3 months of ecigs... coming to an end

[Rosa]

Wasn't Nicotine a rat poison? Thanks for the reply!

-Dario

nicotine is an insecticide used in agriculture. Nicotine is not carcinogenic though, so IMO it's still safer than smoking cigarettes (which actually do contain rat poison). *LINK*

 

[Dario]

nicotine is an insecticide used in agriculture. Nicotine is not carcinogenic though, so IMO it's still safer than smoking cigarettes (which actually do contain rat poison). *LINK*

That's some scary stuff right there, with the exception of Maple Syrup. Thanks for the nightmares. Lol

 

[Nicko]

Dario, nobody on this forum ever suggested you try e-cigs, so if you have decided you don't like them, ok, don't ever try them again. Also, I can not imagine where you get the idea that nicotine is artery hardening. Both my blood pressure and heart function are the envy of every health professional who examines me. And I have been smoking heavily for 30 years. And also, I have not suffered from rat poisoning lately.
Just to remind you, this forum is for e-cig users to exchange help, support and advice about using e-cigs and related topics.

 

[mlinky]

Swedish Snus has virtually no increased risk for cancer BioMed Central | Abstract | Systematic review of the relation between smokeless tobacco and cancer in Europe and North America Also, nicotine is no more harmful than caffeine. The studies that associate it with heart disease were all based on nicotine use in cigarettes.

And, I know what the Pareto Principle is. I just don't think it makes any sense in the context of your post.

 

[JWebb]

Gee, I saw this thread yesterday, and throught Dario was just quitting everything and I wished him good luck and his twins. Now this has grown to be a whole other kind of animal! What gives?

 

[Nicko]

This is a bit of a newb question, but I am only into my 2nd day of getting settled on this forum. What is the difference between dipping and dripping? Do they both carry the same risk? I assume not, if they are two very different things. I assume (as a newb) that they are the methods used to get the juices into the e-cig, but it doesn't make much sense to me that a method would be a cause for damaging or unhealthy side effects, but rather a chemical in the e-cig...

Right? I don't know... Anyone else can chime in here, of course.

Dripping is totally different. Dripping just means directly dripping your e-juice on the atomizer as opposed to using a cartridge which holds about 20 drops of liquid. Does this help? I think in the sticky questions in the new members forum there are more detailed answers.
And, welcome to ECF, we love to help new-comers, it's our duty. Any questions, and there are so many people who will love to help you.

 

[mlinky]

I said I was quitting ecigs, I am not going back to dipping snuff and I do not smoke nor smoked before I switched to ecigs.

I thought I made it clear when I said I was quitting. Quitting is quitting. Do I need to explain this?

You might also get some help here: QuitSmokingMessageBoard.com • Index page

 

[Nicko]

dipping in the tobacco world is when you put a wad of moist tobacco under your lip, dipping in the vaping world is when you dip the exposed atomizer into some e-liquid and vape that way. Dipping in the tobacco world causes cancer, dipping in the vaping world does not.

dripping is only for vapers, it's when you drip e-liquid into your atomizer.

Rosa, I like you very much, seriously I do. But how about harm reduction? How does dipping in the tobacco world cause cancer? It is MUCH safer than smoking. Until mainstream healthcare understands the concept of harm reduction, vaping will never be accepted. Honestly, please forgive me if I missed something. Your posts are normally quite brilliant.

 

[Rosa]

Rosa, I like you very much, seriously I do. But how about harm reduction? How does dipping in the tobacco world cause cancer? It is MUCH safer than smoking. Until mainstream healthcare understands the concept of harm reduction, vaping will never be accepted. Honestly, please forgive me if I missed something. Your posts are normally quite brilliant.

Oh, I totally agree -- dipping in the tobacco world is much much safer than smoking (but it does cause cancer). It's definitely reduced harm. Swedish snus is even safer -- and doesn't contain the cancer causing nitrosamines (so it may be completely harmless).

 

[espresso]

I have 4 extra kimble 20025 class b 100mL graduated cylinders with bump guards, unused. They cost about $80 for a pack of 4 back in... 1995 or so when I bought them. If you know anyone that wants them I'll trade the box of 4 for 30mL of 12-16mg Tobacco flavored ejuice. Since I'm here in NC for a short period of time this is a limited offer. I'll be in the Islands as soon as the passports get back from being updated (photos). That could be 5 weeks from today. I am willing to trade on an honor policy. I could ship USPS priority if it doesn't cost too much.

You might have better luck posting this over at Classified and Swaps

 

[Iffy]

WARNING: VERY GRAPHIC PHOTOS!> Smokeless Tobacco Cancer <WARNING: VERY GRAPHIC PHOTOS!

 

[jjcordone]

Wow this thread really had a surprise twist toward the end.
Pro chewing tabacco - this must be joke.

 

[Dario]

Wow this thread really had a surprise twist toward the end.
Pro chewing tabacco - this must be joke.

Honestly... when/if pot is legal... if I'm still in this country (and I doubt I will be)... I'll be on that bandwagon. Until then I think misinformation will continue to dominate and people will always choose something less deadly. But it's still deadly. What can you do?

 

[Diablo]

Dario, here's the link to CASAA. CASAA | The Consumer Advocates for Smoke-Free Alternatives Association
One of the biggest ongoing myths / lies about tobacco is that there's no safe way of using it. Nothing could be further from the truth. The so-called health groups have been lying about this for at least 20 years. They keep telling us that no matter whether you smoke it or chew it or whatever you do with it, it will kill you all the same. It's a lie and it will always be a lie. The only way to LIKELY kill you is to smoke it. The people at CASAA have all the truthful, science-based info on this. Feel free to ask any questions you wish.
Best wishes to you my friend, ~ Nicko

If the CASAA postion is to tell the US people that dipping tobacco like Copenhagen is a much safer alternative to smoking tobacco then I would have a hard time giving them any creditability at all. Is this suppose to be one of the largest Associations that are fighting for Vapors rights? Somewhere along the line not sure when, but somebody forced the smokeless tobacco companies to put "this is not a safe alternative to smoking" on every single can of smokeless tobacco.

Sorry, while I consider myself a pro tobacco person and smokers and users of all tobacco products have the right to do what they want to their own bodies. Nobody will ever convince me that smokeless tobacco like Copenhagen and Skoal(not SNUS)is a safer alternative to smoking tobacco.

Anyway that's just my opinion.

 

[Rosa]

If the CASAA postion is to tell the US people that dipping tobacco like Copenhagen is a much safer alternative to smoking tobacco then I would have a hard time giving them any creditability at all. Is this suppose to be one of the largest Associations that are fighting for Vapors rights? Somewhere along the line not sure when, but somebody forced the smokeless tobacco companies to put "this is not a safe alternative to smoking" on every single can of smokeless tobacco.

Sorry, while I consider myself a pro tobacco person and smokers and users of all tobacco products have the right to do what they want to their own bodies. Nobody will ever convince me that smokeless tobacco like Copenhagen and Skoal(not SNUS)is a safer alternative to smoking tobacco.

Anyway that's just my opinion.

Casaa puts swedish snus in a different category than other smokeless tobaccos like snuff/chew/dip, they are not equal.
Casaa.org - Harm Reduction

edit: also, chew/snuff/dip IS reduced harm compared with smoking cigarettes:
quote:
British researchers reviewed 89 studies and found an increased risk for cancers of the mouth and throat for past smokeless tobacco use in the USA. However, of all tobacco-attributable deaths, those caused by smokeless tobacco would represent only 1.1% if the number of smokers and smokeless tobacco users were equal.

 

[Dario]

Dario,

You could easily go back to what you were doing before trying vaping, but you're here on ECF I assume to give things a try. I recommend that you read the reviews, do your homework, read about good vendors, and reduce your chances for wasting your money.

Speaking of money, I spend much less vaping than I did smoking, and I sure do feel better. Once you get something that you're relatively happy with, you can actually spend much less money vaping and maybe save your life in the bargain. Many people like different brands and juices, so that's a matter of personal preference. As a result, nobody can tell you what you'll like. You can narrow down the choices by reading reviews of happy customers, and that's what I suggest you do. Lots of folks have spent considerable time and effort to post threads designed to help others, and you can read all of them FREE.

No doubt, I can agree with this. But finding that info IS hard.

 

[classwife]

(pssst...no drug talk....)



Nicko, ECF also covers other alternatives to smoking cigarettes...

Other Alternatives to Smoking

 

[Diablo]

British researchers reviewed 89 studies and found an increased risk for cancers of the mouth and throat for past smokeless tobacco use in the USA. However, of all tobacco-attributable deaths, those caused by smokeless tobacco would represent only 1.1% if the number of smokers and smokeless tobacco users were equal.

2 things about that study.

1. It is not a US based study. Not saying UK isn't done well but a US study would hold more meaning it would have a much larger group of people and list more than just how many died from it.
2. It does not say how many smokeless tobacco people in that study lost half their face,throat or stomach and therefore couldn't use the product anymore.

The areas of the body that smokeless tobacco damages would force you to quit whereas smoking you can do up until the day it kills you.

 

[Rosa]

2 things about that study.

1. It is not a US based study. Not saying UK isn't done well but a US study would hold more meaning it would have a much larger group of people and list more than just how many died from it.
2. It does not say how many smokeless tobacco people in that study lost half their face,throat or stomach and therefore couldn't use the product anymore.

The areas of the body that smokeless tobacco damages would force you to quit whereas smoking you can do up until the day it kills you.

I'll agree with your statement, but would also point out that facial disfigurement is technically "reduced harm" compared with death.

 

[Diablo]

I'll agree with your statement, but would also point out that facial disfigurement is technically "reduced harm" compared with death.

True True


You can always remove a jaw bone to save your life but can't remove both your lungs...