E-Cigarette Forum Discussion Thread

[hollyberry]

It's called a flat iron. My hair is super curly. To wear it straight is a choice. Or maybe I'm a slave to my flat iron? IDK.

Mine is also crazy curly (and long). I never flat iron it because it would take 3 hrs and I don't have that kind of patience.

 

[renstyle]

Can someone thank katie for her little reminders that regardless of age, we can all act like were 3 yrs old, at will.

And Ill give the to sally new avy too.

This has been done, sorta, hope I did OK....

Q-What do doctors think of electronic cigarettes?

 

[Randyrtx]

This has been done, sorta, hope I did OK....

Q-What do doctors think of electronic cigarettes?

A very well thought-out and rational response.

 

[renstyle]

As more studies are done, they will show that nicotine is a chemical, not a cigarette.

 

[renstyle]

A very well thought-out and rational response.

I'm just trying to find some way to turn all of this "energy" into something just partially useful. Since I'm not planning on leaving the forum any time soon, I figured it was worth a shot. Plus it gave the thread a bump anyway.

 

[MustangSallie]

Excellent post, renstyle. Even if Katie isn't listening, maybe someone else is.

 

[cigarbabe]

If she's still unable to read,hear and comprehend I volunteer to explain it in excruciating detail to her.
C.B.

 

[DC2]

I like these stories-its like yeah you can vape or whatever but also can choose not to-thats interesting & weird. By weird it seems like you'd do it like you did cigs but most of you say no its not that way-in a way its like why bother?

I smoked for 27 years, averaging around 5 cigarettes per day, and was never addicted to nicotine.
I know some people will choose not to believe that, but I have no doubt it is true.

So why did I smoke then?

-Taking breaks from work
-Taking breaks from social situations I found uncomfortable
-Taking breaks from domestic squabbles
-Taking breaks before doing things I didn't want to do
-Taking breaks after doing things I didn't want to do
-Taking breaks to be alone with my thoughts and think things through

So as for the "why bother" part, obviously, I bother because if I didn't "vape" I would go back to smoking.

 

[DC2]

Beth, you have to understand... the "addiction" folks think (or at least seem to imply) that it's all about the addiction to nicotine, that it is the sole reason why people smoke. If that were true, then NRT would have a far better success rate.

It isn't all about the nicotine! It's much, much complicated than that. It's also about the ritual of smoking, the feel of the smoke, the taste of the tobacco; every aspect of smoking that we become accustomed to over the years plays a part in it.

But it's the smoke that's the deadly part! Remove the danger caused by the smoke, and you can retain all the other aspects of the habit without the harm.

I didn't smoke because I had to; I smoked because I wanted to. That desire was the "demon" that kept me smoking, not addiction to nicotine!

Now, I vape because I want to, not because I have to. I still have all the pleasurable aspects that I had with smoking, but now I don't have the smoke killing me.

That's why I personally get offended by all the "addiction" and "junkie-thinking" rhetoric. This is a conscious choice for me, not a hopeless addiction to something that is causing me harm.

Quoting this so people read it again.

It also showed me the light that smokers smoke for different reasons. If I could quit the day I pick up an e-cig but my husband needs something else from tobacco (thankfully, not from the SMOKE) then we were smoking for different reasons. (I just needed the hand-to-mouth and he needed chemicals.) If that is true, the generally accepted theory that all smokers only smoke because they are addicted to nicotine is dangerously wrong.

And yeah, this one too!!

 

[hobotivo]

This has been done, sorta, hope I did OK....

My doctor sees the smoking vs ecig+nicotine question as a harm reduction strategy.

They'll get you for that, you can't say "harm reduction" over there, the concept is just to complex for them.
Cheers

 

[The Big Chief]

Not me! The only thing I post in response to her comments are a reminder of the forum rules. (And her posts are usually breaking one or more of them!!) Maybe if no one acknowledges her other than a reminder of the rules she'll give up and stay away from the e-cig area. (Wishful thinking, but a girl can dream....)

Im obviously better at kickin dirt and throwing rocks, but Im thinking your right on the rules gig...Wish I wouldve thought of that.

 

[hobotivo]

Sallie,
May I join with the others in complimenting you on your splendid new avatar.
It's like having a new painting in one's room.
Cheers

 

[The Big Chief]

This has been done, sorta, hope I did OK....

Q-What do doctors think of electronic cigarettes?

That was gooood......

 

[renstyle]

They'll get you for that, you can't say "harm reduction" over there, the concept is just to complex for them.
Cheers

What can I say? It was my doctor! One would hope they bothered to read the fairly long post I made where I *talked* to my doctor and he gave the "pragmatic" solution, which to me in this realm equates to harm reduction anyway.

 

[hobotivo]

What can I say? It was my doctor! One would hope they bothered to read the fairly long post I made where I *talked* to my doctor and he gave the "pragmatic" solution, which to me in this realm equates to harm reduction anyway.

I told them that an entire College of Physicians said

that nicotine itself is not especially hazardous, and that if nicotine could be provided in a form that is acceptable and effective as a cigarette substitute, millions of lives could be saved.

and that got me banned. They'll ban you for anything in that "benighted horrorverse" (to quote lolady.)

But hey, it was a darn good post.

Cheers

 

[MustangSallie]

I think the problem was where you posted it, not that you posted it at all. Otherwise I'm guessing it would have been deleted. In my view, guessing is about the only way to figure out the rules on that board.

 

[hobotivo]

I think the problem was where you posted it, not that you posted it at all. Otherwise I'm guessing it would have been deleted. In my view, guessing is about the only way to figure out the rules on that board.

You're right, although I don't believe that was fair, as I said in an email to Fred, to which, of course, I never received a reply. I may as well post that email here, for the record.

Hi Fred

I'm mystified by your decision to ban me. I can only assume that it was due to my post on "Harm Reduction" being placed in the General Forum, while you thought it should be in the Electronic Cigarette forum, as evidenced by your moving it to that location.

Respectfully, I disagree that the post location was inappropriate, for the following reasons:

• Nowhere in the paper I referenced and quoted are e-cigs mentioned at all, not even once.
• Nowhere in my writings in that post are e-cigs mentioned.
• I even chose not to use my customary signature block, which mentions how much I've spent on e-cig supplies, to further distance the post itself from any specific mention of e-cigs.
• The post, and the study it cites, simply point out the importance of harm reduction, however it might be achieved, for those whom conventional quit methods do not work.
• In short, it was not about e-cigs at all, until others jumped in, presumably without reading the study (which took me whole day) and assumed it was, just because it was I who posted it.

Obviously I personally consider that e-cigs might be one of the innovative technologies that Professor Britton and his colleagues say are needed, but so might other modern medicinal deliver methods, such as battery powered transdermal patches and many others, either under development or not yet even thought of.

As I understand it, you recently warned some members that their behaviour was unacceptable and placed them on notice that they might be denied further participation if their behaviour continued. I was not warned at that time and so had no idea that my postings were in any way unreasonable.

I received no warning prior to being banned, it just happened.

I don't think I've been a bad influence on the board. Although being banned makes it a bit hard for me to search for my own posts, I recall:

• Posts praising others on their quitting efforts and lengths of quit.
• Posts welcoming newcomers to the board.
• Posts admitting that the board had convinced me of the merits of reducing nicotine and that I would endeavour to do so. (And I am.)
• Posts condemning littering.
• Pledges that I will not smoke today.
• Advice on re-heating pizza.
• Posts admitting my addiction to nicotine.
• Numerous posts discouraging anybody with a successful quit from even thinking about using an e-cig.
• Posts about what we had for dinner. (There's more to life than just quitting.)
• Praising Veterans on Memorial Day.
• Even a post pointing to a paper on the danger of nicotine, for somebody who said it wasn't dangerous.

These are just some that come to mind. I don't believe I've ever been rude or disrespectful to anybody who didn't attack me first, and even then I've tried to exercise the utmost moderation.

Now of course there are also many posts in which I've praised e-cigs as a method to quit smoking for those who can't manage it any other way. I just can't help but do that, because e-cigs stopped me smoking after 40+ years at 45 per day. My wife shared exactly the same experience. Nothing else helped and God knows, I've tried almost everything. Anybody is going to be evangelical about something (or someone) that they consider to be their saviour. Wouldn't you be?

In closing, I acknowledge that you run the board and it's "your house" where you can welcome guests or deny entry as you chose. However, if by any chance your decision to ban me was simply due to the location of my post I beg you to re-read it, and ideally the paper to which I referred, and perhaps reconsider whether such a ban was justified.

Personally, I don't care how people quit smoking, I just care that they quit. CT, gum, patches, Champix, hypnotherapy, shamanism, e-cigs or absolutely anything - other than quitting as a result of dying first - is fine by me.

Best Regards

 

[MagnusEunson]

Hobo, you used too many words. All he saw was "Fred Bad Man!"... -Magnus

 

[MustangSallie]

Wow, great letter. Unfortunately, Im not surprised that you didn't get a response.

I just had a look at Fred's revised rules on e-cigs and it did say that any posts re: nicotine cessation would be moved to the e-cig section if they are furthering the e-cig debate.

Topic threads related to nicotine cessation which are obviously furthering this debate will be moved to the Electronic Cigarettes forum

Considering you're an e-cig user I guess it was assumed that your post on harm reduction was furthering the debate on e-cigs and nicotine cessation. Still clueless on why you got banned.


EDIT: or what Magnus said

 

[hobotivo]

Hobo, you used too many words. All he saw was "Fred Bad Man!"... -Magnus

That's the trouble with words, one has an infinite supply of them.

I remember when I was a child, there was a construction kit, with girders, plates, nuts and bolts and all kinds of accessories called "Meccano." I loved it but the illustrations always showed replicas of huge bridges, skyscrapers and the like which were impossible to create without buying vast amounts of the product, far more than I could ever afford. That's why I love programming, it's like a construction set but with endless parts, you never have to stop building something because you've run out of "IF" statements.

English is like that too.

Cheers