Judge caught vaping his way through high-profile murder trial

[stols001]

If it was totally outside your point, I'm not 100% clear why you brought it up, but I believe, and I did go back and read, that you cited it as a secondary motivation to "not vape near others." So, at the time, that was your argument.

It's not a tenable argument, and to say it was tangential NOW, well, yes, I'm sure you'd want it to be, because it was thoroughly debunked.

The reason I am continuing is that as, others have said, it does raise the issue of getting new vapers "scared" they will harm their loved ones. That's not necessarily a good first message. A good first message (thoroughly lost, by initial vapers and many mod manufacturer's who included their "vape anywhere card, legally" is that the more obnoxious vaping becomes to others, the more it will be policed. Second hand vape is NOWHERE on the WHO's radar at this point they have a lot more to worry about, you know, real things. We should be polite vaping because it benefits us, and others. PERIOD..

Perhaps you DID need to look at your vaping life, as I use an air purifier indoors as a way to deal with any vape and if I am transporting someone who doesn't like vaping, I won't vape in the car and etc.

By the way, coughing does not indicate "harm," necessarily, either. I cough from time to time, either to remove mucus from my lungs, or when I am ill, etc. It's actually beneficial to cough when one is ill and dispel germs and mucus.

I am of the opinion (given that I might be holding a vape, but not vaping, it and someone does that "cough" thing, it's pretty psychosomatic) GIVEN that I am not vaping, merely "holding" a vape.

I think you should do what is best for you in your life, but inflicting it on every vaper is just as obnoxious as cloud chuckers vaping into a baby's stroller.

The fact is, no one here is the vaping police, and that includes you. It's a nuanced topic, and one that is best served by not getting emotional and raising "side issues."

Anna

 

[zoiDman]

Thanks for returning this back into an enjoyable thread.

No Problem Letitia.

LMK if there is anything Else I can do.

 

[Rossum]

if I am transporting someone who doesn't like vaping, I won't vape in the car and etc.

Meh. If you don't like me vaping in my own car, find someone else to give you a ride!

 

[stols001]

Hoping it cheers some, including me, up.

Anna

 

[kiba]

If it was totally outside your point, I'm not 100% clear why you brought it up, but I believe, and I did go back and read, that you cited it as a secondary motivation to "not vape near others." So, at the time, that was your argument.

It's not a tenable argument, and to say it was tangential NOW, well, yes, I'm sure you'd want it to be, because it was thoroughly debunked.

The reason I am continuing is that as, others have said, it does raise the issue of getting new vapers "scared" they will harm their loved ones. That's not necessarily a good first message. A good first message (thoroughly lost, by initial vapers and many mod manufacturer's who included their "vape anywhere card, legally" is that the more obnoxious vaping becomes to others, the more it will be policed. Second hand vape is NOWHERE on the WHO's radar at this point they have a lot more to worry about, you know, real things. We should be polite vaping because it benefits us, and others. PERIOD..

Perhaps you DID need to look at your vaping life, as I use an air purifier indoors as a way to deal with any vape and if I am transporting someone who doesn't like vaping, I won't vape in the car and etc.

By the way, coughing does not indicate "harm," necessarily, either. I cough from time to time, either to remove mucus from my lungs, or when I am ill, etc. It's actually beneficial to cough when one is ill and dispel germs and mucus.

I am of the opinion (given that I might be holding a vape, but not vaping, it and someone does that "cough" thing, it's pretty psychosomatic) GIVEN that I am not vaping, merely "holding" a vape.

I think you should do what is best for you in your life, but inflicting it on every vaper is just as obnoxious as cloud chuckers vaping into a baby's stroller.

The fact is, no one here is the vaping police, and that includes you. It's a nuanced topic, and one that is best served by not getting emotional and raising "side issues."

Anna

It's been throughly dragged out, but as I said & keep saying, use the fact that it's constantly being proven how little we know as an incentive, I doubt they care though.

& like I also said, if I mistakenly said that second hand vape clouds contain aldehydes (I think I specifically said otherwise) or are proven harmful, lmk and I'll edit that post immediately.

 

[stols001]

Nah, I'm done. Like I said, I think you should vape the way you feel you should vape.

I really actually agree with 99% of what you said. You were asked to cite facts, or studies that supported your argument, and you did. It's all good. I can agree to disagree, and I did. There are larger matters to worry about, really. I don't think the jury will be in or out for a while, and that's okay. Like much in life. We'll have to figure it out for ourselves, one by one, until the hammer strikes, and that's really how it's going to be at the end of the day.

Like you, I prefer to be considerate, it's just that my (current) motivations differ a bit, that's all

Anna

 

[Rossum]

You know in my generation (when I was being born) mom's routinely SMOKED during pregnancy and even labor
[...]
Yes, low birthweights

Lower birthweights were considered a benefit of smoking during pregnancy back then!

 

[CMD-Ky]

Using a quotation would help others, i.e., me, follow this thread. I am presuming that it is actually worth following - but I do wonder.

Well:

1) You are making an argument about something without citing relevant studies. One does not use one study to prove another. IF you have a study about second hand vape that you feel "proves" or justifies risk please do post it. I'd be happy to take a look. The carcinogen studies are only measuring what comes from the atomizer into a person's lungs, not what happens when it is dissipated.

2)Vaping is being targeted enough (IMO often falsely) to take studies about FIRST hand vaping and try to extrapolate that SECOND HAND vape is dangerous. Why would you do that? That's like saying after I metabolize a pill, *I* get an effect, but since *I* get an effect, my pores must be extruding the medication in minute amounts, so EVERYONE GETS an effect. It's untrue, it's biased, and it's really not a good argument to vape.

Had you kept your musings to "it's impolite and rude." I would 100% agree with you.

You didn't. You said that studies show vaping is dangerous (in some ways) as FIRST hand vape and went on to apply it to second hand vape.

We have enough problems with VAPE HATERS doing that, let alone actual vapers.

I will never, ever, sign on to "second hand vape is dangerous" based on Mike P's temp data. I don't think it is relevant, I feel there are a few studies, completed in different ways, that indicated very little harm, or some harm. But, you aren't even citing the studies that show harm! I wish you would, so I could tear apart their methodology. I've read some (both ways) and I understand scientific methodology.

Also, stating "Someday we might know more" as a reason is not going to fly either .Someday, we may in fact know more about EITHER side, but until we do, it's not a good rationale, a scientific rationale, or anything else.

I do not base my life around the fact that someday, the sun may go supernova and swallow up the earth and all its inhabitants.

Nor do I base my vape life around the fact that "someday" second hand vape may be shown to be harmful or not.

I don't apply my second hand vape to non vapers because many don't like it. I actually was mostly exactly the same way with smoking. I was polite, because I was raised to be.

Why not just keep it politeness and you know, sanity based. The idea of not subjecting my vape to others is ALREADY reasonable to me. Making up stuff and trying to connect a bunch of studies that WERE NOT SECOND HAND VAPE STUDIES is irrational, and actually harmful to the cause of vaping, in my opinion. Whether later on it becomes shown harmful or not, well, vaping should be done politely. Going on about the kid in the stroller shows irrationality, because if VAPING POLITELY is your concern, then fine. But, it's not based on the dangers of second hand vape, nor should it be, not unless you can support ANY of your claims (hint, you haven't).

So why introduce lies, there are enough of them being promoted by the ANTI vaping community. The argument you are trying to make... Seems to be rather similar to hitting oneself in the head with a hammer. I am not going to say "I VAPE POLITELY BECAUSE, at some future date, it will kill you...... Possibly, and I base it on a study of FIRST HAND VAPOR." I will never say that.
a) It's false
b) It's false
c) It's really not beneficial to the cause of "vaping" generally and such false information is harmful to new vapers, and vaping generally.

IF at some point some sort of "minimal" harm is demonstrated, then great, I will state that as a rationale for not vaping near people who don't like it.

I still would like your study about THE HARM of second hand vape. Because so far, we are far from "proven" on that. No one is saying vaping does not carry any risk . NO one on this thread has stated that . But, if you can prove in a causal way, supported by a study, that 2nd hand vape is in any way dangerous, you are actually the one giving out "false" information. I really don't think that is necessary or appropriate.

Without a study, I'm done here. You have yet to provide ONE THING that supports your claims. It is disturbing, because I'm sure that isn't your intent. But, it is actually what you are doing.

Anna

 

[DaveP]

Vape coil temps are the red line that we don't need to cross. If I remember correctly Dr. Farsalinos found in his testing that 380F was the point at which harmful byproducts begin to be created. When I switch to TC mode at 11W my displayed temps stay under 250F by a considerable margin.

World Renowned Dr. Farsalinos Releases New Report Analyzing Vaping Studies

 

[kiba]

Vape coil temps are the red line that we don't need to cross. If I remember correctly Dr. Farsalinos found in his testing that 380F was the point at which harmful byproducts begin to be created. When I switch to TC mode at 11W my displayed temps stay under 250F by a considerable margin.

World Renowned Dr. Farsalinos Releases New Report Analyzing Vaping Studies

C or F? Under 300F or so I can hardly tell I'm vaping. I'm normally under 420F. according to Mike, who I trust more than farsalinos, that's the minimum temp at which the nasties start to be produced, 470F for significant amounts.

Basically according to what I know (which isn't much) if your coil stays under 470F you're fine & they aren't produced at all under 420F. Wattage setups do regularly hit temps above 470F in chain vaping though.

 

[AzPlumber]

The last few pages resemble a classic courtroom volley, mind if I vape?

 

[Antwoord]

The guy is a giant dingus, its no different than the ...... I've seen blowing clouds in movie theaters & restaurants, or the kids doing it in crowded streets in the city next to babies in strollers.

Believe it or not there are people who don't want to be breathing second hand clouds, we already know there's carcinogens/aldehydes above certain temps (which, it's only something like 5% of us is using temp control), leeching metals, etc & more testing needs to be done to ascertain the safety of it. Which, if we're honest with ourselves, we had at least an inkling all these years. In some ways it's more physically obtrusive bc of the size & stickiness. At least smokers have the decency to do it outdoors & away from other people.

I think it is important for people who vape to be educated about as much information as they can so that we can show that we have been responsible, and actually have communities of people who promote and discuss research into electronic cigarettes, and we do care about the impact that our choices have on the world around us. We should cite both positive and negative studies if given the chance for an interview with a media publication. Granted, we should use the studies which contain data and conclusions that support that vaping is a harm reduction method and/or a viable means to quitting smoking to justify our right to choose to vape. We should never use that data to justify our right to impose upon other people's freedoms.

That said, and I am not trying to say anything damaging, it is very hard to justify vaping by people who have never smoked. About all you can say for a person who simply starts vaping because it looks cool is that they have the right to put themselves at risk by using an electronic cigarette as long as smoking is still legal.

On the other hand, if someone without a nicotine addiction wants to point out that they vape 0% nicotine then they have the right to play with a toy fog machine. I really don't know how to justify the legality of it. For non-nicotine addicts you start wandering into pharmaceutical territory, and that would mean e-cigs would most likely only be available by prescription.

So we are pretty much forced to say that e-cigarettes are what their name implies. Tobacco products relegated to the dirty ashtray section of perception. Would I like e-cigarettes to be available with all of their potential uses including cloud-chasing? Yes. Do I also, as an electronic cigarette user, want the use of electronic cigarettes to be safe? Yes. Do I think non-nicotine addicts should vape "just because"? I think it is somewhat foolish, but I also think wearing a lot of perfume or cologne is somewhat foolish because studies on the effects of fragrance are not readily conducted, and new evidence suggests that even compounds perceived to be as benign as organic floral compounds can have significant effects on hormone levels in humans.

How do we legislate rights? By judging the perceived benefit or harm, the potential, of a human being with those rights. All of this is about perception. The scientific data is used to cast perception. It's only about perception because lots of things can harm you and others. Driving is a perfect example. It shouldn't be legal. It is only legal because of speed limits and other measures which regulate it.

If a lot of people drove like our perception of how some people vape then, in a hypothetical future where public transportation has advanced, driving may become illegal. There are no speed limits yet, but yes, we have to regulate ourselves. We should, anyway. We should strive to be perceived as the hypothetical free human being who is able (given permission by collective unconscious judgments of one's level of social, let's call it evolution) to think for him/herself, and thus determine his/her own rights. That is how you want people to view you.

 

[kiba]

I think it is important for people who vape to be educated about as much information as they can so that we can show that we have been responsible, and actually have communities of people who promote and discuss research into electronic cigarettes, and we do care about the impact that our choices have on the world around us. We should cite both positive and negative studies if given the chance for an interview with a media publication. Granted, we should use the studies which contain data and conclusions that support that vaping is a harm reduction method and/or a viable means to quitting smoking to justify our right to choose to vape. We should never use that data to justify our right to impose upon other people's freedoms.

That said, and I am not trying to say anything damaging, it is very hard to justify vaping by people who have never smoked. About all you can say for a person who simply starts vaping because it looks cool is that they have the right to put themselves at risk by using an electronic cigarette as long as smoking is still legal.

On the other hand, if someone without a nicotine addiction wants to point out that they vape 0% nicotine then they have the right to play with a toy fog machine. I really don't know how to justify the legality of it. For non-nicotine addicts you start wandering into pharmaceutical territory, and that would mean e-cigs would most likely only be available by prescription.

So we are pretty much forced to say that e-cigarettes are what their name implies. Tobacco products relegated to the dirty ashtray section of perception. Would I like e-cigarettes to be available with all of their potential uses including cloud-chasing? Yes. Do I also, as an electronic cigarette user, want the use of electronic cigarettes to be safe? Yes. Do I think non-nicotine addicts should vape "just because"? I think it is somewhat foolish, but I also think wearing a lot of perfume or cologne is somewhat foolish because studies on the effects of fragrance are not readily conducted, and new evidence suggests that even compounds perceived to be as benign as organic floral compounds can have significant effects on hormone levels in humans.

How do we legislate rights? By judging the perceived benefit or harm, the potential, of a human being with those rights. All of this is about perception. The scientific data is used to cast perception. It's only about perception because lots of things can harm you and others. Driving is a perfect example. It shouldn't be legal. It is only legal because of speed limits and other measures which regulate it.

If a lot of people drove like our perception of how some people vape then, in a hypothetical future where public transportation has advanced, driving may become illegal. There are no speed limits yet, but yes, we have to regulate ourselves. We should, anyway. We should strive to be perceived as the hypothetical free human being who is able (given permission by collective unconscious judgments of one's level of social, let's call it evolution) to think for him/herself, and thus determine his/her own rights. That is how you want people to view you.

Tbh I just don't like his choice of vape pen, lol. Nevermind the fact that he's doing it on front of all those people, I'm sure some of them smoke/vape.

About the prescription thing that you mentioned... I actually like that & I've thought of it before as to where vaping is headed as a whole (prescriptions for unflavored vg/pg/nicotine). for example, we have medical cannabis here & it's very popular, there are now tons of people who use it, & the prescription system works very well & keeps it in the hands of people who need it & out of the hands of minors. I myself have a script for it & use it with a different type of atty, but the same mod I use for vaping... you don't ever see people on the street doing it, EVER. Even though they can & are allowed to. They do it discretely & there are many people who vape that as well, so I doubt it would do much to curb the asinine behavior, i mean I'm not completely sure but it seems to be something w/ vaping in particular... Like I said smokers don't act like that, it starts once they begin vaping.. So, yeah, idk... It's a conundrum.

 

[Antwoord]

Tbh I just don't like his choice of vape pen, lol. Nevermore the fact that he's doing it on front of all those people, I'm sure some of them smoke/vape.

About the prescription thing that you mentioned... I actually like that & I've thought of it before as to where vaping is headed as a whole (prescriptions for unflavored vg/pg/nicotine). I doubt it would do much to curb the asinine behavior though, i mean I'm not completely sure but it seems to be something w/ vaping in particular... Like I said smokers don't act like that, it starts once they begin vaping. for another example, we have medical ........ here & it's very popular, there are now tons of people who use it, & the prescription system works very well. I myself have a script for it & use it with a different type of atty, but the same mod I use for vaping... but you don't ever see people on the street doing it, EVER. Even though they can & are allowed to. They do it discretely & there are many people who vape that as well. So, yeah, idk... It's a conundrum.

For sure. After viewing so many petitions with only a few thousand signatures, and then things like this judge who has a blatant disregard for, everything apparently, it just seemed like the last nail in the coffin to me. Maybe things will turn out better than one might expect. Who knows.

 

[kiba]

For sure. After viewing so many petitions with only a few thousand signatures, and then things like this judge who has a blatant disregard for, everything apparently, it just seemed like the last nail in the coffin to me. Maybe things will turn out better than one might expect. Who knows.

Yeah, I def. agree & it's stuff like that & battery safety which attracts most of the unwanted attention.

Things that, to many of us, are considered common sense.

 

[Opinionated]

You know... I am so unclear why this thread, which is about a judge who is accused by a newspaper journalist (if you can call him that) of stealth vaping in the courtroom, the only proposed evidence of this is not vapor being observed, but a small blue light...

So... here we have the thread topic. Fine... no difficulty..

But oddly we are back to this B.S. of temperature control .

In another thread here on this very forum earlier today there was a person having a difficult time with getting their TC on their expensive mod (purchased solely for the TC capabilities of the mod) to work properly...

When someone in the thread mentioned their TC wasn't working right they threatened to quit vaping and go back to smoking because they were terrified of vaping without TC, so deeply has this about TC permeated the community.

This just days after I argued against this new TC that is sweeping our forum and the vaping community as a whole due to a few misguided individuals going around bible thumping about the necessity of temperature control.



I'm about done with the vaping community if all you people want to do is to scare the hell out of smokers and deter them from ever even trying vaping over all these damn temperature control lies.

And even in threads that have not one thing to do with it either..

Let's just scare the hell out of all potential vapers.. my God vaping is a lifesaver (without TC).. get a damn grip on yourselves.

We don't need anti vapers at all with all you TC thumpers running around spreading lies.. who need enemies I swear..

 

[scott58]

I miss ash trays on desks.

 

[Rossum]

I miss ash trays on desks.

You know, it's funny. At the Kennedy Space Center's Visitor's Complex, you can see the launch control room used for the Apollo missions. The tour guide claims it looks exactly like it did back then. I called him out. "BS, the ashtrays are missing!"

 

[ENAUD]

chompin' down some diacetyl flavored temperature controlled popped corn while reading thread about a judge...

 

[kiba]

You know... I am so unclear why this thread, which is about a judge who is accused by a newspaper journalist (if you can call him that) of stealth vaping in the courtroom, the only proposed evidence of this is not vapor being observed, but a small blue light...

So... here we have the thread topic. Fine... no difficulty..

But oddly we are back to this B.S. of temperature control .

In another thread here on this very forum earlier today there was a person having a difficult time with getting their TC on their expensive mod (purchased solely for the TC capabilities of the mod) to work properly...

When someone in the thread mentioned their TC wasn't working right they threatened to quit vaping and go back to smoking because they were terrified of vaping without TC, so deeply has this about TC permeated the community.

This just days after I argued against this new TC that is sweeping our forum and the vaping community as a whole due to a few misguided individuals going around bible thumping about the necessity of temperature control.



I'm about done with the vaping community if all you people want to do is to scare the hell out of smokers and deter them from ever even trying vaping over all these damn temperature control lies.

And even in threads that have not one thing to do with it either..

Let's just scare the hell out of all potential vapers.. my God vaping is a lifesaver (without TC).. get a damn grip on yourselves.

We don't need anti vapers at all with all you TC thumpers running around spreading lies.. who need enemies I swear..

lol, that's... definitely something. not sure what, but I had fun reading it.

Question; did you type out the censors yourself or was it done by the forum? Just for the sake of context, to me it's funnier imagining someone typing "censored" over & over.

In all honesty though, you're not wrong, a lot of them are misinformed. My local b&m uses it as a ploy to sell the most expensive mods. Also I'm kind of impressed at the same time that someone brand new is diving in balls deep like that.