Decent Vaping article on Gizmodo today

[Gowanus]

5 Facts That Everyone Gets Wrong About Vaping

 

[WattWick]

Finally a good article on vaping from Gizmodo. They have been spewing some FUD earlier on. Couldn't help noticing how it's written by a guest writer. Even so, it seems they've changed their stance somewhat:

[Ed. note: The author of this piece works in the vape industry and therefore does have a vested interest. Knowing that, we're running this because we agree with his points.]

Thanks for sharing. Anyone who has a Facebook or Twitter account can add to the comments section.

 

[six]

Thanks for sharing. Anyone who has a Facebook or Twitter account can add to the comments section.

And probably should judging by the ones I read. Gizmodo sure seems to be a haven for hubris. There was a lot of drivel in those comments from holier-than-thou misinformed loudmouths.

 

[Zanderist]

Propylene glycol—or PG—is a main ingredient in albuterol, or asthma inhalers, and is perfectly safe to inhale when vaporized. PG is thinner than VG, and carries flavor very well—the next ingredient, flavorings, are usually suspended in PG. Flavorings are food-grade, can be natural or artificial, and are limited only by the imagination of the juice maker.

I feel this is an empty argument, it is missing proof. I've have never actually see propylene glycol as a listed ingredient on my father's breathing medicines, not even the albuterol.

The only real life examples I've seen of Propylene Glycol used was in HVAC system with a huge vat of it used as chill water additive, I've seen in it in Nyquil, and I've seen it in food flavoring.

 

[six]

I feel this is an empty argument, it is missing proof. I've have never actually see propylene glycol as a listed ingredient on my father's breathing medicines, not even the albuterol.

That's because it is an *inactive* ingredient. They don't have to list it.

 

[Double Helix]

That's because it is an *inactive* ingredient. They don't have to list it.

If they don't list it then how does it seem to be common knowledge for people that don't even take the medication. I dug through tons of info on the inactive ingredients both prescription and otc inhalers, and I found no information stating that propylene glycol is in any of them. I can find the inactive ingredients for these drugs, so you're saying they intentionally left PG out while listing the others?

I might be able to dig out some old inhalers from somewhere around the house. Perhaps they changed their propellant formula.

 

[SpinDr480]

The article was great, but the comments section in that article reminded me of how annoying people have become in this world. It's just beyond me how holier than though people are about things.

 

[WattWick]

If they don't list it then how does it seem to be common knowledge for people that don't even take the medication. I dug through tons of info on the inactive ingredients both prescription and otc inhalers, and I found no information stating that propylene glycol is in any of them. I can find the inactive ingredients for these drugs, so you're saying they intentionally left PG out while listing the others?

I might be able to dig out some old inhalers from somewhere around the house. Perhaps they changed their propellant formula.

Not sure how deep one has to dig to find specifics on the various asthma inhalers. Widen the search to i.e nebulizers in general, and PG seems to be a commonly used solvent.

Formulations and nebulizer performance. - PubMed - NCBI

 

[LordZeal]

Still makes me mad that the pro Vape article has study links and is far less attacking than the anti vape article, yet most of the comments attack the post in general.

Even the anti vape article uses terms like "arguably" and "probably" and admits many places that ecigs aren't as bad as smoking or worse case are on an equal level. I get that it's probably douchy to use vaping to get around no smoking areas, but why all the hate out there for ecigs?

 

[CigmundFreud]

I'm starting to get ...... off with this pull the wool over our eyes stuff. What I mean is number 4 in this article.

4. E-Liquid Ingredients Are Not A Mystery

I heard this said a bunch of times to try and calm down the customer. It's just VG, PG, flavorings, and nicotine. While it's somewhat reassuring at least compared to cigs, it's still deceiving. The ingredients that constitute flavorings are thousands. And some of them are proven dangerous, like diacetyl.

 

[Alien Traveler]

The article was great, but the comments section in that article reminded me of how annoying people have become in this world. It's just beyond me how holier than though people are about things.

Actually its easy to understand thanks to one of comments on article I am copy-pasting below:

The hate probably comes from a lot of people using Vaping to get around existing Cigarette laws.

"I'm not smoking here, I'm vaping! It isn't illegal!"

I doubt too many people would have something strong against someone vaping in the same way they must smoke cigarettes today. (Outdoors away from where others have to endure it or in their own homes as you describe)

People just do not want to inhale vapor. Even if you can prove it is harmless.

Edit: Besides, choosing someone from the industry to give a pro-vaping statements was a big error.

 

[DC2]

Still makes me mad that the pro Vape article has study links and is far less attacking than the anti vape article, yet most of the comments attack the post in general.

Even the anti vape article uses terms like "arguably" and "probably" and admits many places that ecigs aren't as bad as smoking or worse case are on an equal level. I get that it's probably douchy to use vaping to get around no smoking areas, but why all the hate out there for ecigs?

Thanks for providing the chance for me to post this again...
Rampant Antismoking Signifies Grave Danger

The contemporary antismoking crusade has manipulated/altered psychology and social/economic/cultural/political structures the world over. One of the manipulations instrumental in its ‘success’ is avoiding scrutiny by smearing anyone that dares question antismoking policies and methods. By its beliefs and tactics, antismoking conducts itself like a cult. The antismoking industry is now so large and mainstream that questionable, inflammatory claims are produced with high regularity. There are so many such claims working to an agenda that it is impossible to keep up with scrutiny.

The current antismoking crusade has a clear beginning and framework. Rather than try to keep abreast of a myriad of questionable claims, it is wiser to consider what the antismoking framework has been from the outset, and to consider it by antismokers’ own words. Provided below are excerpts from antismoking conferences and manuals. By this information, the public can then properly judge the basis and nature of the contemporary antismoking ‘movement’.

I have a goal of getting every vaper to read the above link.
Only then can we know why we are where we are, and what we really face.

Understanding is the key to effective activism.
Or at least I hope so.

 

[Robino1]

Moved to Media and General News from General Vaping discussion

 

[Gowanus]

Actually its easy to understand thanks to one of comments on article I am copy-pasting below:

The hate probably comes from a lot of people using Vaping to get around existing Cigarette laws.

"I'm not smoking here, I'm vaping! It isn't illegal!"

I doubt too many people would have something strong against someone vaping in the same way they must smoke cigarettes today. (Outdoors away from where others have to endure it or in their own homes as you describe)

People just do not want to inhale vapor. Even if you can prove it is harmless.

Edit: Besides, choosing someone from the industry to give a pro-vaping statements was a big error.

I think you're right here, except for the harmless part. Other people shouldn't have to inhale vapor, REGARDLESS of whether it's harmless or not. They're happier without anything entering their lungs that they've watched come out of someone else's breath, and it's their right to breath what they want.

I'm not suggestion the perception isn't off, but I do get really upset at how self righteous a lot of vapers are. Sneaking in airplanes, doing it in clear non-smoking areas. Or on the other end of the spectrum, cloud chasing with a giant mod that looks like a piece of raver drug paraphernalia out in public. Either way, you're doing something that you will never be able to convince the general public that it's good or something to ignore. People will ALWAYS think activities like these are obnoxious.

Shape it up and act like responsible adults, and maybe people won't judge us as harshly.

 

[Robino1]

Let me ask this: If I can "vape" and have not one wisp of vapor escape from my lips, would anyone have the "right" to complain?

Yes, I can do this and I do vape this way, frequently.

 

[Nate760]

I think you're right here, except for the harmless part. Other people shouldn't have to inhale vapor, REGARDLESS of whether it's harmless or not. They're happier without anything entering their lungs that they've watched come out of someone else's breath, and it's their right to breath what they want.

If it's my "right" to only breathe what I want, then I demand that internal combustion engines, heavy industry, and dairy farming be immediately banned.

 

[Gowanus]

that's simply not a productive stance to take.

 

[Nate760]

that's simply not a productive stance to take.

It's not a stance, it's an extrapolation of your logic. It sounds absurd because said logic doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

 

[DC2]

It's not a stance, it's an extrapolation of your logic. It sounds absurd because said logic doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

He wasn't using logic, he was using emotion.

Or perhaps it would be more accurate to say he was referencing the emotion of the sheeple.
And while I can agree with him on that score, that doesn't make it the right.

It only makes it all that more disturbing.

 

[Nate760]

He wasn't using logic, he was using emotion.

Or perhaps it would be more accurate to say he was referencing the emotion of the sheeple.
And while I can agree with him on that score, that doesn't make it the right.

It only makes it all that more disturbing.

Fair points. If we made it a rule that public policy should be determined by the emotions of the majority, it would take about five minutes for civil society to completely break down.