Harvard Eliquid Study Today
- Thread starter WharfRat1976
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
@Alien Traveler - And yes, it is often discussed here that B&M's appeal mostly to cloud chasers. In fact I see a lot of complaints that B&Ms generally do not cater to people looking to simply quit smoking. So yes, all the anecdotal evidence here suggests they cater to extremists, hobbyists.
Last edited:
I don't look to bash people (particularly members on this site), but do look to bash the idea of potential danger given the stakes this sort of commentary is being used for. And then do truly wonder if/how that could apply to other ingredients, or for some, how it does not? Nicotine would be prime example. We have plenty to work with on that ingredient. We currently have no long term evidence regarding the 'potential' danger of vaping nicotine. From this type of discussion and the discourse that is deemed 'reasonable,' we ought to stay consistent if 'potential' is all we have to go by. Again, on that basis, we have ZERO evidence that it is more safe/less safe than smoking. But I think everyone (including ANTZ) would simply borrow knowledge we all think we have from smoking and proceed to have discussion accordingly. As if we have mountains of evidence when it comes to inhaling nicotine, and what that might be like for individuals over the short to long term. But technically, because vaping (nic) is so new, we actually don't have specific data on that, do we?
I really don't see the difference in any other compound in eLiquid, and thus unflavored is as much on the table as diketone liquids. To the degree that is not true (for some), makes me want to discuss/probe what is truly the concern here and what that is based on.
It is possible for a vaper, consuming the highest diacetyl concentrated juice, in the most quantities, to exceed the inhalation of some smoker out there. Yes, you can concoct that.
You made a big deal out of the idea that someone could vape 20 ml/day of some high diketone juice, and that exceeded the ONE pack a day "typical smoker" illustrated in the chart. But you ignore the fact that there are FOUR pack a day smokers out there, that are no more or less extreme than 20ml smokers.
A four pack a day smoker is inhaling about 26,800 micrograms per day of diacetyl. It is possible for a vaper to do that. But what does that prove? Considering that four PAD smokers are a significant percentage of the ONE BILLION smokers, not one of whom has ever been diagnosed with flavoring related disease, I'm not sure what your point is. It would apparently take far in excess of the world's heaviest smokers to show evidence of BO, and since the number of case sis ZERO, we have no idea what that magic number is.
Your entire argument totally ignores all the EVIDENCE produced from 1/7th of the world's population, smoking for various amounts of an entire adult lifetime.
The argument is all reduced to proving a negative, in the face of overwhelming evidence that vaping is indeed quite safe. That is pure propaganda.
Now its 10ml a day users? 10,20,30 ml? The real question is what percentage of those are using
high diketone count e-juice exclusively? What percentage of these will become ill (if at all)
assuming they continue high ml usage for 20 years?
As a percentage of the total its extremely unlikely that any harm if at all will not be noticed
as the sample is too small.
Regards
Mike
I find it sad / frustrating because it really seems like the intellectual discourse is willing to accept a whole lot of other things that are not truly proven, but are used as if no one questions it. Cause technically we haven't proven any of the ingredients in eLiquid are not potentially dangerous. Nor have we done this with any new product, perhaps ever, but for sure any new product that's come about in say last 15 years.
But I mostly find it humorous because it seems very obvious to me that everything on this planet is 'potentially dangerous' or even (more likely) carries with it a degree of harm/risks. And so funny that of all the activities one can engage in on this planet, vaping is the one where we are having this sort of discussion. I guess that is absurdity, more than humor, but when I witness the rhetoric and see the way points are constructed, it is funny at first glance. Then I got to get into debate mode and be all intellectual about these points as if there is something to be discussed via reason.
As I said on another post, for all we know, science is potentially more dangerous to humanity than religion, over the long term (3000 years). How would we prove today, otherwise? (And in reality, the question / topic just humors me.)
If you drink enough Pepsi or Coke every day, you *will*, at some statistical level, get diabetes. We accept the idea that some moderation is part of life, and virtually nothing escapes that. Why do you always focus on the extremes? And unlike the Pepsi debate, why do you do that in the face of ZERO evidence that any of this is harmful? Unlike the Pepsi/sugar debate, where excessive sugar intake is a fact, borne of much evidence. Unlike vaping, where these things are all matters of proving a negative, in the absence of ANY evidence at all.
When I try to drag you, kicking and screaming, into discussing KNOWN FACTS, you have a standard response: "I'm not interested in discussing that"
You have a right to not discuss that. I have a right to observe that you are copping out, in the absence of anything resembling observational fact on your side. And yes, "I don't want to discuss (the facts)" gets quite tiring and I have to call you out on that.
Of course nobody is going to be diagnosed with flavor related disease , when one gets ill from smoking it is never contributed to one or two ingredients in tobacco smoke , all the chemicals in regular cigarettes are a contributing factor .
Smoking (to me) is a known killer (i know some have recently commented that they don't even believe smoking is proven to be bad ) so i am referring to myself here as i have lost many due to smoking related diseases .
What you are trying to say is unless diketones, (one of many chemicals) in regular cigarettes is called out and proven to be the biggest culprit of smoking related diseases that means that there is nothing to worry about and they must be safe .
When you see your friends and family members breathing with the aid of oxygen tanks and in terrible shape that could very well be contributed to the diketones among all the other chemicals inhaled over decades of heavy smoking that is the cause of such suffering .
I know that without diketones being found solely responsible you will still consider them perfectly safe so of course you will not believe any of this but any serious health issues that occur in thousands of long time smokers can not rule out diketones being a big reason for their respiratory troubles and breathing issues among other factors .
There is nothing inherently dangerous with either science or religion. Unapplied, they are inert and benign. It's when they are used to promote, promulgate and enforce a human agenda that they become dangerous. Either way, it's US that's the problem. So, how are we gonna fix that problem?
Eh.. We live in a universe that's designed to kill us off anyway.
We do not know.
We should know what we could know now, to make choices.
Choices depend on personal preferences and tolerance of negative knowledge.
Examples:
I am not a heath nut, however I avoid eating foods with added sugar; because I do not really like sweets, it is not a big deal for me (for cooking my wife uses sucralose solution, the same one I occasionally use for DIY).
I do like meat, red meat, especially with lots of fat. I ignore supposed health threats and keep eating it.
So, I made my choices about my food. Sometimes I am choosing healthier style (when it does not really interfere with my preferences), sometimes I just eat what I like to eat. My choice - and I made it knowing about drawbacks of my food choices. The same should be with vaping - people should know about drawbacks, even supposed ones, to make their choices. To hide information is at least not ethical.
Are you on some internet forum wringing your hands about the evils of sugar? Or red meat? No? I didn't think so. Then why are you here, interjecting FUD in all these discussions?
@herb , you are playing the "we can't distinguish BO from smoking related diseases" card.
If you want to play that card, you have to explain why BO was found in a tiny population of popcorn workers, 50-80% of whom were smokers. But somehow we cannot find it in a population of ONE BILLION smokers.
I'm sorry, but that simply is preposterous. If they could find BO in a factory of a hundred or so workers, the majority smokers, surely they could find it in ONE BILLION smokers. And surely they tried, because a Nobel Prize, or something very equivalent, awaits that discoverer.
Why would you/anyone take up vaping when it is not regulated in the way you are saying? What are the ethics behind that decision? Care to explain?
1. Every single case of diagnosed BO is related to a dust laden industrial environment. Coal dust. Textile dust. Diketone dust
2. Not one single case of BO is known (at least to anyone here in this forum) to any other non-dust borne environment. None of the world's billion smokers. None of the hundreds of millions of smokers who have died, and their lungs were available for autopsy. Some millions of their lungs were autopsied, many long aftger the diketetone/smoking issue was known. I'm not talking about how few, I am talking about the concept of ZERO. ZERO is an amazing number, and amazing mountain of evidence. And none of the world's vapers, whose up to 7 years experience far exceeds the timeline required to produce evidence of BO in popcorn workers (2 years or less).
3. Because of the above two simple and indisputable facts, the medical community considered BO a "dust borne disease"...
4. Until the politics of vaping destroyed the science.
That is all you need to know about diketones. If you can find evidence of BO in the smoking or vaping population, a Nobel Prize, or equivalent, awaits you. There are thousands of scientists that would love to reap that reward, but none have.
I have repeated this mantra over and over in this thread, and you repeatedly refuse to discuss these very simple observational facts. Your response is not unlike the response to observational evidence that the Earth is not the center of universe. Ignore that evidence, and burn the heretic at the stake. As a species we've learned nothing since Copernicus and Giordano Bruno. Nothing at all.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
