I found the following article on the Huffington Post (Puffington Host?... sorry, had to do it). I'll post a link to the article, then paste my lengthy reply to it. I hope you all will approve of my reply.
www . huffingtonpost .com/2013/09/0...l?show_comment_id=282186699#comment_282186699
My reply:
What a terrible article, filled with misinformation. I'll reply to each of the nine points.
1. Based on an article four years ago? Really? The e-liquid industry has evolved exponentially over the last four years. Four years ago, the majority of e-liquids were manufactured in China. Today, there are scores of e-liquid vendors who use American made ingredients, and manufacture their e-liquids right here in America. Almost all e-liquid vendors offer two varieties: one with 'propylene glycol' as a base, which, by the way, is an FDA approved ingredient in foods, cosmetics, etc., and one with vegetable glycerin as a base. My juice only has five ingredients, none of which are toxic.
Also, in the article you sited, I found the following:
A. This study was based on 32 participants. Great reference Huffington Post. Would you take a new drug after it had only been tested on 32 people? I didn't think so.
B. The following statement: "The medical profession and scientists generally agree that e-cigarettes, if they do pose any dangers to health, are much less harmful than tobacco smoking." Did you catch the 'if' in that sentence? So the very article you're referencing doesn't even conclude that there are any dangers to health from using e-cigarettes.
2. I agree. Kids and teens shouldn't be allowed to buy anything with nicotine in it.
3. I personally like strawberry and vanilla flavors, and I'm a middle-aged man. It's short-sighted of you to suggest that only kids and teens would like these flavors.
4. I sort of agree. Anything resembling smoking (including e-cigarette commercials) should be limited to non-peak times when kids and teens are less likely watching television.
5. See #4.
6. And your point is? With no second hand smoke, why shouldn't e-cigarettes be allowed in places that traditional tobacco products are banned?
7. E-cigarettes can 'positively' help people quit smoking. After 25 years of smoking two packs per day, I quit and have only used e-cigarettes since. You see, for quite a bit of us, the habit is the majority of our addiction. The nicotine addiction is beaten within days and weeks. But the habit is what brings ex-smokers back. E-cigarettes allow one to keep one's habit, without the harmful effects of smoking combustible tobacco products.
8. Who cares if e-cigarettes aren't taxed like traditional tobacco products? Aren't we taxed enough?
9. So the Huffington Post has a problem with something making inroads into a new generation that will save tens of thousands of kids from ever smoking cigarettes? Nice statement to hang on yourself.
Please do us all a favor and perform a whole lot more research before allowing an article such as this to be posted to what some consider a reputable source of news.
www . huffingtonpost .com/2013/09/0...l?show_comment_id=282186699#comment_282186699
My reply:
What a terrible article, filled with misinformation. I'll reply to each of the nine points.
1. Based on an article four years ago? Really? The e-liquid industry has evolved exponentially over the last four years. Four years ago, the majority of e-liquids were manufactured in China. Today, there are scores of e-liquid vendors who use American made ingredients, and manufacture their e-liquids right here in America. Almost all e-liquid vendors offer two varieties: one with 'propylene glycol' as a base, which, by the way, is an FDA approved ingredient in foods, cosmetics, etc., and one with vegetable glycerin as a base. My juice only has five ingredients, none of which are toxic.
Also, in the article you sited, I found the following:
A. This study was based on 32 participants. Great reference Huffington Post. Would you take a new drug after it had only been tested on 32 people? I didn't think so.
B. The following statement: "The medical profession and scientists generally agree that e-cigarettes, if they do pose any dangers to health, are much less harmful than tobacco smoking." Did you catch the 'if' in that sentence? So the very article you're referencing doesn't even conclude that there are any dangers to health from using e-cigarettes.
2. I agree. Kids and teens shouldn't be allowed to buy anything with nicotine in it.
3. I personally like strawberry and vanilla flavors, and I'm a middle-aged man. It's short-sighted of you to suggest that only kids and teens would like these flavors.
4. I sort of agree. Anything resembling smoking (including e-cigarette commercials) should be limited to non-peak times when kids and teens are less likely watching television.
5. See #4.
6. And your point is? With no second hand smoke, why shouldn't e-cigarettes be allowed in places that traditional tobacco products are banned?
7. E-cigarettes can 'positively' help people quit smoking. After 25 years of smoking two packs per day, I quit and have only used e-cigarettes since. You see, for quite a bit of us, the habit is the majority of our addiction. The nicotine addiction is beaten within days and weeks. But the habit is what brings ex-smokers back. E-cigarettes allow one to keep one's habit, without the harmful effects of smoking combustible tobacco products.
8. Who cares if e-cigarettes aren't taxed like traditional tobacco products? Aren't we taxed enough?
9. So the Huffington Post has a problem with something making inroads into a new generation that will save tens of thousands of kids from ever smoking cigarettes? Nice statement to hang on yourself.
Please do us all a favor and perform a whole lot more research before allowing an article such as this to be posted to what some consider a reputable source of news.
Last edited by a moderator:
