Is this still a harm reduction?
- Thread starter rokyo87
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
We can detect and measure chemicals, harmless and harmful, in smoke and vapor. When we do that we find trivial amounts of harmful chemicals in vapor compared to cigarette smoke. That isn't the whole story. I vape 7 ml per day. I notice a slight amount of lung irritation, also trivial compared to smoking. Perhaps that irritation would be an issue for some whose lungs have poor recuperation but not an issue for others.
I reduced flavoring to get rid of minor mouth irritation. I'm reducing nic very slowly over months (only so my stash lasts longer), and I wouldn't mind vaping less ml to minimize the touch of irritation I notice. I do think there should be some discipline to vaping and not let it become a total indulgance.
I reduced flavoring to get rid of minor mouth irritation. I'm reducing nic very slowly over months (only so my stash lasts longer), and I wouldn't mind vaping less ml to minimize the touch of irritation I notice. I do think there should be some discipline to vaping and not let it become a total indulgance.
There is a lot of misunderstanding as to harm reduction and tobacco, but it actually has a history to it before vaping showed up. In the mid-nineties Brad Rodu began publishing papers on the dramatically lower risk of smokeless tobacco compared to cigarettes. He was later joined by the likes of Carl Phillips and Bill Godshall, among others, in advocating that smokers simply switch to smokeless tobacco to greatly reduce their risk. It was a break from the abstinence only, quit or die mentality that dominated (and still does) the tobacco control industry. Smokeless tobacco is estimated, based on many studies out of both Sweden and the US, to be about 99% less harmful then smoking, plus or minus 1%. What we know from these studies is that the thing that kills people is the smoke, not nicotine or tobacco.
When vaping came along it was immediately recognized as another harm reduction product, simply because it did not involve combustion. We already know that nicotine has a risk so low as to not show up in population studies. Smokeless tobacco users get plenty of nicotine, yet any harms are just not showing up. There are a few long term unknowns as in flavorings etc, but as of yet there haven't been any real issues.
In general, people who vape are overestimating the risk. Even the studies coming out of the UK are an overestimate and not based on sound science (it was based on a survey among some self-proclaimed experts). I don't know where you are getting the 90% less harmful chemicals number as I have never seen it anywhere. It is certainly a good deal less then that.
No it wouldn't. The total lack of any evidence of harm to vapers established that.
I use food safety to establish a benchmark as to what defines "safe". It is very legitimate to compare relative safety.
And I use "consume" to include vaping and eating. Despite the mystical nature of inhaling something foisted upon us by our adversaries there is nothing mystical about it. Our lungs were well designed to deal with even more contaminants than our stomachs see. We eat a couple times a day but breath 24/7. Contrary to popular belief fresh air is not pure air.
I note you are not arguing with my premise- that vaping is safer than eating. You instead argue semantics....
I have no desire to support our adversaries in the issue of vaping safety. Attempts to brand vaping as the worst thing since ...... is utterly inaccurate and manipulative to achieve a social, rather than medically rational policy. Attempts to report vaping as having zero long term health effects is just as inaccurate and manipulative in the absence of that data as well.
It took decades to establish that exposure to asbestos was harmful. It took decades to establish that particulate matter released from coal burning electric plants was harmful. This despite how well are lungs are designed to deal with contaminants (actually, the lungs aren't all that great, we rely on our upper airway for much of the filtration of stuff before it gets into our lungs as the first line of defense).
The best that can be said st present is that based upon 10 years of observation, no significant harm has been noted with vaping for that period. Based upon the known composition of vaping e-liquids currently available, there is little to suggest a long term risk to health will be seen with long term use. Vaping represents a marked reduction in risk compared to combustible tobacco. Certainty about long term safety cannot be established due to the limited period of observation across a large population at this time.
This is not about semantics. This is about truth and accuracy. Stating vaping carries no long term risk is inaccurate.
There are two words which should be used with great care when it comes to health. Always or never. Both are rarely correct.
Both you and @alientraveler have now misrepresented what I said. I never said "vaping is harmless".
What I said is that "there is no known harm". And whenever I say that people get really riled up and among other things misrepresent what I said. Someone yesterday even dragged Hitler into it. For what reason I have no clue. It made no sense.
The fact is that when someone asks about vaping safety at least 30 people pile on with their version of "we just don't know". And "I Dare you to prove a negative" (prove it's 100% harmless"). And "I'm just certain there is harm here" (never with evidence because there is no evidence to support that belief).
We don't need ANTZ to destroy us. This forum carries all their water for them.
All I have to say is "don't forget that there is zero evidence of harm, after over 7 years now. And the fireworks start. Amazing what a simple statement of fact can do here...
I stand by what I said-. It's cult-like behavior. And there is NOTHING in our lives known to be 100% safe, and precious little legitimately studied on a long term basis because it is in most cases simply impossible. Not even green beans.
Can I post lab rat tests if they're about how PG doesn't do anything but possibly make you gain weight? This was cited by the AHA, and many others during these same arguments that seem to happen weekly on ECF.
TESTS FOR THE CHRONIC TOXICITY OF PROPYLEXE GLYCOL AND TRIETHYLENE GLYCOL ON MONKEYS AND RATS BY VAPOR INHALATION AND ORAL ADMINISTRATION
Huh. Could be a market for low calorie PG so rats can stay fit and thin.
Vaping is probably the one way to avoid gaining 20 pounds when quitting smoking as you're far less likely to overeat in compensation for your oral fix. Unless you're a rat, of course.
I was fat before I quit smoking, so I'm not sure if it helped me at all.
"The animals in the glycol chamber gained weight more rapidly than did the control rats and the weights of the former group at 12 months were about 50 per cent greater than the latter. We have no explanation to offer for this difference since, except for the presence of the glycol vapor, all conditions were approximately the same in each group. There was no essential change in the weights of the rats of either group after twelve months. "
300 grams vs 450, for those that care.
Sorry, I'm not a lab rat and I didn't gain weight after I started vaping and quit smoking. Nor was I confined to a cage and forced to inhale PG whether I liked it or not. A human study of vaper's weight change would be more interesting.
Yeah, but we tend to not like it when we are put in cages under controlled conditions. The monkeys in the study, exposed to TEG, yielded similar results w/out the weight gain.
And lower risk. The anti vaping people are bald faced lying because their position is weak and they have no moral dimension when it comes to protecting their funding. We don't have to lie because our case is strong. We can go beyond "truthful" to being fully informative. That might involve careful choice of words. Vaping may be contra indicated for some people but apparently so few that the epidemeologists have yet to spot a trend. In the last 8 years there has been a gigantic trial by millions of vapers. Where are the reports of doctors treating illnesses caused by using ecigarettes? So far so good.Vaping = Harm reduction
So the animal closest to us did not gain weight but everyone talks about rats that did?Yeah, but we tend to not like it when we are put in cages under controlled conditions. The monkeys in the study, exposed to TEG, yielded similar results w/out the weight gain.
I don't know that everyone does. You, me, and Eskie appear to be.
I don't know if asbestos is in the same category as PG an VG... Asbestos was never considered safe: Asbestos - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
But it was used widely around the world. I agree on that.
Last edited:
I am curious as to how/why the 3 or 4 ingredients in our e-liquid has been changed from ingredients to chemicals. Did it get started by someone with an agenda? An agenda to make folks think there has to be something dangerous in it because of the chemicals. That would be like calling the ingredient list for making cookies a chemical list.
Just a little food for thought. We have enough of a fight on our hands with all the do gooders out there that think they know what is best for us. How 'bout we not use and repeat their talking points. A lot of the new folks coming here for advice have been bombarded with all the lies and half-truths out there. They need to hear the truth from us. JMHO
I think both terms... ingredients and chemicals are both accurately used. The term chemical in this case is a more specific term to classify the ingredients.
Propylene Glycol is a chemical... same with vegetable glycerin... nicotine in it's liquid form would be accurately termed a chemical and it's mixed in a base of either PG/VG or both. Then there's flavorings... if you look at the ingredients of the artificial food flavorings used in most e-juice... they are pure chemical concoctions that contain no part of the source flavor they mimic. Here's a good example: http://www.johndwalsh.com/MSDS/FLAVORS/Blueberry,Artificial059100A.pdf
if your little vape movie didnt miss the boat to the us alllllllll summer when we needed some help, maybe youd know.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
