Huge Archive of Medical Research on POSITIVE Effects of Vaping

[SuperBunk]

Hi,

Long time lurker, decided to finally register. Hello!

I'm ALWAYS asked by people that smoke and don't vape whether I'm worried about what it's doing to my lungs. Yes. By SMOKERS. Apparently: You DON'T know what's in these liquids (rubbish, for the most part) or the long term effects (if any).

Before starting vaping I was actually sucked into this; I read reports online about the bad stuff vaping does and how know one knows anything about the effects. I believed it. But then I thought: hang on a second! Am I gonna take the mainstream media's word for this or find out for myself? This was a good few years ago by the way.

I did find a load of reports though and research in my investigations; I read some, but a lot of it was well technical and not really my thing! Anyway. I found this post -- The War on Vaping is About MONEY –– NOT Your Well Being -- and it has links to TONS of research papers you can read online -- and it's all PRO vaping.

More poeple should know about this. It's a sad time we live in where something that stops people smoking is actually about to be prohibited

Look forward to speaking to you guys some more in the future!

 

[nicnik]

You need more posts before you can post links. I'm not sure how many. Please repost the link when you can. I'd like to see it.

 

[CharTech]

I think it's 5 posts to be able to post a link.

 

[pennysmalls]

Yes, I'd like to see it also.

 

[B2L]

Welcome @SuperBunk

Here's the link, lots of good stuff in there...

The War on Vaping is About MONEY –– NOT Your Well Being

Good to see that someone saw through the smokescreen, the truth is out there (if you care to look)

 

[B2L]

Double post :-/

 

[nicnik]

I'm ALWAYS asked by people that smoke and don't vape whether I'm worried about what it's doing to my lungs. Yes. By SMOKERS. Apparently: You DON'T know what's in these liquids (rubbish, for the most part) or the long term effects (if any).

Before starting vaping I was actually sucked into this; I read reports online about the bad stuff vaping does and how know one knows anything about the effects. I believed it. But then I thought: hang on a second! Am I gonna take the mainstream media's word for this or find out for myself? This was a good few years ago by the way.

I was very interested in e-cigs when I first heard of them. Then, I got scared off by the "antifreeze" propaganda. After at least a few months, I started reading again, since I'd already been mistrustful of anti-smoking campaigns.

7 years ago, I tried one at a head shop that sold some. I felt absolutely no throat hit. The guy acted amazed that I didn't, and said that it was packed with the highest available level of nicotine. I was still uneasy about the "antifreeze" thing, and along with no throat hit, I didn't feel much desire to delve further.

I now know there could've been many reasons for no throat hit. I believe it was a 510, and I know that I can get plenty of throat hit from a 510, without that high of a nicotine level. The battery was probably low, but I went away thinking that e-cigs were not gonna help me, and was glad not to have to worry about antifreeze.

A few years later, I looked up more info about the antifreeze claims, and also started reading, trying to figure out what's up with no throat hit. Didn't know that term "throat hit" yet, but soon ran into it, and found lots of encouraging info. I started my vaping and quitting smoking very soon after that. I've been vaping and not smoking for just under 3 years, now.

 

[rico942]

I was still uneasy about the "antifreeze" thing ...

This one almost got me too, early in my vaping experience ...

Ironically, it was a close friend, a retired automotive engineer, who straightened me out about the "anti-freeze" disinformation campaign ...

He was a bit skeptical about my vaping, since he was a "cold turkey" quitter many years ago. But when he saw doctors in the media claiming that propylene glycol is "extremely toxic", he called BS, and explained to me that PG was used in modern anti-freeze to replace ethylene glycol, to prevent poisoning animals that might drink from drained puddles of engine coolant. He also wised me up to the fact that PG is a component of many common non-toxic household products ...

I would like to think that the sheer overwhelming volume of anti-vaping propaganda, and the obvious absurdities and falsehoods presented in the mainstream media, might eventually cause a reset of perception with the general public ...

I don't expect the average never-smoker to embrace vaping overnight, after decades of conditioning, and the acceptance of smoker-bashing as a politically correct behavior ...

But I would expect any independent thinker to be angered by the fact that they have been manipulated into an unreasonable prejudice, by forces that have only puritanical ideology and monetary gain as their motivations ...

By the way, my retired engineer friend, once a skeptic, has now expressed interest in applying his considerable talents to designing and building for me a smaller, more efficient personal vaporizer ...

I count that as one in the win column ...

 

[nicnik]

Ironically, it was a close friend, a retired automotive engineer, who straightened me out about the "anti-freeze" disinformation campaign ...

Lurking on ecf straightened me out on it.

 

[rico942]

Lurking on ecf straightened me out on it.

I was a lurker here on ECF at the time, but not yet fully immunized to media misinformation about the mythical "dangers of vaping". I now come here daily for my booster shot ...

 

[SuperBunk]

You need more posts before you can post links. I'm not sure how many. Please repost the link when you can. I'd like to see it.

Hey! Wow -- what a noobie fail on my part! Sorry about that.

 

[SuperBunk]

Welcome @SuperBunk

Here's the link, lots of good stuff in there...

The War on Vaping is About MONEY –– NOT Your Well Being

Good to see that someone saw through the smokescreen, the truth is out there (if you care to look)

Welcome @SuperBunk

Here's the link, lots of good stuff in there...

Hey! Thanks for that Great to meet you guys

 

[SuperBunk]

I was very interested in e-cigs when I first heard of them. Then, I got scared off by the "antifreeze" propaganda. After at least a few months, I started reading again, since I'd already been mistrustful of anti-smoking campaigns.

7 years ago, I tried one at a head shop that sold some. I felt absolutely no throat hit. The guy acted amazed that I didn't, and said that it was packed with the highest available level of nicotine. I was still uneasy about the "antifreeze" thing, and along with no throat hit, I didn't feel much desire to delve further.

I now know there could've been many reasons for no throat hit. I believe it was a 510, and I know that I can get plenty of throat hit from a 510, without that high of a nicotine level. The battery was probably low, but I went away thinking that e-cigs were not gonna help me, and was glad not to have to worry about antifreeze.

A few years later, I looked up more info about the antifreeze claims, and also started reading, trying to figure out what's up with no throat hit. Didn't know that term "throat hit" yet, but soon ran into it, and found lots of encouraging info. I started my vaping and quitting smoking very soon after that. I've been vaping and not smoking for just under 3 years, now.

Yeah, the way I see it is pretty simple now: it's not as bad as smoking, likely harmless and this is disruptive to the powers that be as they're not invested in it and cannot replicate the type of brand appeal independent vape brand have. So, rather than spending millions they're just going to crush the industry.

I'd never go back to smoking now, though I admit I do have the occassional one once in a while. It's great to have options and this is truly a great technology. I just hope logic wins out in the end!

 

[nicnik]

Yeah, the way I see it is pretty simple now: it's not as bad as smoking, likely harmless and this is disruptive to the powers that be as they're not invested in it and cannot replicate the type of brand appeal independent vape brand have. So, rather than spending millions they're just going to crush the industry.

I'd never go back to smoking now, though I admit I do have the occassional one once in a while. It's great to have options and this is truly a great technology. I just hope logic wins out in the end!

I'm no expert, but I can't seem any harm in an occasional smoke if it doesn't cause a relapse. It wouldn't for me, but for some vapers it might.

Yeah, I'm rooting for logic, starting with science. I think it WILL win in the end.

 

[sofarsogood]

Hi,

Long time lurker, decided to finally register. Hello!

I'm ALWAYS asked by people that smoke and don't vape whether I'm worried about what it's doing to my lungs. Yes. By SMOKERS. Apparently: You DON'T know what's in these liquids (rubbish, for the most part) or the long term effects (if any).

Before starting vaping I was actually sucked into this; I read reports online about the bad stuff vaping does and how know one knows anything about the effects. I believed it. But then I thought: hang on a second! Am I gonna take the mainstream media's word for this or find out for myself? This was a good few years ago by the way.

I did find a load of reports though and research in my investigations; I read some, but a lot of it was well technical and not really my thing! Anyway. I found this post -- The War on Vaping is About MONEY –– NOT Your Well Being -- and it has links to TONS of research papers you can read online -- and it's all PRO vaping.

More poeple should know about this. It's a sad time we live in where something that stops people smoking is actually about to be prohibited

Look forward to speaking to you guys some more in the future!

The FDA and so-called public health aren't moved by the research because it's the wrong research. What hasn't been done is to study what would happen if most smokers around the world switched over a 10 year time frame or a similar scenario.

Suppose tobacco sales declined from $1 trillion per year to $100 billion. What would happen to national economies? That could be studied. Why isn't it? Some existing businesses that rely on tobacco sales would go out of business. The money wouldn't disappear. It would be spent on other things. Children of smoking parents would benefit by more money to spend on them. Life expectancy would increase. Health care systems would be effected. Former smoking employees would be more productive increasing competition in the work place. A rapid 90% decline in tobacco taxes would be the mother of all tax cuts. Poor people and their families would benefit a lot. Tax supported institutions, especially so-called public health would suffer severely. May be some already stressed governments would become insolvent. May be there would be political unrest is many places because governments couldn't keep their spending promises. The list is endless and a good computer model coulld teach a lot about the possibilities. THAT's the "science" that worries governments, the FDA, and the whole worthless lot of them.

 

[nomore stinkies]

Yeah, the way I see it is pretty simple now: it's not as bad as smoking, likely harmless and this is disruptive to the powers that be as they're not invested in it and cannot replicate the type of brand appeal independent vape brand have. So, rather than spending millions they're just going to crush the industry.

I'd never go back to smoking now, though I admit I do have the occassional one once in a while. It's great to have options and this is truly a great technology. I just hope logic wins out in the end!

MayI ask you how much you smoked and for how long? When did you start vaping?
Ps good for you!

 

[SuperBunk]

MayI ask you how much you smoked and for how long? When did you start vaping?
Ps good for you!

I smoke for about 15 years, I guess. Roll-ups, mainly. Switched to vaping in 2013 or so I think and haven't looked back since really. I even stopped vaping for about 3 months, but eventually started again Just glad I had it to fall back on and not smoking!

 

[nomore stinkies]

I smoke for about 15 years, I guess. Roll-ups, mainly. Switched to vaping in 2013 or so I think and haven't looked back since really. I even stopped vaping for about 3 months, but eventually started again Just glad I had it to fall back on and not smoking![/QUOTE



Well you ddidn't do too much damage in 15 years. I, unfortunately, smoked 3 times as long and did irreparable damage. It's a slow, progressive, insidious attack on lungs, vessels and heart. Happy to hear vaping helped you quit the habit! Let's hope the FDA will see the light after we make some commotion. One can only hope.

 

[nomore stinkies]

Oh for crying out loud my response attached to your quote. Old people should not stay up past their bedtime.

 

[nicnik]

Oh for crying out loud my response attached to your quote. Old people should not stay up past their bedtime.

Just give yourself a later bedtime, and you'll post flawlessly. 9:30 is too early.