E-Cigarettes Pose a Health Hazard, FDA Warns
- Thread starter hanover fist
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Good overview of what is going on right now--and not very encouraging as it stands right now.
Sun
Sun
The story's been picked up journalists throughout the country and in other countries, as well. The tone is the same everywhere.
Going to be an uphill battle to put that cat back in the bag from a public preception point of view----a long road that has no turning Rambling.
Sun
Yesterday, I was surfing the forum and found a link to an excellent article from a doctor who pretty much debunked the whole "e cigs are worse than tobacco" argument. He pointed out the dangers of the various other nicotine replacement therapies out there, and he wrote at length about the relative dangers of the (admittedly) small amount of nicotine (a known carcinogen) versus cigarettes or the abhorrent dangers of Chantix (a known and proven pharmaceutical that can cause suicidal tendencies). Basically, his argument was that there are documented deaths on these other therapies, and none (so far) on e cigs.
Now, I can't find the link. Anyone out there know the article I'm talking about?
I'm trying to convince a dear friend to try e cigs, but yesterday's news report on NBC and CNN has scared him off with the whole "e cigs cause cancer" headline.
He's convinced he's safer with the devil he knows than the one he doesn't. If anyone out there knows the article I'm referring to, please post the link again. Thanks for your help.
Now, I can't find the link. Anyone out there know the article I'm talking about?
I'm trying to convince a dear friend to try e cigs, but yesterday's news report on NBC and CNN has scared him off with the whole "e cigs cause cancer" headline.
He's convinced he's safer with the devil he knows than the one he doesn't. If anyone out there knows the article I'm referring to, please post the link again. Thanks for your help.
And that's the real tragedy here, that many who have been considering switching are now scared to try it.
Hello, my name is the FDA, and I have you in my back pocket.
You think I'm stupid, and that is just fine with me, because your opinion doesn't even matter to me.
I am currently using scare tactics to bend the American public to my will.
And of course, as you might expect, it's working just fine right now.
The thing is, I can be beaten, and there are many ways that might just work.
I hope you don't find them, or figure them out.
My motives are unknown, as much as you all might speculate.
But what do my motives really matter anyway, if the truth can win out in the end?
Or can it?
You think I'm stupid, and that is just fine with me, because your opinion doesn't even matter to me.
I am currently using scare tactics to bend the American public to my will.
And of course, as you might expect, it's working just fine right now.
The thing is, I can be beaten, and there are many ways that might just work.
I hope you don't find them, or figure them out.
My motives are unknown, as much as you all might speculate.
But what do my motives really matter anyway, if the truth can win out in the end?
Or can it?
This article is all over the place which makes it a bit frustrating. It covers contents in the juice, marketing to teens and children, and the concept of using this as a nicotine replacement therapy.
First off, no one has bothered to disassociate the actual device with the liquid. Unlike a real analog, the device itself has no ability to do much of anything. So the issue here isn't the device itself nor the fact that the device is made in China. The question at hand should revolve entirely around the liquid.
Secondly, it is entirely possible to get the liquid without any nicotine (that is the direction I take as a non-smoker). The article doesn't go into this at all but rather focuses entirely on nicotine addiction. While it is certainly fair to address this topic, a note about the ability to get zero nicotine juice would have been more fair and balanced.
Thirdly, it is difficult to make out the overall issue with the liquid. I am not sure about the companies they mention; however, a place like Johnson Creek lists all of its ingredients. Now if we assume that list is correct, I am not sure where these other chemicals may come from. A scan of the internet on "nitrosamines" finds that it comes from a protein and is found in meat, fish, cheese, and beer. It does show itself to cause cancer in animals but is inconclusive in humans. However, where is this coming from in the liquid? Essentially we should see PG/VG, distilled water, flavoring, and maybe nicotine. I am not at all understanding where the cancer causing agents are coming from within this ingredient list. Now if other suppliers are putting other things in their liquid that would be interesting, however, the basic liquid contains what I described above. I could not find an ingredients list on NJOY's website.
It seems to me that most of these articles are annoyed that people look at these products as a smoking cessation device which they are not legally registered as yet. This is the first article I have seen that starts to get into the juice itself which is good, but clearly a larger study needs to take place. Again based on the ingredients I listed above I would really like to know where the potential cancer ingredients are coming from. I would assume the flavoring since PG is FDA approved as generally safe....
First off, no one has bothered to disassociate the actual device with the liquid. Unlike a real analog, the device itself has no ability to do much of anything. So the issue here isn't the device itself nor the fact that the device is made in China. The question at hand should revolve entirely around the liquid.
Secondly, it is entirely possible to get the liquid without any nicotine (that is the direction I take as a non-smoker). The article doesn't go into this at all but rather focuses entirely on nicotine addiction. While it is certainly fair to address this topic, a note about the ability to get zero nicotine juice would have been more fair and balanced.
Thirdly, it is difficult to make out the overall issue with the liquid. I am not sure about the companies they mention; however, a place like Johnson Creek lists all of its ingredients. Now if we assume that list is correct, I am not sure where these other chemicals may come from. A scan of the internet on "nitrosamines" finds that it comes from a protein and is found in meat, fish, cheese, and beer. It does show itself to cause cancer in animals but is inconclusive in humans. However, where is this coming from in the liquid? Essentially we should see PG/VG, distilled water, flavoring, and maybe nicotine. I am not at all understanding where the cancer causing agents are coming from within this ingredient list. Now if other suppliers are putting other things in their liquid that would be interesting, however, the basic liquid contains what I described above. I could not find an ingredients list on NJOY's website.
It seems to me that most of these articles are annoyed that people look at these products as a smoking cessation device which they are not legally registered as yet. This is the first article I have seen that starts to get into the juice itself which is good, but clearly a larger study needs to take place. Again based on the ingredients I listed above I would really like to know where the potential cancer ingredients are coming from. I would assume the flavoring since PG is FDA approved as generally safe....
From reading around here on this forum, I think it is safe to say that the nicotine used in these liquids is where the other crap is coming from. Apparently you can not render nicotine as it is being done without getting some of the other stuff that is part and parcel of what you are rending that nicotine from.
But that seems to be why Johnson Creek has changed their recipe recently, and feel they are well within the hashmarks with respect to any concerns the FDA might have about their product.
Somebody please clarify any stupid comments I have made.
It's been a long day, and I need a vape.
At least I don't need, or even want, a smoke.
the amount of quotes in that article regarding underage smoking overwhelms the point of the whole article. whats their real point???
i think again they are trying to (intentionally?) confuse glycol derivatives with ethylene glycol, which IS in antifreeze. these people are not scientists, they are journalists. and i do not take their word for anything.
edit: i found this funny, quoted from wiki (maybe not the most reliable source but its a source) "Propylene glycol is "generally recognized as safe" by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)" imagine that
edit: another side note, i found this "Diethylene glycol is also illegally used as counterfeit glycerin in some nations..."
i think again they are trying to (intentionally?) confuse glycol derivatives with ethylene glycol, which IS in antifreeze. these people are not scientists, they are journalists. and i do not take their word for anything.
edit: i found this funny, quoted from wiki (maybe not the most reliable source but its a source) "Propylene glycol is "generally recognized as safe" by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)" imagine that
edit: another side note, i found this "Diethylene glycol is also illegally used as counterfeit glycerin in some nations..."
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
