ECA Misinformation
- Thread starter Kate
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
I wish my carts lasted 300 puffs
You see Kate.... the problem is... that you forgot to divide the inverse equation of the volume of the cartridge by Pi to the 3rd power times 4 calling birds- 3 french hens and 2 turtle doves...
Which comes to.... Wait.... 0.00000001mg of nicotine per year and that is why there is more poison in mothers milk than PG/VG/ or the BeeGees.
You see Kate.... the problem is... that you forgot to divide the inverse equation of the volume of the cartridge by Pi to the 3rd power times 4 calling birds- 3 french hens and 2 turtle doves...
Which comes to.... Wait.... 0.00000001mg of nicotine per year and that is why there is more poison in mothers milk than PG/VG/ or the BeeGees.
Kate - You have quoted yourself and now you are asking me to claim your statement as my own!
Those are YOUR statements. Not mine.
The statement the ECA made CLEARLY states cartridges and you are referring to eLiquid. YES! eLiquid comes in higher strengths than 16mg, but the nJoy cartridges DO NOT. So based on the survey that was given to consumers who had nJoy cartridges, these statements are ACCURATE.
And I will also add that once I get a chance to get another survey together that can be deemed worthy by the lawyers, the ECA WILL offer another survey and the statement on the facts/myths page could change.
As I have noted several times that I appreciate your concern and that I will do everything I can to ensure that the facts claimed by the ECA are correct and representative of eSmokers. Right now, this is a study that has been done and it is what we have.
As I have noted several times that I appreciate your concern and that I will do everything I can to ensure that the facts claimed by the ECA are correct and representative of eSmokers. Right now, this is a study that has been done and it is what we have.
I don't understand why the members of this forum are not considered to be the average e-smokers. With so many members surely we must actually have a fairly balanced average of exactly how the majority of people will vape if they convert to vaping instead of smoking?
Members of the forum very well may be. But my estimation between all of the people who have an ecig is anywhere between 100,000 and 500,000. (this is just my guestimate based on the claims of kits sold by companies who are in brick and mortar spaces like SE and nJoy. As there are only 8,000 or so members on the forum, and most are highly educated in their eSmoking ie they know they can get liquids vs prefilled carts etc, we represent a very small portion of (my) estimated base of possible eSmokers there are. (Oh... and these are US estimates)
Lacey,
Don't get me wrong, anyone dedicated to the clarification of the muddy waters surrounding this issue has my support. It is in the best interest of those of us involved, to state the facts so that a sanctioned study at a later date does not undermine our credibility.
So maybe a bit more nicotine is consumed. All that needs to be illustrated is comparisons to lozenges, gum, and patches. Same deal....people eat it like crazy, wear 'em like crazy.... and a lot of them still sneak analogs.
Meanwhile, vaping addresses the physical aspect and people tend not to crave the real thing. More nicotine? Probably for a while. But as we all know that can be dropped back drastically with lower carts or mixing down E-liQ.
An upfront, truthful, and sensible campaign is the only way to resolve this issue without finger-pointing. Admit the drawbacks, as they are far outweighed by the benefits.
I truly believe that the majority of the opponents of e-cigs are that segment of the population that loves to see smokers suffer. (We all know they are out there!) The ones that are chuckling when they see smokers outside on a below 0 day. These types of personalities actually enjoy ruining fun. Basically they don't want anyone doing things that THEY don't like doing! And it's a shame that we have to share the world with these mean little people. But... (in contrast to their mindset) I feel sorry for them. When someone is doing something that doesn't affect me or hurt anyone, and they are enjoying it, I tend to think, "Good for them! They are enjoying themselves.", even if I find it to be kinda stupid.
Just saying.... Let's keep it real, so that the MLP's (mean little people) have no field to graze in.
Don't get me wrong, anyone dedicated to the clarification of the muddy waters surrounding this issue has my support. It is in the best interest of those of us involved, to state the facts so that a sanctioned study at a later date does not undermine our credibility.
So maybe a bit more nicotine is consumed. All that needs to be illustrated is comparisons to lozenges, gum, and patches. Same deal....people eat it like crazy, wear 'em like crazy.... and a lot of them still sneak analogs.
Meanwhile, vaping addresses the physical aspect and people tend not to crave the real thing. More nicotine? Probably for a while. But as we all know that can be dropped back drastically with lower carts or mixing down E-liQ.
An upfront, truthful, and sensible campaign is the only way to resolve this issue without finger-pointing. Admit the drawbacks, as they are far outweighed by the benefits.
I truly believe that the majority of the opponents of e-cigs are that segment of the population that loves to see smokers suffer. (We all know they are out there!) The ones that are chuckling when they see smokers outside on a below 0 day. These types of personalities actually enjoy ruining fun. Basically they don't want anyone doing things that THEY don't like doing! And it's a shame that we have to share the world with these mean little people. But... (in contrast to their mindset) I feel sorry for them. When someone is doing something that doesn't affect me or hurt anyone, and they are enjoying it, I tend to think, "Good for them! They are enjoying themselves.", even if I find it to be kinda stupid.
Just saying.... Let's keep it real, so that the MLP's (mean little people) have no field to graze in.
Brooks,
I appreciate your weighing in and I just wanted to let you know that I have read your post (as you addressed me) and agree. I will do everything in my power to ensure that the campaign for our rights to use our PV's is honest and right.
I am working on some questions for another survey, but I do need to speak with lawyers as I want to make sure that when the ECA does go live with a new survey/study, it can't be seen as manipulated or biased in any way. For instance, I know that with the ECig Survey posted from ecigarettesdirectUK, James cannot review the survey once it is finished as he was the designer of the survey... so I want to make sure that the ECA does not in fact need an outside source for the designing of the survey as well.
AH! So much to do... so little time!
I appreciate your weighing in and I just wanted to let you know that I have read your post (as you addressed me) and agree. I will do everything in my power to ensure that the campaign for our rights to use our PV's is honest and right.
I am working on some questions for another survey, but I do need to speak with lawyers as I want to make sure that when the ECA does go live with a new survey/study, it can't be seen as manipulated or biased in any way. For instance, I know that with the ECig Survey posted from ecigarettesdirectUK, James cannot review the survey once it is finished as he was the designer of the survey... so I want to make sure that the ECA does not in fact need an outside source for the designing of the survey as well.
AH! So much to do... so little time!
Lacey, I can agree with you on the most of the points that you're making, like that manufacturers have 300 puffs number to describe the cartridge, and that surveyed customers take about 63 puffs per day.
Where Kate and others have problem with is that puffs are far away from accurate measurement to support any comparison. E.g. I can take 1 second or 5 second puff, and the difference on the liquid/cartridge usage per puff would be huge. Up to the point that the true study can show completely opposite numbers. I am not saying that it will, I am saying that it could.
To conclude anything about nicotine consumption for ecig consumers, we would have to at minimum, ask consumers if they are completely replacing their smoking, and how many cartridges / how much liquid are they using. This would be inaccurate as well, but much less, and inaccuracies would go against our point, which can only contribute to our stand (basic rule of the debate). Just look at how difficult it is to debate that issue with Kate, who's pretty much on your side here, now imagine zealots like ash. If their study finds 10% more usage than yours, they are in the clear win of that debate point, independent of the fact that 10% doesn't mean much. Order of magnitude difference, which is quite possible mind you, can win the whole debate if it leads to suspecting the rest of our findings.
Personally, I would leave the whole nicotine story outside of the debate. There is no proof that nicotine causes any problems when below toxic level. Let's try focusing on effects on the environment, positive reactions from smokers who switched, etc.
Tvujec - Thank you for your comments. I have forwarded them on to the board of the ECA as this argument does make good sense. Also, paragraph 3 in your post leads me to some good thinking regarding questions that would need to be posed on any future survey.
I have!
Originally, when we decided to go eLiquid only and not offer prefilled cartridges, I took a 5 pack of prefilled cartridges. From each cartridge, I yielded a different puff count on each from the same pack! (Now, my puffs of course). Either way, I agree that 300 is probably not what we get.
From a "puff" machine in a manufacturing plant, right off of the assembly line, 300 could very well be what is yielded (hence the claims by many manufacturers AND the marketing claims that you can yield 20 cigarettes from a mini cartridge). After travel, gravity, drying and dripping, not so much.
Either way, I am waiting on final word but they are discussing the Fact v. Myth in question and determining if it should be taken down.
Edit: All of your concerns were forwarded to the board and to Matt. The Fact v. Myth in question has been taken down off of the ECA website until further studies can be conducted. So, thank you to all who have participated in this conversation and I hope that you may find a bit more confidence in the idea that the ECA does wish to represent eSmokers/Vapers.
Originally, when we decided to go eLiquid only and not offer prefilled cartridges, I took a 5 pack of prefilled cartridges. From each cartridge, I yielded a different puff count on each from the same pack! (Now, my puffs of course). Either way, I agree that 300 is probably not what we get.
From a "puff" machine in a manufacturing plant, right off of the assembly line, 300 could very well be what is yielded (hence the claims by many manufacturers AND the marketing claims that you can yield 20 cigarettes from a mini cartridge). After travel, gravity, drying and dripping, not so much.
Either way, I am waiting on final word but they are discussing the Fact v. Myth in question and determining if it should be taken down.
Edit: All of your concerns were forwarded to the board and to Matt. The Fact v. Myth in question has been taken down off of the ECA website until further studies can be conducted. So, thank you to all who have participated in this conversation and I hope that you may find a bit more confidence in the idea that the ECA does wish to represent eSmokers/Vapers.
Last edited:
I have never agreed with taking either puffs of vapor or drops of liquid as a measurement of any kind. Both are far, far, far too varying from one person to the next and from one device or bottle to the next to be anything even faintly resembling true outcomes. To give just my own example: I have never smoked up a cig in 10 to 15 draws, I consistently needed around 30 puffs to finish an analog. Subsequently, it won't be much of a surprise that for me that number of 300 puffs per (1 ml) cartridge is a lot closer to true then for most... (But I know I am an exception to the rule on both accounts - still, I am 'one end of the scale' that does exist...)
Having said that about puffs and drops though: if FDA simply refuses to go by anything else then measurements per puff... what can we do about that? Then that is what we will have to work with, isn't it? (All the while trying to change their mind on that, mind you, if I would have my way!)
I do think it would be good to go by the other things Tvujec mentions - if that would be possible without bad effects, agree.
(Typing at the same time... ECA-conclusion seems the best for now I think)
Having said that about puffs and drops though: if FDA simply refuses to go by anything else then measurements per puff... what can we do about that? Then that is what we will have to work with, isn't it? (All the while trying to change their mind on that, mind you, if I would have my way!)
I do think it would be good to go by the other things Tvujec mentions - if that would be possible without bad effects, agree.
(Typing at the same time... ECA-conclusion seems the best for now I think)
I disagree. You need to use a realistic figure.
At present it would be so easy to show that the 300 figure is false and discredit the whole argument for vaping on the basis that you are distorting the truth and deliberately misleading.
True figures would likely show that vapers consume no more nicotine than smokers; if this came up you could show credible figures. There is no point painting a picture that is untrue - especially given that it is unnecessary.
Last edited:
Lacey said that the problematic statement has been withdrawn Kin, I think that's what Katink was saying she thought was for the best.
I'm relieved that the ECA is removing those figures, that's one less source of misinformation to worry about.
I'm relieved that the ECA is removing those figures, that's one less source of misinformation to worry about.
- Status
Similar threads
