Here's my research paper on e-cigarettes for your enjoyment

[Chemcat]

Thank you for posting your paper! I thought it a very concisely detailed article on the history, development, and advantages of e-cigarettes compared to the more usual existing smoke-able tobacco products. The statistical information provided was presented in a very logical and understandable manner even if the reader had no prior knowledge of e-cigarettes. I liked reading it very much.

 

[CanadaLady]

Glad you got an A! Good read! Good work! Spread the word!

 

[Maast]

Thanks for the kind words, I knew there were grammatical errors, but I was up against a deadline and had to spit it out. It was a (very) rough draft +2 edits back-to-back and then sent in.

It went from outline format to submitted in 3 days, and I work full time and am taking 9 credit hours for the summer semester. And I had a math midterm the day prior.

Its biased because it's a "persuasion" paper. If you read through the linked sources you'll find that I cherry-picked my data to favor my point, its all absolutely true - but it's not exactly "balanced". I found several references of allergic reactions to PG plus other things that I ignored because vapers dont put PG in a IV and inject it - it's all in the dose.

The hard part was gathering the research, that took a couple long sessions.

Anybody feel free to use it in any means you desire, I considered publication but I dont have the time to polish it enough to pass a editorial review board.

 

[Iffy]

Anybody feel free to use it in any means you desire...

Thanx! I now have it in Word and will print copies to hand out with the ECF business cards and the CASAA brochures for the inquisitive.

Would you please PM me your name so I can add it as authorship?

Again, good job and thanx.

 

[Gestalt]

Hi,

Thanks for posting that well thought out paper. The one thing that I would have liked more clarification on is this paragraph:

"A 2010 study conducted by Michael Siegel published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine showed that at 6 months after purchasing a e-cigarette 70% of those who used it 20 times a day or more were not using any combusted tobacco at all. 67% reported a reduction in tobacco use, 49% had significant abstinence from smoking and 34% we not using any nicotine containing products. "

I would just like to know how the numbers add up. 70% don't use any combusted tobacco and 67% had a reduction in tobacco use. Where the other 3% already using an alternative tobacco product, or no tobacco at all? Or maybe the "20 times a day" stipulation didn't apply for the other quoted percentages? Anyways, good job. That part is just a little unclear for me.

 

[txtumbleweed]

Very good report!

 

[Sandrita]

Wow well done that definitely deserved an A!!

 

[RialCeLmiT]

Thanks for the kind words, I knew there were grammatical errors, but I was up against a deadline and had to spit it out. It was a (very) rough draft +2 edits back-to-back and then sent in.

It went from outline format to submitted in 3 days, and I work full time and am taking 9 credit hours for the summer semester. And I had a math midterm the day prior.

Its biased because it's a "persuasion" paper. If you read through the linked sources you'll find that I cherry-picked my data to favor my point, its all absolutely true - but it's not exactly "balanced". I found several references of allergic reactions to PG plus other things that I ignored because vapers dont put PG in a IV and inject it - it's all in the dose.

The hard part was gathering the research, that took a couple long sessions.

Anybody feel free to use it in any means you desire, I considered publication but I dont have the time to polish it enough to pass a editorial review board.

You don't know my habits >.>...I'd love to stay and chat, but I'm busy filling this syringe with juice and trying to locate one of the few veins I might have left

 

[RamAir02]

Excellent paper! Very well written and quite informative. I'm glad I read it as I actually learned a lot, being quite new to vaping.

 

[Dimitris]

great paper and very informative!

 

[K24A3]

Good read! Well done.

"Nicotine, which binds to and activates neurotransmitter receptors in the brain’s pleasure centers and provides a feeling of well-being. Secondly, combusted tobacco contains natural Monoamine Oxidase Inhibitors (MAOI’s) which inhibit the neurotransmitter receptors from being cleared"

That alone is one big advantage. Smoking analogs deprives the brain from oxygen which is obviously not a good thing. ECigs don't have this affect at all as far as I can tell from experience.

 

[fray]

A lot of good information, but I hope there were a lot of changes before you turned it in.

This paper would have gotten me a D or C in highschool.

 

[incog]

Excellent write up!!!! *Clap* CLAP*

 

[Spazmelda]

Good job. What grade did you end up getting?

Marking for future reference...

 

[classwife]

I'd like to hear too...OP hasn't posted since 6/22

 

[LeftCoastVaper]

Nice approach, but many of your assertions are incomplete or dubious. A little more research and less reliance on the particular sources cited might have made this a much better paper.

 

[Iffy]

Nice approach, but many of your assertions are incomplete or dubious.

As I said earlier in Maast's defense, it's an English assignment, not a grant proposal.

If you have a more comprehensive, understandable and brief document for the vape curious, please do share!

 

[LeftCoastVaper]

Hmmm... back in my day even English assignments had to be defensible and fact-based. If things have changed I withdraw my comments. But asking me to submit my own thesis is like demanding a film critic make a better movie than the one he's reviewing. Non sequitur, as it were...

 

[Spazmelda]

I thought it was pretty good. He used qualifying statements such as 'may', 'surmised', 'anecdotal', etc... Unfortunately, since we don't have any long term studies and very few even short term research to rely on, this is about as good as can be done.

For it's purpose, I thought it was informative and well done.

 

[LeftCoastVaper]

I thought it was pretty good. He used qualifying statements such as 'may', 'surmised', 'anecdotal', etc...

I don't have a problem with those terms; rather with certain assertions presented as facts, which clearly aren't. Those are the things which will get you that C- in most colleges or universities.