GREAT article on the toxicity of nicotine!!

[Anjaffm]

I forget who put this up before but I liked this article about the toxicity of nicotine;

http://www.ecigarettedirect.co.uk/ashtray-blog/2013/12/eliquid-nicotine-lethal-dose.html

that's a good one, thank you

 

[Uma]

To those who don't see the reality of the situation, watch this video. It's a must see.
Agenda 21 EXPLAINED, full version - YouTube

 

[Vocalek]

Unfortunately, the Dynamics of the e-Cigarette Market are not so Scientifically Clear Cut.

Limiting Nicotine mg helps the Patch and Gum OEM's still have Market Share. And those OEM's have Big Money at stake.

Did you Expect a Politian to turn their back on a Pharmaceutical Company and their Soft Campaign Money just because e-Cigarette are Not as Harmful as they might be able to be Portrayed?

We knew as long ago as 1995 that fast metabolizers of nicotine needed higher doses than ordinary NRT to achieve smoking abstinence.

High dose transdermal nicotine the... [Psychopharmacology (Berl). 1995] - PubMed - NCBI

Psychopharmacology (Berl). 1995 Dec;122(3):215-22.
High dose transdermal nicotine therapy for heavy smokers: safety, tolerability and measurement of nicotine and cotinine levels.
Fredrickson PA, Hurt RD, Lee GM, Wingender L, Croghan IT, Lauger G, Gomez-Dahl L, Offord KP.

Forty smokers received 44 mg/day of transdermal nicotine for 4 weeks followed by 4 weeks of 22 mg/day. Biochemically confirmed point prevalence smoking cessation rates were 65% and 55% at weeks 4 and 8 of patch therapy, respectively, and self-reported smoking cessation at 3 months was 50%. The most common effect was skin irritation at the patch site. A single subject was admitted for myocardial infarction following step-down from 44 to 22 mg of replacement nicotine. The subject was not smoking and the adverse event was deemed to be not related to the patch therapy. Sleep complaints were reported in 33% of subjects during the 44 mg phase. Other complaints were infrequent. We conclude that 44 mg per 24-h nicotine patch therapy in heavy smokers is safe, tolerable, and without significant adverse events.

And yet, here we are nearly 20 years later, and this is now being "rediscovered."

High dose transdermal nicotine for fast met... [Nicotine Tob Res. 2013] - PubMed - NCBI

Nicotine Tob Res. 2013 Feb;15(2):348-54. doi: 10.1093/ntr/nts129. Epub 2012 May 15.
High dose transdermal nicotine for fast metabolizers of nicotine: a proof of concept placebo-controlled trial.
Schnoll RA, Wileyto EP, Leone FT, Tyndale RF, Benowitz NL.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION:
Smokers with a faster rate of nicotine metabolism, estimated using the ratio of 3'-hydroxycotinine (3-HC) to cotinine, have lower plasma nicotine levels and are more likely to relapse with 21 mg nicotine patch therapy, than smokers with slower rates of nicotine metabolism. Thus, faster metabolizers of nicotine may require a higher nicotine patch dose to achieve cessation.

METHODS:
This proof of concept randomized placebo-controlled trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of 8 weeks of 42 mg transdermal nicotine versus 21 mg, among 87 fast metabolizers of nicotine (3-HC/cotinine ≥ 0.18).

RESULTS:
After 1 week of treatment, an intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis showed that participants treated with 42 mg nicotine had significantly higher expired-air carbon monoxide (CO)-confirmed 24-hr abstinence (75% vs. 58.1%; OR = 3.21; 95% CI: 1.12-9.24, p = .03) but not 7-day abstinence (50% vs. 34.9%; OR = 2.02; 95% CI: 0.82-4.94, p = .13). After 8 weeks of treatment, ITT analysis showed that participants treated with 42 mg nicotine had marginally higher rates of CO-confirmed 24-hr abstinence (45.5% vs. 30.2%; OR = 2.32; 95% CI: 0.92-5.92, p = .08) but not 7-day abstinence (29.6% vs. 23.3%; OR = 1.52, 95% CI: 0.57-4.07, p = .41). Percent nicotine and cotinine replacement were significantly greater for 42 mg nicotine versus 21 mg (p < .005). There were no significant differences between treatment arms in the frequency of severe side effects and serious adverse events or blood pressure during treatment (p > .10).

CONCLUSIONS:
Further examination of the efficacy of 42 mg nicotine patch therapy for fast metabolizers of nicotine is warranted.

Hello? So why have the makers of the patch not sought FDA approval for the higher dose products?

Maybe they make more money if smokers manage to quit with lower doses (but then relapse) than if they actually helped them get off (and stay off) smoking.

Call me a cynic but.....

 

[zoiDman]

...

Hello? So why have the makers of the patch not sought FDA approval for the higher dose products?

Maybe they make more money if smokers manage to quit with lower doses (but then relapse) than if they actually helped them get off (and stay off) smoking.

Call me a cynic but.....

These Three Little Words are what Drives the Entire tobacco Industry. And Also the Newly Emerged e-Cigarette Industry.

Which is a Better Scenario?

A Patch/Gum/e-Cigarette that a Person tries Once and they Never Smokes another Cigarette Again. Ever.

A Patch/Gum/e-Cigarette that a Person tries Again and Again and they May or May Not Smoke another Cigarette.

For those wanting to Quit, the 1st Scenario is by far Better. But for those who make Money selling a Patch/Gum/e-Cigarette, Isn't the second Scenario more Profitable?

And you know as well as I Do that Profits is what Turns the Wheel.

 

[zoiDman]

...

Call me a cynic but.....

BTW - A Cynic is sometimes Merely a Realist who holds a Divergent View from those who which he/she is discussing a topic with.

 

[Vocalek]

What would you call a proposed "act" that enables a small handful of people to ban anything that can prevent a large part of the above quoted "700,000 premature deaths" annually in Europe? Ban it, without having to consult Parliament? Thus being responsible for all of those "700,000 premature deaths"? Every year?

I would call it an "Enabling Act". Silencing Parliament to rule unchallenged. And to make sure that those deaths continue. Year after year.

The proposed EU TPD (Tobacco Products Directive) contains precisely such a clause. A clause that would enable the un-elected EU Commission to BAN any kind of vaping gear. Any time they please. Without consulting the EU Parliament (the elected representatives of the people).

- source for the 700,000 deaths in Europe per year: Introduction - European Commission

Well that's pretty frightening. And so is this. View Rule

The proposed deeming action differs from most public health regulations in that it is an enabling regulation. In other words, in addition to directly subjecting newly-deemed "tobacco products" to the substantive requirements of Chapter IX of the FD&C Act, it enables FDA to issue further public health regulations related to such products. Thus, almost all the potential benefits and most of the costs that flow from the proposed deeming action would be realized in stages over the long term. The proposed rule would generate some immediate quantifiable benefits by dissuading smokers of small and large cigars, thereby improving health and longevity; it would impose costs in the form of registration, submission, labeling, and other requirements.

The parent to this law is the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/111/hr1256/text

Now on what persons or companies would these costs be imposed?

The Secretary shall promulgate regulations regarding the establishment and maintenance of records by any person who manufactures, processes, transports, distributes, receives, packages, holds, exports, or imports tobacco products.

So let's say we have a Chinese factory that manufacture millions of e-cigarettes each year (hardware only). Thousands of small businesses across the U.S. (some stores, some Internet sales sites) import some of the e-cigarettes made in this factory. So each of these small businesses (if I am reading this law correctly), would be treated as a tobacco company in its own right, subject to "registration, submission, labeling, and other requirements."

Now let's say that the Chinese factory decides to improve its product and makes a small design change. Guess what! That's a new product. Each business that wants to sell the new improved version of the product must submit either a Premarket Approval application or an application for Substantial Equivalence. Never mind that 9,999 other businesses are filling out the same paperwork for identical products, made in the same factory.

This does not appear practical, logical, or workable to me.

 

[2coils]

Well that's pretty frightening. And so is this. View Rule



The parent to this law is the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/111/hr1256/text

Now on what persons or companies would these costs be imposed?



So let's say we have a Chinese factory that manufacture millions of e-cigarettes each year (hardware only). Thousands of small businesses across the U.S. (some stores, some Internet sales sites) import some of the e-cigarettes made in this factory. So each of these small businesses (if I am reading this law correctly), would be treated as a tobacco company in its own right, subject to "registration, submission, labeling, and other requirements."

Now let's say that the Chinese factory decides to improve its product and makes a small design change. Guess what! That's a new product. Each business that wants to sell the new improved version of the product must submit either a Premarket Approval application or an application for Substantial Equivalence. Never mind that 9,999 other businesses are filling out the same paperwork for identical products, made in the same factory.

This does not appear practical, logical, or workable to me.

I'm sure e-cigs threw a wrench into their plans. I don't see them changing anything to accommodate the ecig industry either. This is like trying to fit a square peg into a round hole!

 

[BuGlen]

(snip...)
Hello? So why have the makers of the patch not sought FDA approval for the higher dose products?

Maybe they make more money if smokers manage to quit with lower doses (but then relapse) than if they actually helped them get off (and stay off) smoking.

Call me a cynic but.....

That's not cynical, it's logical. There is no money in the cure; the real money is in the treatment.

 

[zoiDman]

That's not cynical, it's logical. There is no money in the cure; the real money is in the treatment.

Awesome BuGlen.

I love it when a Massively Complex and Dynamic Concept can be summed up in One Simple Sentence.

 

[zoiDman]

I'm sure e-cigs threw a wrench into their plans. I don't see them changing anything to accommodate the ecig industry either. This is like trying to fit a square peg into a round hole!

This is where we All may be a Bit Surprised.

e-Cigarettes are Unique in that the came from Outside the BT and BP universe. But they have ties to Both.

 

[AgentAnia]

....This does not appear practical, logical, or workable to me.

You've just described FDA's Policies and Procedures...

 

[zoiDman]

...

This does not appear practical, logical, or workable to me.

It would seem Practical, and Logical. and Very Workable if you were a Corporation/Drug Company wanting to make Profits off a Product with Questionable Benefits and or Adverse Side Effects.

 

[Kent C]

Odd that they developed vaccines that actually stop illnesses. Not so odd that they continue to profit from those, and not so odd that gov'ts make them mandatory. Liberals always look at 'profit' as a dirty word. Conservatives always look at taxes as a dirty word. The end result of regulation will tell you the real answer. My guess is it will be both.

 

[zoiDman]

Odd that they developed vaccines that actually stop illnesses. Not so odd that they continue to profit from those, and not so odd that gov'ts make them mandatory. Liberals always look at 'profit' as a dirty word. Conservatives always look at taxes as a dirty word. The end result of regulation will tell you the real answer. My guess is it will be both.

I don't have Any Problems with a Company making Profits. In fact, it is what Drives the Economy and keeps people off the Dole.

My problem is sometimes How companies make theses Profits.

Pumping Pills down the Throats of Americans can be Very Profitable. It would be Nice though if I had some Faith that when the FDA says these Pills are Relatively Safe, that they Actually are.

And not just because the Data that was given to the FDA says they are Safe. The Data that the Drug Companies Amassed that is.

 

[Kent C]

I don't have Any Problems with a Company making Profits. In fact, it is what Drives the Economy and keeps people off the Dole.

It is what pays for the Dole and the bill is expanding geometrically. I'm not saying that I agree with what some companies are doing wrt ecigs, just that some of those same companies have saved millions of lives with vaccines and other drugs and their profits allow for more of that as well. I don't blame Elaine for 'being a cynic' - it's a good tactic and it works for both sides because of the propaganda that is put out by public schools, the media and Hollywood. It's unfortunately part of the psyche at this point. It's the default position and unlike some seem to think, it isn't 'radical' - it's the epitome of conformity.

To paint 'BP' as always bad or only profit driven is inaccurate. Some people think that if they found a cure for cancer, they would withhold/suppress it because the current treatments would get them more money - like how some think that the oil companies suppress ways to run cars on water. I simply don't think that to be the case.

 

[Orb Skewer]

Burzynski the Movie

 

[Racehorse]

The KKK?

Kinda takes things to Whole New Level.

LOL

LOL is right.

There was a link to a news article where the same person compared not being able to smoke in an apartment in the US with the lack of rights under Stalin's Russia

Maybe it's just me, but there is a huge difference between not being allowed to smoke in one's apartment, and being placed in a labor camp, the genocide of peasants in the Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and Southern Russia, the violation of human rights violations under the Geneva Convention, having scholars, scientists, cultural and religious leaders in your community arrested--- then shot---- without a trial, and Stalin's Scorched Earth policy where thousands of women and children were killed in burning buildings, and children were bayonetted or doused with acid for simply hoisting a flag, and where entire villages of people murdered, including infants.

There was another post today where Anne Frank was actually brought up.


If hyperbolic non rational statements like these keep being made, I think vapers are in far more danger of becoming a laughingstock than anything else.

These comparisons have no place in the vaping conversation, and it can only serve to embarass us.

 

[Kent C]

Maybe it's just me, but there is a huge difference between not being allowed to smoke in one's apartment, and being placed in a labor camp,

Some look at it as a 'slippery slope'. And for good reason...

Anti-tobacco movement in Nazi Germany - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Orb Skewer]

LOL is right.

There was a link to a news article where the same person compared not being able to smoke in an apartment in the US with the lack of rights under Stalin's Russia

Maybe it's just me, but there is a huge difference between not being allowed to smoke in one's apartment, and being placed in a labor camp, the genocide of peasants in the Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and Southern Russia, the violation of human rights violations under the Geneva Convention, having scholars, scientists, cultural and religious leaders in your community arrested--- then shot---- without a trial, and Stalin's Scorched Earth policy where thousands of women and children were killed in burning buildings, and children were bayonetted or doused with acid for simply hoisting a flag, and where entire villages of people murdered, including infants.



There was another post today where Anne Frank was actually brought up.


If hyperbolic non rational statements like these keep being made, I think vapers are in far more danger of becoming a laughingstock than anything else.

These comparisons have no place in the vaping conversation, and it can only serve to embarass us.

Not every one has the insight, forethought, stomach, stamina and backbone for the 'politico' going on in the vaping world, and you can save that embarassment for later, when the dust settles, and you count your chickens.


Anja is a fighter, I would have 10 of her kind at the head of a tumen

 

[Racehorse]

Some look at it as a 'slippery slope'. And for good reason...

Anti-tobacco movement in Nazi Germany - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Rand Paul used slippery slope in debates about gay marriage: "If we have no laws on this, people take it to one extension further – does it have to be humans? You know?” suggesting that next, people would be marrying farm animals or dogs. .

I'm sorry, but I can't participate in drawing out slippery slope to full-on absurdity. I believe that most thinking people are not drawn to the morally absurd nor the logically absurd argument. One loses audience that way. They tune out.

There is a smallish group of conspiracy theorists who might enjoy it, but I don't think that is who we are trying to win over, is it?

Besides which, ANY comparisons of not being allowed to vape in certain venues, placed against the greatest crimes against humanity, past, present, or future, tends to marginalize the horrors that real human beings have and are experiencing on this planet. Somalia comes to mind.

For me, there is a very clear distinction here.