't work in tobacco sales disguised as lab research?

    If you can't beat 'em, join 'em: U.S. tobacco giant Lorillard buys e-cigarette company Blu Ecig in $135m deal.
    Smoke Free since Sept. 22nd 2013 ... Keep Calm & Vape On

  3. #13
    Ultra Member Verified Member KurrptSenate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    1,788

    Default

    since the temperature of the atomizer isn't regulated that makes the nicotine more dangerous.

    ...

    ...

    that makes no sense.
    2ndChoice likes this.

  4. #14
    PV Master Verified Member
    ECF Veteran
    Racehorse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    7,101
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wv2win View Post
    I find it hard to believe that the studies done by university researchers, such as at Drexel University in Philadelphia, are inferior to the testing done by tobacco companies.
    I didn't see anything specific in the study that was done at Drexel on exactly how nicotine molecules are vaporized DIFFERENTLY on different temperature atomizers and the effect of consistency of atomizer temperatures on nicotine eliquids? (ie. esp. the "burnt" hit?)

    That was what the researcher above was futzing around with.....maybe I missed reading that part of the Drexel study, can somebody link me to the appropriate test results on that?

    Unless I missed reading that part.


    TC's given: ~9/27/12~ ~ 11/17/2012~~04/01/2013/TC rec'd: 03/09/2013

  5. #15
    Full Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Racehorse View Post
    That's not exactly a good question, since BT had no problems poisioning us in the past.

    According to my Dr. unless you have certain health problems, nicotine is not bad for you. So nicotine molecules getting stuck in throat or going deeper doesn't bother me per se. Flavorings and such, however, do worry me. I would love to know what the actual cell damage is when getting hit with eliquid, etc.

    However, switzerland researchers tend to be on cutting edge of these things, I will give your friend a wee bit of credit since he is talking about "how" the nicotine is actually vaporized on the atty. I DO agree that BT has the very best testing equipment, there is no doubt in my mind about that, they have it all figured out, don't kid yourselves.

    Since there is no research proving what your friend said is true or false yet, we can't just toss his thoughts, IMHO.

    Bottom line for me is that I have to stay off the cigarettes, which due to their combustible nature, I am quite sure are worse than ecigs. HOw much worse I do not know yet, but I know they are worse.

    My whole feeling about vaping, from the very start, has been "less is more". I don't vape at super high temps, I spend at least part of the day vaping unflavored nic solution, and I don't vape at higher nicotine levels than I really *need*. Sometimes, at night, I even vape ZERO NIC solution with no flavorings.

    I don't think it's right calling somebody a troll every time somebody muses on the safety of ecigs. If it ws totally safe it would not be called harm reduction. It would be called harm free. As for friends, I have friends who designed space station freedom, and researchers in aerospace, and you can be DARN SURE I take what they say about aircraft quite seriously. That is because they have extensive specialized training that I do not have, and if they have a tidbit of info to offer, I'm going to at least liisten.
    THANK YOU for this.

    I have no knowledge in chemistry or the medical field. This is why I'm looking for a second opinion from people with actual knowledge and competences. I know there are many people of such skills here, that's why I'm asking.

    - Is there any truth about nicotine altering itself at high temperatures? If so, can it be harmful?
    - Is there any risk associated with vapor drops getting stuck in the throat (for how long?) or going into the alveolars (?) of the lungs? What's the worse that could happen?

    Now let's get a deep breath and let some steam off :-) Happy vaping!
    bcme likes this.

  6. #16
    PV Master Verified Member
    ECF Veteran
    Racehorse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    7,101
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    I am merely open to any and all information when it comes to my behaviors and how they relate to my health.

    I use real M.D.s for my doctors, but my main guy is a Functional Medicine M.D./Internist.

    Those are the people that don't just hand out pharmaceutical pills....the specialty is for those who encourage their patients to use lifestyle changes to improve their health.

    I was able to lower my (very high) cholesterol by almost 100 points just using lifestyle changes.....a feat my doctor says has shown better results than ALL his patients on statin drugs. Yes, i"m proud of myself.

    So i am always open to ideas.....I don't believe in putting down somebody's idea unless you can prove it wrong OR you have direct experience and expertise in the subject matter and can show that they are wrong.

    There are always things we can do to minimize our health risks. Always.

    So, I took up vaping as harm reduction to get away from smoking. But that doesn't mean I'm not going to keep researching how I can minimize my risks with vaping. That would just be silly.
    bcme and kimran73 like this.


    TC's given: ~9/27/12~ ~ 11/17/2012~~04/01/2013/TC rec'd: 03/09/2013

  7. #17
    Ultra Member Verified Member
    ECF Veteran
    flowerpots's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    my desk
    Posts
    1,411

    Default

    I think your friend may believe what he is telling you, otherwise, he is not a good friend - and you say he is, so my guess is that he believes this to be true. I don't doubt that they are busy bees trying to find some plausible reason(s) to ban vaping, even if it makes no sense logically, chemically, or medically. He is probably stuck in that environment and affected by it. There are thousands of reported chemicals in analogs (cigarettes). Whether you have a chemistry or medical background or not, this begs the question, how can a liquid and delivery device that are not on fire, and do not deliver those chemicals, be worse? Cigarettes contain carbon monoxide, tar, and known carcinogens (tested, double tested, confirmed). Even with the lack of evidence we have with vaping, especially over decades, to follow vapers and their health status over time, people who quit smoking and vape report better breathing capacity, increased vitality, better overall general health. I don't think this can be dismissed as subjective with so many people saying the same thing. You will hear strong opinions here in support of vaping and against BT and BP, so the bias is on both sides (vapers and those opposed) - I don't see it being any different on either side in that respect, but it's obvious authorities are trying to hijack this burgeoning community and take the money for themselves. That is a big difference with selfish ulterior motives that fuel the fervor.

    There is a decent amount of info on this site about what BP and BT are doing and have done in the past. I will try to link some threads here for you explore.

    Here is a list of chemical additives in cigarettes. Most of us could not tell what they are, where they are derived from, or what problems they cause, but just the sheer quantity of chemicals added in and of itself is enough to cause alarm:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._in_cigarettes

    Helpful threads:

    CDC keeps lobbying for FDA deeming reg by misrepresenting survey data on cigar use, falsely claiming cigars are as addictive and harmful as cigarettes
    Last edited by flowerpots; 10-28-2013 at 10:09 PM.
    Man is the only creature that refuses to be what he is - Albert Camus

  8. #18
    PV Master Verified Member
    ECF Veteran
    Racehorse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    7,101
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by flowerpots View Post
    I don't doubt that they are busy bees trying to find some plausible reason(s) to ban vaping
    Huh?

    BT has absolutely no interest in banning vaping. They are IN the ecig biz now.

    Big Pharma, on the other hand, does want to ban vaping, and any other THR (tobacco harm reduction) methods.
    Big Pharma wants to call ecigs a medical device NRT..........instead of THR (tobacco harm reduction). The FDA works for Big Pharma.

    This is about money anyway. Who gets it. IMHO, the way this will come down is that BT $$ will help at least in the beginning stages of the fight.

    I'm sure BT has thrown GOBS of money at this already, but are playing it close to their chest. To me, it's always a good move to peek at somebody else's poker hand if you get the opportunity.

    And that is really all the OP did. Tell us a little about BTs poker hand.


    Maybe there aren't any poker players here, but it sure is damn stupid to turn down that peek, and chase the person providing it off by calling them a troll.

    If in the course of wanting to sell ecigs BT wants to do studies on what heating elements/coils are not going to give off dangerous by-products. I say let them do that. Let them spend the $$. We can't even get juice vendors to spring a few lab tests, even though they can actually afford it.

    Because this stuff WILL have to be proved even for ecigs to become an accepted consumer product, or even regulated, but still "legal" product.

    This could have been an interesting discussion, but instead, it's just become the usual knee jerker.
    Last edited by Racehorse; 10-29-2013 at 05:50 AM.
    bcme and Sundodger like this.


    TC's given: ~9/27/12~ ~ 11/17/2012~~04/01/2013/TC rec'd: 03/09/2013

  9. #19
    Super Member Verified Member
    ECF Veteran

    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Chattanooga, Tn, USA
    Posts
    515

    Default

    Ok, call me rude, crude and insensitive. I believe it was Ronald Regan that said "Trust but verify". In this post I am being ask to give credibility to a private conversation between two individuals that I don't even know occurred, and give "scientific credibility" to a person I don't even know if he/she exist, who is employed by a BT firm, maybe in Switzerland, that has yet to be named. Give me a break. I'll be back when this is published by a valid or even invalid source.
    e-pipeman likes this.

  10. #20
    Ultra Member Verified Member
    ECF Veteran
    flowerpots's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    my desk
    Posts
    1,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Racehorse View Post
    Huh? BT has absolutely no interest in banning vaping. They are IN the ecig biz now.
    Agree, disagree - good debates and discussions will bring in all sides of the subject.

    Yes, BT is in the e-cig business, but only for itself. It's no doubt in my mind that they will still lobby and push to monopolize the market with their products with biased testing to ban vaping as we know it now. It will either come in the form of providing misleading information such as what the OP stated, that the inconsistencies in current deliver devices are of concern, or that the batteries/mods we use are questionable in safety, or some other spin. But, they will try to oust what options we have, thereby giving consumers only their products to purchase
    Man is the only creature that refuses to be what he is - Albert Camus

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks