Flying with my Bloog MaxxFusion (“Quite Literally”)

[leaford]

BTW, you think I was hard on pmos, you guys should see me when someone suggests I use homeopathy or acupuncture, or nonsense like that! Or even worse, if someone tries getting into anti-vaccine lunacy. Then its on like Donkey Kong!

 

[RB37]

leaford you are one funny dude!

 

[pmos69]

BTW, you think I was hard on pmos, you guys should see me when someone suggests I use homeopathy or acupuncture, or nonsense like that! Or even worse, if someone tries getting into anti-vaccine lunacy. Then its on like Donkey Kong!

...and I thought your avatar had something to do with acupuncture.

 

[leaford]

Who, Dead Fred? Naw, he was all about science based medicine. Well, before he died that is...

Now his cousin Punctured Pete, OTOH...

 

[RB37]

proven my last comment even further..

 

[Frick]

Leaford, I'm curious about the IVAQS project you mentioned: IVAQS Project


It seems that they based the study on the effects of environmental vapor, rather than getting an accurate analysis of the mainstream vapor, or the exhaled vapor.

The purpose of this study is to determine components of vapor in the environment during electronic cigarette use under various conditions.​

Is this study really going to do any analysis of the vapor itself? It would seem it's more to make non-vapers feel safe that vapers aren't harming the environmental air (in buildings, offices, etc.) than it is to determine what exactly vapor consists of. I consider that a bit of a shame (if true) because in convincing friends and relatives that the switch to vaping is actually beneficial as an alternative to smoking, vapers lack studies of the composition of vapor to point to as proof.

 

[leaford]

Well, until they collect the funds to publish their results it's anybody's guess. But if I were conducting the study I would want an analysis of the exhaled vapor itself, otherwise how could you determine which substances in the environment came from the vapor and which didn't?

Speaking of which, I have an e-mail to write, urging my partners to donate to the fund. This industry needs peer-reviewed data more than anything.

EDIT: Email sent.

 

[Frick]

Well, until they collect the funds to publish their results it's anybody's guess. But if I were conducting the study I would want an analysis of the exhaled vapor itself, otherwise how could you determine which substances in the environment came from the vapor and which didn't?

Speaking of which, I have an e-mail to write, urging my partners to donate to the fund. This industry needs peer-reviewed data mpre than anything.

I hadn't thought of that. I presumed they'd do an analysis of environmental air containing vapor vs. a control, and determine the difference. Reading their site, I don't see them mentioning a direct analysis of the vapor, but it could be that they do that ancillary to the testing.


I decided to give more business to Cignot (for juice) based on the rather large donation they made to that study, so it can't be bad for business...

 

[jayvap33]

WTF!
We need health testing NOT environmental. This is a BOONDOGGLE.
Look, my cat on my lap PURRING as I exhale vapor into her face tells me everything I need to know about exhaled vapor. If it was SMOKE, she'd be GONE, clawing my crotch probably in her hurry to get off my lap.
No, we need human body model testing and inhaled vapor analysis.
Again, WTF!

 

[MrHyde]

I'd be cautious about blowing the vapor into your cat's face. I'm unsure if the vapor could harm her, but isn't nicotine deadly to cats?

 

[leaford]

WTF!
We need health testing NOT environmental. This is a BOONDOGGLE.
Look, my cat on my lap PURRING as I exhale vapor into her face tells me everything I need to know about exhaled vapor. If it was SMOKE, she'd be GONE, clawing my crotch probably in her hurry to get off my lap.
No, we need human body model testing and inhaled vapor analysis.
Again, WTF!

We need both, Jay. Second hand exposure is a worry to the rest of the public, and that is being used against us.

 

[jayvap33]

I'd be cautious about blowing the vapor into your cat's face. I'm unsure if the vapor could harm her, but isn't nicotine deadly to cats?

It's gotta be negligible, and I seldom do it. Plus my vapes are low nic. Don't tell the SPCA though!

We need both, Jay. Second hand exposure is a worry to the rest of the public, and that is being used against us.

• Okay leaf I'll acquiesce somewhat to this, but the effects on the user must have a significantly higher priority, less we put the cart before the horse. Especially considering the time and effort it takes to get objective, empirical data on anything. Look at second hand smoke; I've even seen data implying it can protect from respiratory illness. Depending on the testing agency, the funding agency, and the controls and analysis, data can be twisted and presented to serve any given purpose. Exploiting gray areas and embellishing minor aspects of testing often skew results. Red herrings are introduced into a would-be scientific test environment and clear interpretation is often lost in the resulting minutia, hearsay, and inaccuracies complicit in those diversions.

 

[MrHyde]

It's gotta be negligible, and I seldom do it. Plus my vapes are low nic. Don't tell the SPCA though!

Haha, I'm more of a cat than a rat...I'll keep it hush hush =~-^=