Dr. F. expounding on the "Dry Burn" comment he made on RY4 Radio May 22.

[skoony]

Not only did I read what you said, I quoted it:

You said:
"he knows the ANTZ have
a zero tolerance of any potentially dangerous substance
no mater if the risk is essentially zero in the real world.
statements such as this is an avoidable risk or should
be avoided until additional research are not for us.
the're to placate the ANTZ to keep them from using
their zero tolerance attitudes to trash the whole
study.

I said:
"ANTZ have zero tolerance of any potentially dangerous substance" (your quote)
- some potentially dangerous substance has been found (from dr. f's findings)
Therefore, this will "placate the ANTZ to keep them from using their zero tolerance attitude". (your quote).

Unless you meant something other than what you actually said, then I think I was pretty accurate in "what (you) were trying to get at" - that it was "not for us", but to "placate the ANTZ" (again, your quotes). And that:

if you don't give em' any rocks,they can't throw em'
at you. (your quote)

... it actually gives them some rocks.

I know it's a pretty common tactic in debate to say someone misquoted you or took your comments 'out of context' but I copy and pasted the quotes and got the context right in this instance.

The problem is, the ANTZ zero tolerance for potentially dangerous substances. In order to combat that, you have to either show that there are no potentially dangerous substances OR that the no-threshold standard is an unreasonable standard. Your explanation of "what Dr. F knows" does neither.

no,you missed my whole point completly.
i'll try again.
the good Doctor having been in the business a long time
knows how to present his studies in the best light possible.
he's not giving the ANTZ rocks, he's throwing them bones.
he is saying look this is a bad thing make something of it.
i don't see a whole lot of how Dr. F got it wrong articles
floating around.
regards
mike

 

[AndriaD]

no,you missed my whole point completly.
i'll try again.
the good Doctor having been in the business a long time
knows how to present his studies in the best light possible.
he's not giving the ANTZ rocks, he's throwing them bones.
he is saying look this is a bad thing make something of it.
i don't see a whole lot of how Dr. F got it wrong articles
floating around.
regards
mike

That's true, but this is just speculation on his part; I'll wait till there's actual EVIDENCE, because dry-burning is how I clean my coils, and flaming is how I get the wire ready to be wrapped. I'm not going to replace a coil every-other day just because he *thinks* it might be a problem to dry-burn them... and I'd have to flame the wire for a new coil anyway.

And I'm pretty sure that even with flaming and dry-burning, vaping is STILL 95%-99% safer than smoking. I'm 54 yrs old; I accepted a long time ago that I am not immortal -- something IS going to take me out, one day. Who knows, it might even be the 39 yrs I spent smoking.

Andria

 

[caramel]

@Kent C and @skoony : Let me correct both of you. The ANTZ have zero tolerance to any substance that could chip into smoking, MSA money and their revenue stream.

Even if we would be vaping distilled water, they would still be talking of the potential danger of inhaling "concentrated hot steam" for extended periods of time ("we don't know the long term effects"). As an "accelerated test", they'll drown some mice and "prove" their point.

Add nicotine to that water and you're adding complaints about addictive, debilitating effects and outright poisoning.

Directly arguing with them is useless, they will just keep reciting their BS. As Upton Sinclair said, you can't make understand someone who's salary depends on not understanding. The only way to combat them is to expose them to the world at large as the frauds they are.

 

[Kent C]

no,you missed my whole point completly.
i'll try again.
the good Doctor having been in the business a long time
knows how to present his studies in the best light possible.
he's not giving the ANTZ rocks, he's throwing them bones.
he is saying look this is a bad thing make something of it.
i don't see a whole lot of how Dr. F got it wrong articles
floating around.
regards
mike

Ok. 'Throwing them bones' makes more sense. But ONLY if you don't preface that with the fact that 'he knows' that the "ANTZ have a zero tolerance" standard - which is where I had a problem with the way you originally composed it. Surely you see how even a bone doesn't comply with zero tolerance.

 

[Kent C]

@Kent C and @skoony : Let me correct both of you.

Just how does that correct me? I've been saying basically the same thing here for ages - long before you came on the scene. I have 'zero tolerance' on any regulation re: ecigs and near none elsewhere (quarantine and on imports - a noted exception) - just ask those who still think it's ok to regulate anything re: ecigs. Do you think kids who smoke shouldn't have access to a safer alternative?

 

[Lessifer]

From his perspective of vaping as smoking cessation, and wanting to be as close to zero risk as possible, his opinion makes sense.

My only issue is, he didn't state it as an opinion, and didn't disclose that it was only conjecture, at least initially. I do try to cut him some slack though, even though he speaks English incredibly well, it's not his native language.

 

[skoony]

Ok. 'Throwing them bones' makes more sense. But ONLY if you don't preface that with the fact that 'he knows' that the "ANTZ have a zero tolerance" standard - which is where I had a problem with the way you originally composed it. Surely you see how even a bone doesn't comply with zero tolerance.

you don't think in his long career and all the research he has done
he hasn't picked up a trick or two. by pointing out potential problems
even when they are very small deflects most if not all the knee jerk
negative reactions and actually highlights the good things.
i am not saying there isn't some die hard ANTZ wack job that
wont get it no mater what but most of his peers on all sides
of the issue do.
regards
mike

 

[Kent C]

you don't think in his long career and all the research he has done
he hasn't picked up a trick or two. by pointing out potential problems
even when they are very small deflects most if not all the knee jerk
negative reactions and actually highlights the good things.
i am not saying there isn't some die hard ANTZ wack job that
wont get it no mater what but most of his peers on all sides
of the issue do.
regards
mike

I was addressing what you thought "Dr. F knows" not what Dr. F might know. I don't think he'd attempt to make the same argument that you did.

And I don't think it is just 'die hard' ANTZ that may have a problem with anything he might say. I don't differentiate between 'die hard ANTZ' and ANTZ - "zealots" include the concept 'die hard'.

 

[caramel]

Just how does that correct me?

You seemed to be locked in a "who said what" discussion. Now hopefully you're out of it

 

[Kent C]

You seemed to be locked in a "who said what" discussion. Now hopefully you're out of it

Not locked in, just replying to what was said, like I usually do. Thanks for your concern though :- )

 

[Jimi D.]

I don't need no stinking doctors !

 

[AndriaD]

Just how does that correct me? I've been saying basically the same thing here for ages - long before you came on the scene. I have 'zero tolerance' on any regulation re: ecigs and near none elsewhere (quarantine and on imports - a noted exception) - just ask those who still think it's ok to regulate anything re: ecigs. Do you think kids who smoke shouldn't have access to a safer alternative?

I think even adolescents who don't smoke should have it as a safer alternative, so that they never start. An ounce of prevention... in this case, is worth 10 tons of cure.

Andria

 

[Lessifer]

I think even adolescents who don't smoke should have it as a safer alternative, so that they never start. An ounce of prevention... in this case, is worth 10 tons of cure.

Andria

And this is why I love you, in a non creepy internet forum kind of way.

 

[DC2]

I don't know if there is any real concern over dry burning or not.
But I'm glad that there was a recent sale on 510 atomizers for $1.00 apiece.

I had a 10 year supply already, but I bought 100 more.
And now I just throw them away instead of trying to clean them.


Now I just need to worry about those darned silica fibers.

 

[AndriaD]

And this is why I love you, in a non creepy internet forum kind of way.

Right back atcha.

It just seems to me, if it's 95%-99% safer than smoking, then it's 95%-99% safer for adolescents too, not just grown-up established smokers. Adolescents *will* smoke... maybe not nowadays in the numbers that they used to, but you can still see teenagers smoking all over the place. I only wish it had been available when *I* was 13; maybe instead of starting smoking so some boy would think I was "cool," I'd have started vaping for the same reason -- and found it much easier to get rid of, when I was 23 and really trying to quit (so some other guy would think I was "cool"!). Or at least when I was 26 and expecting a child.

Andria

 

[skoony]

I was addressing what you thought "Dr. F knows" not what Dr. F might know. I don't think he'd attempt to make the same argument that you did.

And I don't think it is just 'die hard' ANTZ that may have a problem with anything he might say. I don't differentiate between 'die hard ANTZ' and ANTZ - "zealots" include the concept 'die hard'.

what does that have to do with your
idea's concerning how one deals with the ANTZ in general? i was speculating
as to his odd comments not the war
against e-cigarettes etal.
regards
mike

 

[Kent C]

what does that have to do with your
idea's concerning how one deals with the ANTZ in general? i was speculating
as to his odd comments not the war
against e-cigarettes etal.
regards
mike

I don't see how anything you say here addresses my reply. At this point, complicating the issue may be your only recourse though. With a nod to Mark Twain, I'm done here.

 

[skoony]

I don't see how anything you say here addresses my reply. At this point, complicating the issue may be your only recourse though. With a nod to Mark Twain, I'm done here.

i see it completely.
you are inventing a problem that doesn't exist to bolster a controversy
that isn't there.
mike

 

[rothenbj]

That's true, but this is just speculation on his part; I'll wait till there's actual EVIDENCE, because dry-burning is how I clean my coils, and flaming is how I get the wire ready to be wrapped. I'm not going to replace a coil every-other day just because he *thinks* it might be a problem to dry-burn them... and I'd have to flame the wire for a new coil anyway.

And I'm pretty sure that even with flaming and dry-burning, vaping is STILL 95%-99% safer than smoking. I'm 54 yrs old; I accepted a long time ago that I am not immortal -- something IS going to take me out, one day. Who knows, it might even be the 39 yrs I spent smoking.

Andria

Of the two pages of posts, yours I can relate to most. At 67 with 43 years of heavy smoking, I know I'm not invincible and I'll take my chances with the devil I don't know as opposed to the one I lived with all those years. With at least 70 pack years of smoking, I should be ashes somewhere already based on TC's message.

 

[AndriaD]

Of the two pages of posts, yours I can relate to most. At 67 with 43 years of heavy smoking, I know I'm not invincible and I'll take my chances with the devil I don't know as opposed to the one I lived with all those years. With at least 70 pack years of smoking, I should be ashes somewhere already based on TC's message.

Yeah, if smoking was as bad as they keep saying (over and over and over) it is, my son would certainly not be here; I was a smoker for 13 yrs before I had him, smoked (lightly) while pregnant, and quite heavily in the house before I finally took it outdoors when he was 9 -- because of his bronchitis.

As an asthmatic mother of a guy with bronchitis, I can easily accept that smoking is not good for you; considering that my father died of lung cancer after smoking for 55 yrs, and my mother suffered terribly with COPD before she finally gave up the coffin nails, I can even accept that smoking *may* lead to increased incidence of major illness, and even death. But the kind of stats TC would have us believe are just not realistic -- if they were true, I suspect a lot of us might not be here either. They clearly think we're all idiots, to keep making such outrageous claims of smoking's morbidity and mortality.

As for Dr F's speculations about wire... he'd have been far better off to keep them to himself, until he really KNEW, one way or the other, rather than mouthing off speculations. He should realize that warning former smokers of some nebulous potential danger will never fly, unless there is PROOF -- from MANY sources -- we're far too accustomed to similar BS from TC. But I really didn't start vaping because of health; I started because I was tired of going outside and freezing last winter, just to get my nic on, and wanted something I could partake of, indoors. It turned out to be my salvation from cigarettes, but that really wasn't the goal -- just a happy side-effect.

Andria