Fear from FDA, Family Members, etc That Vaping is Long Term Substitue for Other Addictions

[cvedrick]

So I am giving up the cough, the stink, the feeling crappy, 50 known carcinogens, 1950 other chemicals for:

Propylene Glycol (Used in medical inhalers as well as many off the shelf food items)
Vegetable Glycerin (Used in medical inhalers as well as many off the shelf food items)
Food coloring (Guess what that is used for)
Artificial and natural flavors (You know)

I get the bit about poor QC in Chinese products, but I get ALL my liquid from reputable American sources.

So what is the 1 known hazard? Nicotine of which I run about 24 to 30 mg per day, There is nothing else that you wont get from a can of spaghettios. I have no idea how much caffeine I drink every day and they have not even tried to regulate the many different "maybe tested" chemicals in energy drinks.

Problem with the debate is you are not going up against rational people with brains, common sense and useful educations yo are going up against people who know "smoking is bad" "being around smoke is bad" "smokers are evil for smoking" and thus anything that has even the slightest teeny tiny connection (other than the anti-smoking commercials) with smoking that is also bad. So since Nicotine is in smoke, it too must be bad (said while toking their legal joint, and sucking on an energy drink that has been sweetened with saccharine or drinking a cup of Earl Grey with its tannic acid and other chems...)


Give em the simple argument, of what is in it, if they won't buy that, blow a puff of vapor or hopefully you have been doing that the whole time and ask "would you rather I was smoking a cigarette?" or "Here why don't I run out and get a pack just to make you happy, while I am at it lets sit down in YOUR house at YOUR dinner table and have a nice meal while I smoke the whole pack and blow it in YOUR face! Nope? then SHUT UP!

 

[Bill's Magic Vapor]

I would think that when you compare all the different stop smoking methods e-cigs have the most health risk, but it is far less that analogs.

But now if you compare the success rate. I bet; cold turkey, patch and gum the success rate of none smoking after a year can not be be more then 10%?

So after years of trying all the different solutions that are FDA "proven" to stop smoking with no success. I have been off the analogs for 8 months. The longest in my life, and I have greatly reduced the harmful affect of smoking. I have more breath, feel better, don't hack up brown and black stuff, etc...

It's a shame that any of the methods to quite smoking have been approved with such a low success rate. If you consider addiction an illness. The FDa would not approve a drug for an illness with 10% effectiveness. But the FDA does approve patches and gum and consider them proven, because they really are not cures, there aids???? I would expect if you looked at e-smokers their success rater is a lot higher then the patch or gum??

The FDA has approved thousands of drugs with success rates of less than 10%. The standard is that the success has to be higher than placebo in a double blind scientific protocol. The statistics are then manipulated exactly six different ways, just to beat placebo. It is well known that many drugs in treatment of disease have a lower success rate than taking nothing at all. Welcome to Big Pharma and the FDA.

The facts of the success of the patch and gum is 1.7%, before adjustments. No one knows about ecigs, since it is not considered a smoking cessation therapy. I am a full time cancer researcher for a well-known Institution, and the success rate of most medicines is a travesty and a tragedy. You would be very surprised if you understood how it really works.

 

[aldo.lim]

correct me if I'm wrong but vaping isnt a smoking cessation tool isn't it? whereas how ppl have finally overcome their nicotine addiction is simply by their own will.. IMHO if you're trying to answer 'them' from a more tactical terms simply say that with vaping, you could decrease your nicotine level intake simply by switching your juice to lower nic juice.. regarding to the steps of lowering your nic level and how long it'll take for you to get to 0mg nic..it's totally up to the vaper but at least you have a choice to vape 0mg nic unlike an analog

 

[Mohamed]

Problem with the debate is you are not going up against rational peple with brains, common sense and useful educations yo are going up against people who know "smoking is bad" "being around smoke is bad" "smokers are evil for smoking" and thus anything that has even the slightest teeny tiny connection (other than the anti-smoking commercials) with smoking that is also bad. So since Nicotene is in smoke, it too must be bad (said while toking their legal joint, and sucking on an energy drink that has been sweetened with sacharine)

I feel like this whole thread has gotten off point very quickly. So many defensive answers that have nothing to with what I asked and assumptions about the dumb, idiotic, backwoods people that I was having the conversation with. So many of these assumptions couldn't be further from the truth.

The original post even asked to avoid the healthy vs non-healthy debate and to focus on substituting one addiction for another.

Instead the entire thread turns into those dumb ignorant people don't know what they are saying and you can't argue with stupid and it's so much healthier for you.

Sorry just seems like it's so hard for everyone to stay on topic without being so defensive about their ecig.

 

[cvedrick]

Oh yea back to the simple suggestion of swapping one for another addiction......

Ever been to an AA meeting? Every person has a mug of coffee and there is so much smoke you can't see.

 

[Grammie]

I feel like this whole thread has gotten off point very quickly. So many defensive answers that have nothing to with what I asked and assumptions about the dumb, idiotic, backwoods people that I was having the conversation with. So many of these assumptions couldn't be further from the truth.

The original post even asked to avoid the healthy vs non-healthy debate and to focus on substituting one addiction for another.

Instead the entire thread turns into those dumb ignorant people don't know what they are saying and you can't argue with stupid and it's so much healthier for you.

Sorry just seems like it's so hard for everyone to stay on topic without being so defensive about their ecig.

Answer to your question: Less harmful is the reason I switched one addiction for another.

Some people will never change their mind, even if they are wrong. Continually debating/discussing with that type of people will never accomplish anything.

 

[Talyon]

I feel like this whole thread has gotten off point very quickly. So many defensive answers that have nothing to with what I asked and assumptions about the dumb, idiotic, backwoods people that I was having the conversation with. So many of these assumptions couldn't be further from the truth.

The original post even asked to avoid the healthy vs non-healthy debate and to focus on substituting one addiction for another.

Instead the entire thread turns into those dumb ignorant people don't know what they are saying and you can't argue with stupid and it's so much healthier for you.

Sorry just seems like it's so hard for everyone to stay on topic without being so defensive about their ecig.

My conclusion is that u or I have NOT given up 1 addiction for another-- Vapeing vs smoking, we just switched how we get our nicotine by simply using a proven safer alternative.

That's your answer.

 

[AttyPops]

My conclusion is that u or I have NOT given up 1 addiction for another-- Vapeing vs smoking, we just switched how we get our nicotine by simply using a proven safer alternative.

That's your answer.

True.

But he did give up 6,997 other chemicals (or VASTLY reduce them)... since like others have said here too...there's other stuff in cigs that makes them more addictive (or makes the nic more addictive, or whatever).

So in a way...it's a stepping stone! So you gave up SOME of your addiction, just haven't gotten rid of all of it yet.

(Maybe that works for you..........)

 

[Mohamed]

My conclusion is that u or I have NOT given up 1 addiction for another-- Vapeing vs smoking, we just switched how we get our nicotine by simply using a proven safer alternative.

That's your answer.

Agreed until I get to the point of zero nicotine. At the point that it does reach zero nicotine than it is just a replacing one addiction/habit for another. Maybe the term habit will reduce the hostilities around here.

I think I've gotten what I needed to get out of this thread and that it is simply a moral choice / dilemma of if someone should have the goal of getting off vaping eventually, or goal of getting down to zero nicotine but continue to vape, or just always use nicotine and always vape. No wrong or right answer. And those that have a moral dilemma of having a continued long term addiction/habit is just that. A moral issue that no one can answer with out some form of bias and is thus really a moot point of discussion.

 

[BigBen2k]

I'm going to re-post this from another thread:

Also, every single one of us needs to understand the difference between cigarette addiction and nicotine addiction. I say this with humility, not trying to be arrogant.

The two are NOT the same. Cigarettes are extremely addictive because of nic + MAOI's. Nicotine by itself is not as addictive. If it was, how are so many 10-50 year smokers stepping down to 0 nic juice? Nicotine by itself is like a caffeine addiction. Yes, some people are very addicted to caffeine, but they sure as hell don't need a cup of coffee every 15 min all day long. It's also an addiction that CAN be stopped. Cigarettes...yeah...we know how easy those are to quit.

All of us have to understand the difference, so we can also explain to other people that there is a difference. Nicotine is not crack ......., nicotine + MAOI's is.

"BACKGROUND: Long-lasting effects of withdrawal from nicotine are hypothesized to contribute to relapse and persistence of tobacco habits, and significant evidence supports a role of monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOI) contained in cigarette smoke as potent modulators of the rewarding effects of tobacco.

RESULTS: In nicotine-infused rats, mecamylamine induced a place aversion that lasted 6 weeks. When nicotine-infused rats were also treated with a MAOI, mecamylamine-induced conditioned place aversion persisted for at least 8 months of abstinence. The MAOI treatment slightly decreased ratings of somatic signs induced by mecamylamine administration but had no effect on the threshold or the magnitude of mecamylamine-induced conditioned place aversion."

I can't say I understand every part of the results, but I do understand:
Nicotine= 6 weeks
Nicotine+MAOI= 8 months

There is a difference.

Are you replacing one addiction for another?

Technically, Yes, but tobacco is 8 times more addictive than nicotine alone. Nicotine by itself, isn't harder to quit than coffee. Tobacco is a death trap.

Is vaping a long term substitute for other addictions?

It is intended as a NRT, and is used as such, by 97% of vapers, so I believe the answer is no.

(references: Wikipedia - Tobacco, CASAA.org)

 

[Grammie]

Mohamed, if you don't want any discussion, why not just ask:

Question: without any thing else added, no commentary

This might eliminated any "so called hostilities", no one is being hostile here. It just appears you are trying to goad them into some kind of confrontation.

Ask a simple question and people will try to give you a simple answer in their opinion.

 

[Bill's Magic Vapor]

Mohamed, if you don't want any discussion, why not just ask:

Question: without any thing else added, no commentary

This might eliminated any "so called hostilities", no one is being hostile here. It just appears you are trying to goad them into some kind of confrontation.

Ask a simple question and people will try to give you a simple answer in their opinion.

Couldn't agree more. The many off topic comments provided by OP have caused a lot of the confusion. What does the Aztecs enslavement of the popultion have to do with the original post, as one of many examples. Frankly, the way the original post was written did cause me to believe that the OP is surrounded by people giving him a hard time about vaping, and that he felt defenseless to mount a counter argument, which many supplied graciously. Apparently, that is no longer the case, and we are being chastised for providing such arguments. Good grief. Outta here.

 

[Nermal]

Okay, Mohamed, back to what I see as the substance of the original post. They say you are still addicted to something. Cutting through all the creative definitions of addiction, I ask "So what?". If I'm addicted to nicotine (or smoking, to suit everyone else), so what? Who does it harm, and why do you or they think so?

About the digressions; it's my experience on several forums that a serious question is good for about 10 - 12 straight and on topic answers. You've done pretty well here.

 

[AgentAnia]

I'd like to throw in another perhaps random thought, specifically relating to this thread but also to general discussions on the topic, and I think you, Mohamed, are starting to see it as such:

The issue of "substituting one addiction for another" is a moral/philosophical/and yes even religious issue, and no, there is no "right answer." The problem seems to arise when people addressing the issue try to add science into the mix, to prove or disprove their point or to convince others that their position/belief is the "right" one (which implies that there is, in fact, a right belief, one right belief: theirs). Tempting to do so, especially when the subject is ecigs, where there is so much science involved. But don't get distracted by the science, address the core issue, which is divergent moral/philosophical/etc beliefs.

/exiting random thought mode...

 

[EddardinWinter]

I feel like this whole thread has gotten off point very quickly. So many defensive answers that have nothing to with what I asked and assumptions about the dumb, idiotic, backwoods people that I was having the conversation with. So many of these assumptions couldn't be further from the truth.

The original post even asked to avoid the healthy vs non-healthy debate and to focus on substituting one addiction for another.

Instead the entire thread turns into those dumb ignorant people don't know what they are saying and you can't argue with stupid and it's so much healthier for you.

Sorry just seems like it's so hard for everyone to stay on topic without being so defensive about their ecig.

I surely don't understand why people are getting defensive with you, given the neutral, respectful, and detached tone you are using.

 

[skoony]

a lot of people are addicted to a lot of things,
material and pychological.
some people are addicted to the notion i'm better than you because(insert reason here).
logical people dont think that way,they take things as they are.

dont let peoples opinions dictate how you should act and feel about what your doing.
just tell them esmoke is 100% better for you,and no harm to them.
you might suggest they do some research on the google as when people find out the facts
for themselves they tend to see the reasoning behind it better than having an adhoc disscussion
whenever your confronted with this problem.

hang in there regards
mike

 

[mkbilbo]

I apologize up front as I Am not meaning for this to be double post but really did not want to derail my original post http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ing-nicotine-strength-goal-zero-nicotine.html but really have to ask this.

I'm new again maybe two weeks and have gone from 1.25 packs a day down to 0.25 packs a day in a week and probably 3 analogs total in the 2nd week. So I am doing good but there is one aspect that I can not explain to people who question this method of quitting.

I think a lot of the fear from people I have discussed using this as a quitting tool is that I am just replacing one addiction with another.

Actually, I'm going to say this is nonsensical. You "replace" a nicotine addiction with a nicotine addiction. The idea you're replacing "one addiction with another" is utterly incoherent. I mean right down to the grammatical level, there isn't any meaning there.

(And at this point, I refuse to be sidelined into discussions of MAOIs and other elements which I know are there and are components certainly and addiction is complex and variable among individuals. However, as I've said elsewhere and elsewhen, if nicotine is not the primary addiction, vaping doesn't work, does not exist, and we're not here. The only addictive chemical shared between tobacco products and vapor products is nicotine. Nicotine must be the primary addiction or vaping does not work. Vaping does work. Therefore...)

As 99.9% of you are going to say; and I full heartily agree; this is a much better alternative than being addicted to analog cigarettes. That being said I really would like to eliminate that as a valid argument because for some this is just not a valid argument; and to a certain point I see their position as a valid position.

I'm rushing through some of this because I've got to be on to something else so if I miss some of your points, sorry. Just throwing some quick comments in and maybe will have a chance to revisit this thread later. That said...

No, I don't have to accept that argument as "valid". In fact, I reject it across the board. Just because "some" have some ill defined objection is insufficient. "Addiction is bad" is slogan, not an argument.

With other nicotine delivery systems either the gum, the patch, lozenges, etc there is a recommended set of procedures that you follow...i.e. you are on step one for x amount of weeks at y mg of nicotine per day and you gradually step down to w amount of weeks on z mg of nicotine per day and so forth.

You forgot the last step:

"Return to smoking"

All cessation products and programs have failure rates around 90%. In six months, 90% or more people on any and all cessation programs and products will return to smoking.

(On the TV machine there's an ad campaign for the nicotine patch that says, "double your chances of quitting", what they don't tell you is by "double" they mean "from 6% to 12%"... yeah, they're proud of an 88% failure rate. That's a "good" rate. Failing only 88% of the time.)

Before a discussion such as what you appear to be attempting to open or address can go much further, the reality of the utter failure of "cessation" has to be addressed. The rate of return to smoking across the board in cessation programs is statistically, in most cases, almost indistinguishable from the percentage of people who just quit one day (aka "cold turkey"). The quit rate among smokers runs around 6% a year and that's that.

Over 70% of current smokers express a desire to quit but only 6% are able to do so. That is across all "cessation" systems. In fact, some of the "cessation" products show lower success rates than "cold turkey". You could just as easily argue "cessation" programs make it harder to quit.

(Not really a valid argument, there are other ways to look at that bit of data but the assertion would be no less valid than the content free, "substituting one addiction for another" which, honestly, doesn't make a lick of sense if you actually try to parse it)

There are studies that suggest (and strongly) there exist some percentage of the population genetically predisposed to strong nicotine addictions. That is, for some percentage of us, a nicotine addiction is a "one way" trip and "quitting" is never going to happen. I have good reason to suspect I'm one of those.

The question is, are we down to the "hard core" folk?

The anti-smoking campaigns over the last many years have reduced smoking in the US by huge numbers. But, now, the level has "stuck" and refuses to go down much more. We may be down to the people who cannot quit. Not "won't try" but "cannot".

So what do we do with them?

"Quit or die" is not an acceptable answer.

By the way, the nicotine gum manufacturers are now lobbying to have "extended use" of their products blessed by the FDA. It's well known that some people manage to not smoke by transferring their addiction to the gum (I hear there's a guy named "Obama" that has done this, you may have heard of him, he's on the news a lot). Official recognition that not everybody can "step down and quit" is coming.

For the gum. You know, "chewable cigarettes".

(Well, if PVs are "electronic cigarettes", nicotine gum is "chewable cigarettes")

In any case.

Those vapers who want to step down their nicotine levels and go to zero and who are able to do so, great. Good for them. I'll applaud anybody escaping a nicotine addiction successfully any time.

Not everybody can or will. For those folk, at least we can reduce the danger in their habit.

Most every smoker started when young and stupid. I always have to ask, should the penalty for being young and stupid be a death sentence?

 

[HarleyNana]

I surely don't understand why people are getting defensive with you, given the neutral, respectful, and detached tone you are using.

Maybe he needs to up his nic a tad?

 

[BigBen2k]

...
(And at this point, I refuse to be sidelined into discussions of MAOIs and other elements which I know are there and are components certainly and addiction is complex and variable among individuals. However, as I've said elsewhere and elsewhen, if nicotine is not the primary addiction, vaping doesn't work, does not exist, and we're not here. The only addictive chemical shared between tobacco products and vapor products is nicotine. Nicotine must be the primary addiction or vaping does not work. Vaping does work. Therefore...)...

You know I have to bring this out, but it's not because you choose to ignore it

I don't think that anyone is going to argue that nicotine isn't addictive. The real question is: how addictive is it?

Can I suggest a little experiment? For those that have been off analogs for a year or more, can you go more than 2 hours without vaping, and not get the jitters? How hard/easy was it? (Should we start another thread for this?)

 

[Bill Oso]

I doubt there is a valid argument for life long vaping. However, and it has probably already been said many times before, but what about: "It's your own body and you can do what you want to it," and, "Maximum personal freedom so long as it does not infringe on the freedoms of others," or, "Mind your own business, buddy."

Also, regarding addictions and dependency: What about runners running for the endorphin high? Or cleanliness to the point of being OCD? Or working so much that people are rarely home with their family? Et Cetera, et cetera. I'm pretty sure that almost all people have some type or addiction or dependency or hobby that others can find fault in, so what's the point of badmouthing, nitpicking, and arguing?