I never would of thought that I would take to vaping so much that I would actually get offended or upset when someone give off some bad information about them.
Here is how the story goes,
Went out to dinner with 3 people, one my mother and the other I will just call the 'opposition'.
What I mean with opposition against ecigs in general.
What happened was my mother was trying to ask me about reducing my use of the vaporizer because the particles my get in the air and effect my father's breathing, he has COPD. I was trying to avoid that discussion because I didn't want to incite the opposition to go on a rant.
Of course it didn't work and the opposition went on with a statement that they read a study were "ecigs 'burn liquid' to produce a chemical reaction that make formaldehyde particles that are smaller than those found in cigarette smoke which meant they would get deeper into the lungs. ecigs are worse than cigarettes".
While this is being said I'm trying to cut in to correct on the burning liquid by mentioning the fire triangle and pointing out there is no chemical reaction but simply asked "will you allow me to finish", typical smug posturing.
What was bad was it had adrenalin running and I felt completely helpless, my position overrun. I honestly couldn't keep my composure that I just gave it up.
So much for the story, and now little commentary about the whole situation.
What keeps getting to me is people keep going off of dated information on technology that is in its infancy. Just consider alone the temperature control feature in a dna 40 chip and what that could mean in vapor safety. People are desperately trying to write the ecig off because they think of the history of the cigarette and how that turned out. It is not the same thing because combustion is gone, it's a device with its own history to make. With this said though I still feel from situations like above, that the ecig is doomed after all, and nothing can save it.
Here is how the story goes,
Went out to dinner with 3 people, one my mother and the other I will just call the 'opposition'.
What I mean with opposition against ecigs in general.
What happened was my mother was trying to ask me about reducing my use of the vaporizer because the particles my get in the air and effect my father's breathing, he has COPD. I was trying to avoid that discussion because I didn't want to incite the opposition to go on a rant.
Of course it didn't work and the opposition went on with a statement that they read a study were "ecigs 'burn liquid' to produce a chemical reaction that make formaldehyde particles that are smaller than those found in cigarette smoke which meant they would get deeper into the lungs. ecigs are worse than cigarettes".
While this is being said I'm trying to cut in to correct on the burning liquid by mentioning the fire triangle and pointing out there is no chemical reaction but simply asked "will you allow me to finish", typical smug posturing.
What was bad was it had adrenalin running and I felt completely helpless, my position overrun. I honestly couldn't keep my composure that I just gave it up.
So much for the story, and now little commentary about the whole situation.
What keeps getting to me is people keep going off of dated information on technology that is in its infancy. Just consider alone the temperature control feature in a dna 40 chip and what that could mean in vapor safety. People are desperately trying to write the ecig off because they think of the history of the cigarette and how that turned out. It is not the same thing because combustion is gone, it's a device with its own history to make. With this said though I still feel from situations like above, that the ecig is doomed after all, and nothing can save it.
