In the beginning when I first got into e-cigs, I was so shocked to find an alternative (note: not NRT!) that actually works for me that I couldn't wait to tell every smoker that I know about them.
Smokers at work were generally less than enthused [to my surprise] - reactions varied from "isn't it just the same as smoking?" to "I've never tried nor wanted to give up" [my personal favourite: I'm secretly jealous] to "is it safe?" and "how much do they cost? -- ooh, too much".
Now that some time has passed and my colleagues can see that they appear to have kept me off the analogs, a few of them are poking around asking more questions, presumably toying with trying them out themselves now that they can see some evidence of success.
But now I have a problem - and this is partly due to TropicalBob's very well reasoned arguments. We have absolutely no idea how safe these things are and I'm not so sure I'm comfortable promoting something that may very well end up being worse for health than cigarettes. [Not to mention the fickleness of the hardware; it takes determination to battle on with these devices IMHO.]
To clarify, I don't think that they are worse than analogs but, in the absence of any evidence, I cannot be sure. I'm quite happy to take a chance with my own internal organs but I'm now not sure that I want to be responsible for other people's.
I know that one smoker at work has had a heart attack in the past and, as most of us probably know, it's very easy to overdo the vaping and consume too much nicotine in one sitting. I'm not sure that this person, for example, is a particularly good candidate for e-cigs (not that he should be smoking at all of course but measuring dosage is fairly straightforward and predictable with analogs). As for my other colleagues, I have no idea about their medical histories.
What does everyone else think?
Smokers at work were generally less than enthused [to my surprise] - reactions varied from "isn't it just the same as smoking?" to "I've never tried nor wanted to give up" [my personal favourite: I'm secretly jealous] to "is it safe?" and "how much do they cost? -- ooh, too much".
Now that some time has passed and my colleagues can see that they appear to have kept me off the analogs, a few of them are poking around asking more questions, presumably toying with trying them out themselves now that they can see some evidence of success.
But now I have a problem - and this is partly due to TropicalBob's very well reasoned arguments. We have absolutely no idea how safe these things are and I'm not so sure I'm comfortable promoting something that may very well end up being worse for health than cigarettes. [Not to mention the fickleness of the hardware; it takes determination to battle on with these devices IMHO.]
To clarify, I don't think that they are worse than analogs but, in the absence of any evidence, I cannot be sure. I'm quite happy to take a chance with my own internal organs but I'm now not sure that I want to be responsible for other people's.
I know that one smoker at work has had a heart attack in the past and, as most of us probably know, it's very easy to overdo the vaping and consume too much nicotine in one sitting. I'm not sure that this person, for example, is a particularly good candidate for e-cigs (not that he should be smoking at all of course but measuring dosage is fairly straightforward and predictable with analogs). As for my other colleagues, I have no idea about their medical histories.
What does everyone else think?