While many of these articles are pushing conclusions based on incomplete facts, I agree with you in that if we are going to win the argument then we cannot be as polarized as the anti-e-cig crew. That is, it is not bad to admit that nicotine is bad for you. Are e-cigs far, far safer than analog cigarettes.....absolutely. But I welcome all the independent studies on e-cigs and what is in them because in the end it is what it is and if there are harmful chemicals then users should know about it and everyone should recognize it. And if there are reasonable regulations to be had then that's fine.....it's certainly better than the alternative (banning them entirely). If they want to slap a warning on e-cigs stating that nicotine is addictive (it is), then that's fine.....we should all be educated consumers.
Another Popular Science article bashing vaping
- Thread starter TomCatt
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
While many of these articles are pushing conclusions based on incomplete facts, I agree with you in that if we are going to win the argument then we cannot be as polarized as the anti-e-cig crew. That is, it is not bad to admit that nicotine is bad for you. Are e-cigs far, far safer than analog cigarettes.....absolutely. But I welcome all the independent studies on e-cigs and what is in them because in the end it is what it is and if there are harmful chemicals then users should know about it and everyone should recognize it. And if there are reasonable regulations to be had then that's fine.....it's certainly better than the alternative (banning them entirely). If they want to slap a warning on e-cigs stating that nicotine is addictive (it is), then that's fine.....we should all be educated consumers.
Please keep the topic to the OP in here. My news is better than yours is not the topic - take that to the Outside if you're going to debate.
Yup. This whole charade where the government and the tobacco industry pretend to be bitter adversaries is one of the most successful lies ever perpetrated on the American public. They're equal partners in an extremely lucrative racketeering operation that makes both parties fabulously wealthy at the expense of several hundred thousand innocent lives per year.
Yes it is, because there isn't any evidence to that effect. The FDA itself has found no apparent cause for concern in the daily long-term use of non-tobacco nicotine products by anyone over age 12.
Being pragmatic is one thing. Regurgitating ANTZ propaganda because you think it makes you sound objective is quite another.
+1 from me - and the regulations equivalency timing is hugely ironic as that was about when the first ANTZ tests were done, by scientists so dumb they can't tell the difference between PG and antifreeze. ......? No. Agenda? well, duh.
whoops Sorry sonic.
whoops Sorry sonic.
Last edited:
Very well stated. If nicotine is so dangerous, why is the FDA supporting the indefinite use of nicotine gum, etc?
They censor comments against climate change and seems I recall that they were no longer taking comments on ecigarettes but I may have them mixed up with another publication - it was a while back.
I really Don't Care if Pop-Sci doesn't believe in Climate Change. Or if N-Theory should Replace the Standard Model.
What I would Like to See is One Person, Just One Person, Post that they sent an e-Mail saying that they Did Not Approve of Article that Pop Sci Published.
It seems All we do is Post to the ECF when we Don't Like Something that is Written in the Media. Jeeze, At Least a person could Copy and Paste their ECF Post and e-Mail it to a Media.
---
Send an email to letters@popsci.com or write a letter to the address below. Comments may be edited for space and clarity. Please include your address and daytime phone number. We regret that we cannot answer unpublished letters.
Popular Science
Letters
2 Park Ave., 9th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Popsci does believe in climate change and censors any comments that disagree. And liberal, conservative or libertarian or whatever, one should care about that.
I've seen a comments made by our guys and I've made a few myself but not having a fb, google or whatever the other one is
I'm not signing up for those.... I have written multiple emails to my gov, representatives and senators and other senators - mainly Paul, Lee, Cruz, Toomey (and basically the rest of the 'Club for Growth' - libertarian leaning congress people). And many who post here have done so as well. I'd love to see more but just making good arguments here helps 'nudge' them perhaps. 
Last edited:
...
I've seen a comments made by our guys and I've made a few myself but not having a fb, google or whatever the other one is
Of ALL the People who Regularly Post in these Threads, you Kent would be about My Last Choice of someone who Doesn't send e-Mails to the Powers that Be.
And I hear you on the FB Thing. Nothing is going to get me to be Involved with Face Book.
Sounds to me like a more subtle version of the infamous "I cannot confirm or deny" speech we usually get from gov't officials.
Tell Cass that it's transparency not censorship that makes the world a better place.
In the interest of an ongoing investigation, it would not be prudent for me to confirm or deny the potential veracity of this statement. That is, assuming such a statement was ever in fact made in the first place, either overtly or implicitly.
I'm happy for you.
"I am starting to think regulations prohibiting ecig use in public places, especially in confined spaces, might be reasonable."
Why are you starting to think this? Excessive regulation of this kind is unhelpful. There is nothing reasonable about a nanny state.
Several reasons.
Second-hand vapor might be harmful. I recall articles saying nicotine might affect brain development in kids. Some peeps are allergic to PG and might get the heebie-jeebies when exposed to it. Some flavoring ingredients might be harmful when vaporized. As vapers, we accept the possibility of harm to ourselves, knowing it is probably much less risky than smoking. But, other people in our vicinity shouldn't be forced to share that risk, if they don't want to.
Some people suffer psychological discomfort when they see our vapor. Whether their fear is justified or not, their fear is real. I think some people have a deeply ingrained aversion to smoky-looking stuff. The appearance of smoke triggers an urge to get away from it. Smoke often means danger.
Lithium ion batteries, when stressed, are dangerous. They can vent poisonous gasses and they can explode. I feel a little twitchy when I'm around sub-ohmers with mech mods.
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ttery-justn-now-exploded-29.html#post12282764
I'm not a crook, but I plead guilty to heresy and blasphemy.
Mama Cass
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-aK6JnyFmk
Last edited:
New Zealand Health was curious, too. They attached a little bitty thermostat about half a milimeter from the coil in a properly functioning carto and discovered the vapor was coming off the coil at 56 degrees Centigrade, which is about 120 degrees Farenheit.
And yet, all the available evidence says it isn't.
And yet, the FDA has no problem with 7th graders using it every day.
And yet, there's no evidence that second-hand PG exposure from an e-cig has ever harmed or sickened any such person.
Which ones, and why? Nebulous hypotheticals are not a sound basis for public policy. I shouldn't need to tell you that.
Again, there's no evidence that second-hand vapor has caused harm to anyone, anywhere, ever. The data that do exist seem to suggest, quite resoundingly in fact, that no such harm is even possible. You're calling for government intervention over a series of "mights" and "maybes." I find this mentality extremely troubling.
It is not my job, and it certainly isn't the government's job, to cater to anyone's irrational emotional hysteria. This post of yours is just getting sillier and sillier.
Some people have a very real fear of dogs. Does this mean you want the government to ban dog walking?
That's their problem. Not mine and not the state's.
Right, this must be why I so often see people flee in terror from rock concerts and dramatic productions whenever the stage fog comes out.
Lithium ion batteries are used in thousands of different devices. What's your point?
Last edited:
I don't think an emotional response would be helpful. The best way to combat ignorance is with knowledge. Point out factual errors and faulty reasoning. Nobody cares much how you feel.
- Status