E-Cigs are really looked down upon by recent quitters.

[circeseye]

If you want to flame me incessantly, I'll understand

I'm one of the militant .......s on the forum you linked to, that quit the hard way as you like to put it.

Overall, I'm not a fan of the PV, or e-cig, or whatever terminology we wish to use, not because I don't think it can be successfully used to quit smoking, but because of the attitude that some PV'ers have displayed on our forums.

Despite our url and name "QuitSmokingMessageBoard.com", we really are a site that advocates the freedom from nicotine, not just no longer smoking analogs. And yes, we do accept NRT as a method of quitting, providing of course that the intention is to get off the NRT eventually. We are not the Freedom boards who advocate that cold turkey is the ONLY way to go.

But getting back on topic, we've seen most people who advocate the PV's to be advocating them as a replacement to analog, as opposed to actually getting off nicotine as a whole. We're not a bunch of bitter bastards who are angry because we've deprived ourselves of nicotine...we're a bunch of joyous bastards because we're free.

I've read this thread, and I'd be interested to know the results of any study comparing other quit methods with PV's...although I don't think that the rates of PV's will be any better than other forms of NRT. I think they'll show similar numbers to NRT for going back to analogs, and similar numbers of people who aren't smoking but addicted to the NRT.

For our quit smoking home, we don't see the choice to change the nicotine delivery method to be any different from still smoking. Yes, its healthier than an analog (or at least probably is), but it doesn't fit into our beliefs of freedom from nicotine.

If anyone thinks I'm being disrespectful, I do apologise in advance...I'm not trying to come into your "home" and tell you that you guys all suck and that our way is the way you have to go...I'm just trying to help anyone that cares to understand why the e-cig evangelists tend to be bashed around in our forums. And as I stated in the beginning, if you want to bash me around, please feel free...I've got think skin

Good luck all, and I hope that everyone here who wishes to will remain free from analogs, and someday be free from nicotine too.

Sammy

I have been free of intentionally inhaling dangerous chemicals and addictive poisons for 8 Months, 4 Weeks, 1 Day, 16 hours and 18 minutes (271 days). I have avoided using 4,075 nicotine delivery devices, giving me an extra $1,740.76 to enjoy 2 Weeks, 3 hours and 35 minutes of life I would not have had.

i understand what your saying so ill give you my story if you dont mind. i have been smoking for 30 + years and have tryed all the other stop smoking items and have all been bad in one way or another for me. 3 weeks ago i got my ecig and i havent touched a cigarette since. and yes im using the ecig to be completely free of nic. i started with 24mg and am now at 8mg. i will be free of nic in 2 more weeks and then im done just have to ween myself off the habit of the act of smoking. this ecig has and is to me a life saver and for alot of others as well. i got my entire family off cigs with the ecig and there all doing the same thing as me.
another plus with the ecig is it can sit in a drawer and if the need or craving comes all ill have to do is grab a no nic cart to kill the craving. i know this might not sound good but its way better then going back to cigs when a craving hits.

and yes probably at least half are using it as a replacement period and have no plan of quitting the smoking part but its still better then smoking cigs.

give this devise a chance all in all it is really one of the best things that has ever came out thats not controlled by pharmacy or tobacco

[Samalie0]

If this statement is the truth, then why aren't others on that site more vocal towards people using the patch, or gum, or other NRT's? Because I've only seen that bad attitude BS directed at people who vape!

To answer quickly, because there is independant research out there showing that NRT's are (mostly) safe, and provide a slightly increased chance of success over cold turkey for nicotine cessation (although there is arguement on that fact too since most of the studies cannot do a true double-blind study, since lets face it nicotine addicts can tell when they're not getting nicotine but a placebo in a study). But in truth, there are those on our site that look down upon those using NRT as well, and feel that Cold Turkey is the only way to go, and the only way to be successful quitting smoking in the long term. While I don't share that opinion, I always encourage people to give up their NRT as soon as they possibly can.

We smack around PV's at this point in time because there is no research shoing either of safety or effectiveness of PV's for nicotine cessation. If the research changes, so will we.

give this devise a chance all in all it is really one of the best things that has ever came out thats not controlled by pharmacy or tobacco

First of all, congrats on not smoking cigs

But I just had to comment, on the above...

First of all, there is no way to artifically syntehsize nicotine...so the nicotine you are ingested is coming from big tobacco, and probably extracted by big pharmacy (although I could be wrong about Pharma being involved in the extraction).

I cannot find my source at this moment in time, but I disctinctly remember reading it during my own research on nicotine addiction in my stop smoking plan, but there was a memo put out by the tobacco companies, who were concerned over the slowdown of new smokers starting up the habit. The article went on to suggest that the tobacco companies need to find a nicotine delivery method which does not carry the stigmata of smoking tobacco in order to survive as companies in the future.

I will hunt for the source document as soon as I actually wake up enough to think clearly...but suffice it to say that you are still supporting the tobacco growers so long as you are using nicotine cartridges in your PV.

Sammy

[Samalie0]

From "Research Planning Memorandum on the Nature of the Tobacco Business and the Crucial Role of Nicotine Therein". (Damnit, I'm a new user, I can't post the URL - I apologise to the admins for working around this limitation - the source address with the original scanned document is at tobaccodocuments(Dot)org/landman/501877121-7129.html)

The whole thing is a REALLY interesting read, circa 1972. Here are the two quotes that speak strongest in my opinion, especially in relation to PV's...

Critics of tobacco products increasingly allege that smoking is dangerous to the health of the smoker....If, as proposed above, nicotine is the _sine qua non_ of smoking, and if we meekly accept the allegations of our critics and move towards reduction or elimination of nicotine from our products, then we shall eventually liquidate our business. If we intend to remain in business and our business is the manufacture and sale of dosage forms of nicotine, then at some point we must take a stand...we should in all ways scientifically validate and speak to the beneficial effects and "satisfactions" derived from use of nicotine. Essentially all commercial drugs give rise to some undesireable side effects, but we continue to use them with great benefit to humanity because of their overriding beneficial effects. Might we not take a leave from that book in our approach to nicotine? Unless we do, our long-term prospects become unattractive.

If our business is fundamentally that of supplying nicotine in useful dosage form, why is it really necessary that allegedly harmful "tar" accompany that nicotine? There should be some simpler, "cleaner", more efficient and direct way to provide the desired nicotine dosage than the present system involving combustion of tobacco or even chewing of tobacco. A conventional 1000 mg. tobacco rod containing about 20 mg. of nicotine is smoked to produce only about 1.3 mg of smoke nicotine, accompanied by about 20 mg. of "tar" and 20 mg. of gas phase matter; and part of the 1.3 mg of smoke nicotine is lost to the smoker via exhaled smoke -- ,surely an inefficient nicotine delivery system. It should be possible to obtain pure nicotine by synthesis- or from high-nicotine tobacco. It should then be possible, using modifications of techniques develqped by the pharmkeutical and other industries, to deliver that nicotine to the user in efficient, effective, attractive dosage form, accompanied by no "tar", gas phase, or other allegedly harmful substances. The dosage form could incorporate various flavorants, enhancers, and like desirable additives, and would be designed to deliver the minimum effective amount of nicotine at the desired release-rate to supply the "satisfaction" desired by the user. Such a product would maximize the benefits derived from nicotine, minimize allegedly undesirable over-dosage side effects from nicotine, and eliminate exposure to other materials alleged to be harmful to the user. For the long term, we should be working toward development of such products -- if we do not, inevitably someone else will, and there are strong indications that others are are already moving in this direction.

Despite the manufacture of PV's mostly in Asia, I really wonder how much involvement Big Tobacco has in this product.

This is also the principal reason why *I* (personally), am against PV's on our message boards...I see PV's as a product designed to keep nicotine addicts using nicotine, and providing a path to addiction to new users...the new generation of kids brought up in the "smoking is really bad" world who don't see PV's as smoking.

...if we are to attract the non-smoker or pre-smoker, there is nothing in this type of product that he would currently understand or desire. We have deliberately played down the role of nicotine, hence the non-smoker has little or no knowledge of what satisfactions it may offer him, and no desire to try it. Instead, we somehow must convince him with wholly irrational reasons that he should try smoking, in the hope that he will for himself then discover the real 'satisfactions' obtainable. And, of course, in the present advertising climate, our opportunities to talk to the pre-smoker are increasingly limited...

Sammy

[freeskierpj]

Yea I've met a few people trying to quit while using my PV and one was intrigued but decided it wasn't worth his time cause it still had nicotine (as he popped a piece of gum in his mouth) and the rest just said it wasn't really quitting haha...to each his own that's what I say if they wanna try their way that's fine with me.

[Vocalek]

Sammy:

In the Guidelines, item 6 reads "Remember the ultimate purpose of this board: helping yourself and others to quit smoking." The word "nicotine" is nowhere to be found on the Guidelines page. QuitSmoking.com Quit Smoking Bulletin Board System

I searched the entire site and could not find any documentation that the purpose of the forum is to provide support only for those who are willing to abstain from nicotine. The parent site to the QSMB forum is QuitSmoking.com. This is what they have to say on the topic:

Quit Smoking FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions - Quit Smoking Company

"Q. What's the best way to quit smoking?
A. The way that works! No two people are alike. That's why you must find the method for quitting smoking that works for YOU. If every method or product worked for everybody, you probably would have quit by now."

I have noticed that the QSMB forum does appear to be dominated by those who strongly feel that the ONLY way to quit smoking is to become nicotine-abstinent. There are several other forums that do have nicotine abstinence as an underlying principle. Two that I know of are the forum sponsored by the American Lung Association and the forum sponsored by WhyQuit.com.

I believe that the QSMB forum is supposed to be a forum where anyone--regardless of their nicotine beliefs--can give and receive support to stop smoking and stay quit. No participant should ever have to hear that their selected method is doomed to failure--whether that method be complete nicotine abstinence, temporary replacement of nicotine, or permanent maintenance replacement of nicotine. Whatever works to help a person refrain from lighting up tobacco is a good thing.

[vapomike]

If people are going to smoke, wouldnt a PV be better than an analog. I know PV's arent fully tested as "safe" yet. Though wouldn't it be better just inhaling 3 of the 4800+ chemicals as opposed to all of them?

[fraggle]

Despite the manufacture of PV's mostly in Asia, I really wonder how much involvement Big Tobacco has in this product.

This is also the principal reason why *I* (personally), am against PV's on our message boards...I see PV's as a product designed to keep nicotine addicts using nicotine, and providing a path to addiction to new users...the new generation of kids brought up in the "smoking is really bad" world who don't see PV's as smoking.



Sammy

I'm not so closed minded that I can't see where you're coming from, but you have to look at the entry cost here...

I remember when I first started smoking, I used to scrounge change from couches to buy a pack of cigs that might last me a whole week. The entry cost of e-cigs is too high, even for the cheapo models.

A poor quality working setup will cost you at least $50 to start, if not more, especially the overpriced ones on the street. Most youngsters at the "start smoking age" (whatever that may be) don't have that kind of cash at once. By the time they do (say, age 16-18), they've already been smoking regular cigs and are hooked.




As far as big tobacco goes, you would think that if they had some hand in it, they would have been more active in blocking the legislation now being passed against e-cigs.




The bottom line is, as a smoker of 10 years, the e-cig is the only nicotine based cessation aid that has worked. I'm at a month right now, and have gone to the bar several times (my kryptonite), and never even smoked there.

In fact, after using the e-cig, I've been finding my desire to use even the e-cig grow less and less.

For the first time in years I see light at the end of the tunnel.

[Vocalek]

From "Research Planning Memorandum on the Nature of the Tobacco Business and the Crucial Role of Nicotine Therein". (Damnit, I'm a new user, I can't post the URL - I apologise to the admins for working around this limitation - the source address with the original scanned document is at tobaccodocuments(Dot)org/landman/501877121-7129.html)

The whole thing is a REALLY interesting read, circa 1972. Here are the two quotes that speak strongest in my opinion, especially in relation to PV's...


Despite the manufacture of PV's mostly in Asia, I really wonder how much involvement Big Tobacco has in this product.

This is also the principal reason why *I* (personally), am against PV's on our message boards...I see PV's as a product designed to keep nicotine addicts using nicotine, and providing a path to addiction to new users...the new generation of kids brought up in the "smoking is really bad" world who don't see PV's as smoking.



Sammy

Well, they would have if they could have, but they couldn't so they didn't. Did you follow that? Actually there is an interesting story behind the invention. About 5 years ago, Hon Lik, a Chinese pharmacist invented the product after his father died from lung cancer and he, himself, struggled with not being able to give up heavy smoking.
Electronic cigarettes: From China, electronic cigarettes head for the U.S. market -- latimes.com

Several times you have raised the "safety" question. Compared to what? They have been in general use in China since 2004, in Europe for 4 years, and in the US for about a year. In that time there have been zero deaths reported and no serious illness or injury.

Remember that the FDA had its required clinical trails conducted on the stop-smoking drug Chantix. Supposedly those studies proved the drug was "safe and effective." Well, it's reportedly more effective than the NRTs (about 30%), but safe? Hardly. Chantix holds the record for the most adverse events reported in a single quarter and is responsible for nearly 100 deaths.

Despite the medical establishments love of double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials, the acid test of any new drug's safety comes AFTER it is being widely sold and used. That's when all the types of people who were excluded from the trials are first using it. In the case of Chantix, folks with depression and anxiety were excluded from the trials and they are the folks who have had the major problems with it.

So my point is that the PV (electronic cigarette) is already passing the acid test for safety. Actually it is more than "safe". It is (FDA should excuse the expression) healthier, in that users have reported significant improvements in their lung function, blood pressure, blood sugar, cholesterol, etc. I don't attribute these gains in health to the machine itself, but rather to the fact that the users have stopped smoking tobacco. You can read comments they left at http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/kee...ttes-available

Effective? There is a poll within the forum asking whether people have given up all tobacco cigaretetes, reduced the number of cigarettes, or whether they only ues the e-cigarette when and where smoking tobacco is forbidden. The results? 80% gave up all tobacco cigarettes, 19% reduced the number smoked, and 1% use it as temporary measure. Last time I looked, 588 people had answered the question.

Those of us who are using the PV now find the the real cigarettes taste nasty. I did NOT experience that phenomonon other times that I quit smoking. That first cigarette after months of abstinence tasted WONDERFUL. So how does that support the "path to addiction" theory? For thousands of us, e-cigarettes are the path away from our addiction to lighting up tobacco and inhaling the fumes.

If there are any never-smokers taking up the PV with nicotine, it must be a very tiny group. I don't know what they would want to do that. The product is aimed at and purchased by experienced tobacco smokers. Kids aren't interested in them. They think they look stupid! "Hey, there's that thing that OLD PEOPLE use to pretend they are smoking."

[JamieJ]

sammy I appreciate your tone and courteous information. Thank you for giving us something to think about. Keep up the good work and I am very impressed with your dedication and determination to eliminate nicotine which I am sure is the healthiest thing to do. For me I really do enjoy vaping just like I enjoy a cup of coffee. For me everytime I quit nicotine I gain about 20 pounds. So it is just a matter of choice and I am hoping that vaping has less health problems than being overweight.

[McWhat]

I'm realize I'm the new guy here, and I haven't read the entire thread, but I wanted to chime in on this subject. Having quit smoking three times, and the most successful being just over a year, I understand the hostility. I had to walk away from my old life and habits. I had to stop hanging out with some really good friends, stop reading, and started playing video games. Reading was too sedentary for me, playing the video games at least keep my hands and brain occupied. I had to give up drinking, and clubbing. So my social life went into the crapper. I wound up making new non-smoker friends. And my life went on. I looked down my nose at people who used NRTs and failed, and people who switched to oral tobacco. I felt they were weak.

I had also become an "anti smoking nazi" because quite honestly, I couldn't deal with the temptation of tobacco or nicotine. If you had walked into my house with an e-cig I would've thrown a fit. If you had walked up to me in the mall and started blathering on about awesome they were, it would've been ugly. I wasn't too tolerant of alot of people's vices during that time. And one day, sitting around my house being miserable, I realized what my problem was. I'd quit smoking. I wasn't doing anything fun anymore, and my new friends were kind of .......s. Always complaining about loud car exhausts, loud car stereos, the neighbor's barking dogs, smokers, etc. I realized that I really enjoyed that first puff on a cigarette, the little rush you get. I missed going out and not worrying if today was going to be the day I caught some second hand smoke and fell back into my life of depravity. I missed having a nightlife. They just recently passed a law in Arizona making it illegal to smoke indoors at all. You still have to walk past all the smokers to get into the bar or club. I'm also somewhat shy, and the smoking area at a new job is an easy way to make friends.

I went out, bought a pack of American Spirits, and have been enjoying a slow death since. I smoke American Spirits. I think they're the best tasting menthol on the market, and I hope they're really as additive free as they claim. I tried those Eclipse cigarettes RJ Reynolds put out years ago, I even tried Swedish Snus. Actually I still enjoy the Snus on occasion. I'm not using e-cigs to quit smoking, I'm using them to enjoy smoking in a manner that is less detrimental to my health, and my pet's health, and maybe anyone around me. Ok, honestly, I couldn't give a crap about ninety percent of the people around me. But I have seen what happens to the cats of smokers.

So I entirely understand the hostility an actual quitter would have to someone to wants to switch to e-cigs. To them we aren't "quitting", we're just trading vices. We have only anecdotal evidence, and we suck in "antifreeze" (no, not really we don't). Yes, I'm sure you could use e-cigs as a step, or as Denis Leary put it, it could be the secret "Thirteenth Step". And quite frankly, I don't want to quit, smoking is my *HOBBY*. Beats the hell out of woodworking, I like my fingers. And fiddling with a 510 is almost as complicated as an RC car. I'm really resisting the urge to start modding my atomisers.

TL;DR version: We *ARE* still smokers. They don't want anything to do with us, and maybe we should leave it that way. Ex-smokers are really grouchy. Heh, best of luck Sammy, and maybe just direct people with e-cig questions this way. Might save some arguing in the future.