Need help with an argument w/ ex-smoker...

[NancyR]

Something else you might want to check out is Dr K. Farsalinos. He is a Cardiologist, performing clinical research on electronic cigarettes in Athens & Lamia, Greece. He has already had a couple of papers published including one where a man had chronic idiopathic neutrophilia. The man started using e-cigs to stop smoking and after 6 months, laboratory examination showed normalized leukocyte count and C-reactive protein levels, confirmed immediately by a second laboratory and by repeated tests after 1 and 2 months.

Chronic Idiopathic Neutrophilia in A Smoker, Relieved after Smoking Ce

 

[kristin]

Yeah I get that about ex-smokers... but he was literally terrified since his younger brother (in great shape) had a heart attack, and he found out that he has a genetic predisposition for heart failure so now he feels that anything (however irrational it may seem) that may affect his heart - he is against. I'm just trying to get him on "our side" and realize that vapers aren't going to kill him. And, he shouldn't battle against our efforts to have them not in the same classification as analogs.

Someone with a predisposition to heart attack SHOULD be concerned about using ANY stimulant, but that doesn't mean that EVERYONE should have that same concern anymore than someone who doesn't have a peanut allergy needs to avoid peanut butter.

As far as the nicotine in second-hand vapor, a 1993 study on nicotine in vegetables showed that it would take 9 HOURS of exposure to minimal secondary smoke to be exposed to the same amount of nicotine you would get in just 1/4 cup of eggplant. Even if secondary vapor has the same levels as secondary smoke, it's obviously not a lot or we would be told eggplant is a health hazard. So, unless someone also avoids eggplant and other vegetable with nicotine, concern with the amount of nicotine they are exposed to with vapor in a typically ventilated room is an irrational fear.

Smoking-related heart disease is not attributed solely to nicotine. In fact, the nicotine is considered one of the lowest factors. If nicotine use itself was such a high risk for heart disease then Sweden would have a much higher incidence of heart disease due to rampant smoke-free snus use. As the ANTZ like to point out, snus and smoke-free tobacco has "more nicotine" than cigarettes. So snus users would likely have a much higher rate of heart attack and CVD, but that is not the case.

Nicotine can temporarily put stress on the heart via increased heart rate & blood pressure, so that is bad if you already have a pre-existing condition or you'll increase risk of triggering a heart attack. People with such conditions should also avoid caffeine - another stimulant that can affect the heart. But there is very little evidence that nicotine can CAUSE heart disease in otherwise healthy people. There are just too few studies on always smoke-free nicotine users (plenty on smokers, ex-smokers and dual users, but then you cannot exclude other factors due to components in smoke.) But what little research we do have on never-smoker snus users shows that the high nicotine content does not increase risk of heart disease or heart attack.

 

[kristin]

Based on that research, how many mom's will vape, in a closed room, with a newborn infant therein?

Pedal to the metal here.

I guess some {very brave} mom would have to be wiling to expose her newborn to vapor for the good of science before you really know

I can honestly say, that mom would NOT be me.

That's a ridiculous standard of proof. Why expose a newborn's lungs to anything but fresh, clean air? Yet we see plenty of mom's pushing strollers down city streets filled with carcinogenic auto emissions.

Besides, the propylene glycol in vapor is a known irritant, so you wouldn't want to expose a newborn to high concentrations of it anyhow - even though PG has been used as an air sanitizer in hospitals.

The question should be whether or not secondary vapor is hazardous in real-world scenarios, not extremes.

 

[Tanti]

That's a ridiculous standard of proof. Why expose a newborn's lungs to anything but fresh, clean air? Yet we see plenty of mom's pushing strollers down city streets filled with carcinogenic auto emissions.

Besides, the propylene glycol in vapor is a known irritant, so you wouldn't want to expose a newborn to high concentrations of it anyhow - even though PG has been used as an air sanitizer in hospitals.

The question should be whether or not secondary vapor is hazardous in real-world scenarios, not extremes.

PG has been used in a delivery system for the delivery of anti-rejection and anti-inflammitory drugs directly to the lungs in lung transplant patients. Has been used for years and years in breathing machines.
It also because of its properties of being a germicide it has been in trial testing for warding off pneumonia, influenza and other respiratory diseases. There is alot known about PG, its been looked at, tested since the late 40s. Only some people have a problem with it being an irriatant to the throat and bronc tubes.

It seem to be to me safer than taking a stroll in a park in any large polluted city.

 

[cactus71]

I think if it was my friend and we were good friends, I would have to agree to disagree. Whatever worked for him didn't work for you and your friend should respect that regardless of whether or not he thinks it is the right thing.
I don't think you are literally vaping in your friends face so aside from that, he has to live his own life and you have to live yours.
I have friends who aren't really sure on the vaping, but they are glad I am not on the smokes so for now it is what it is. I don't "vape in their face" so it's not their concern.

Actually I now live 3 states away... he constantly gripes about his employees that smoke and I keep trying to educate him on vaping in a way that educates him and as a means to pitch it to them. Yeah, in a normal friendship, I guess we'd just agree to disagree... but this is more like a brotherly debate - in the end I know I won't convince him - but I'll keep at it and I'm just preparing for round 5. I'm sure most of you know the type of person I'm talking about... if he were the one to have tried vaping first and "hipped" me to it then it would be the most amazing thing in the world, yet since I'm the one informing him of it's existence and benefits, he couldn't care less. I know... jackass, but longtime friend jackass nonetheless.

 

[cactus71]

Also you might want to go and read these studys

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/ecf-library/156651-useful-pdfs.html

Thanks for the reads Tanti... I will pour over them

 

[cactus71]

So many times, out in the real world, I hear the words "nicotine" and "smoking" used interchangeably. It's no wonder regular folks & some doctors & patients get so darn freaked out about vaping! In their minds, nicotine=smoking.

We must educate. Knowledge is power.

That's exactly what I'm trying to do...

 

[cactus71]

I don't think people with a heart condition should vape. They should watch their cholesterol too. I'm not a doctor. I think vaping is very safe and recommended for smokers but smokers with a heart condition should go cold turkey or vape very low dose nicotine.

That's the part I alluded to by saying predisposition... apparently his body generates more of the bad cholesterol regardless of diet. So even with meds it's still high so the thought of anything that may elevate the chance of an HA (i.e. vapers - however unwarranted) just freaks him out. I guess I'm trying to get him to look beyond his own circumstances and appreciate that vaping is out there and should be supported by smokers, non-smokers, and ex-smokers.

 

[cactus71]

Ask him if he would be OK with you being on the patch. I'm guessing yes. Ask about the gum. I'm guessing yes. Ask about a prescription nicotine inhaler. If he says yes to that, ask how that's different from a pv.

Negative. At this point in his mind nicotine in any form is inviting the hand of Death.

 

[cactus71]

Why argue with him? Talk about football or something.

It's an integral part of our friendship... we're both intelligent and have have strong opinions (obviously some in opposition). You must understand that spirited debate is quite engaging, educational, and helps you strengthen your arguments. That's not to say that debating is all we do but it is a component.

 

[cactus71]

http://clearstream.flavourart.it/site/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/CSA_ItaEng.pdf

Note that there is 0 (zero) nicotine in the second hand samples.
What I really had to laugh at was the fact that critics said it was the e-cig makers responsibility to prove that their products were safe, but then wanted to say that this study was biased because it was paid for by an e-liquid supplier.

No-win situation... thanks for the link I'll check it out!

 

[cactus71]

Someone with a predisposition to heart attack SHOULD be concerned about using ANY stimulant, but that doesn't mean that EVERYONE should have that same concern anymore than someone who doesn't have a peanut allergy needs to avoid peanut butter.

As far as the nicotine in second-hand vapor, a 1993 study on nicotine in vegetables showed that it would take 9 HOURS of exposure to minimal secondary smoke to be exposed to the same amount of nicotine you would get in just 1/4 cup of eggplant. Even if secondary vapor has the same levels as secondary smoke, it's obviously not a lot or we would be told eggplant is a health hazard. So, unless someone also avoids eggplant and other vegetable with nicotine, concern with the amount of nicotine they are exposed to with vapor in a typically ventilated room is an irrational fear.

Smoking-related heart disease is not attributed solely to nicotine. In fact, the nicotine is considered one of the lowest factors. If nicotine use itself was such a high risk for heart disease then Sweden would have a much higher incidence of heart disease due to rampant smoke-free snus use. As the ANTZ like to point out, snus and smoke-free tobacco has "more nicotine" than cigarettes. So snus users would likely have a much higher rate of heart attack and CVD, but that is not the case.

Nicotine can temporarily put stress on the heart via increased heart rate & blood pressure, so that is bad if you already have a pre-existing condition or you'll increase risk of triggering a heart attack. People with such conditions should also avoid caffeine - another stimulant that can affect the heart. But there is very little evidence that nicotine can CAUSE heart disease in otherwise healthy people. There are just too few studies on always smoke-free nicotine users (plenty on smokers, ex-smokers and dual users, but then you cannot exclude other factors due to components in smoke.) But what little research we do have on never-smoker snus users shows that the high nicotine content does not increase risk of heart disease or heart attack.

Well put kristin... thank you!

 

[sillysally]

I would imagine that to quit smoking cold turkey you would have to kind of rewrite your mindset and gain some sort of hardcore belief system against nicotine. You're just messing with the fortress he's built up. (I know I'd be peeved if I went through the torture of quitting smoking and then found out that I could have switched to vaping instead!)

 

[DC2]

I would imagine that to quit smoking cold turkey you would have to kind of rewrite your mindset and gain some sort of hardcore belief system against nicotine. You're just messing with the fortress he's built up. (I know I'd be peeved if I went through the torture of quitting smoking and then found out that I could have switched to vaping instead!)

Sounds like you've been to WhyQuit.com or met someone who has.
They brainwash you (or as you say "rewrite your mindset") to believe that nicotine is the "nicodemon".

And the hardcore people on their message boards HATE electronic cigarettes with a passion.
Many of them insist you are still smoking, and a number of them have admitted being tempted by electronic cigarettes.

 

[TroyHoot]

Negative. At this point in his mind nicotine in any form is inviting the hand of Death.

Does he eat Eggplant, green tomatoes or potato skins ? just to name a few, cant remember all of the veggies and foods with nicotine.

 

[Racehorse]

That's a ridiculous standard of proof.

Of course it is.

Its hard not to get carried away myself given the tradition of hyperbole that pops up in topics like this.


For the record, 3 renown surgeons at Yale did not refuse to operate on me because I was eating eggplant, or breathing city air. I was on NRT at the time.

I am a vaper, I support our right to vape, and consider it a harm reduction method. Anthing is better than smoking, and thankfully, my doctor agrees with me and supports my new "behavior".

 

[eHuman]

Nicotine (in both vapor and cigarettes) is not a carcinogen but it is addictive. Inhaling soot and chemicals from burning dead leaves contains multiple carcinogens.

If you find yourself debating with the ignorant, it is possible to sway them with facts.
If you find yourself debating with the stubborn, present the facts and sound reasoning. They will either stubbornly refuse to consider it, or will later have to concede to the facts.

Once you realize that you are debating with a stubborn and ignorant person *especially if they are argumentative and combative* end the conversation, walk, run or hide. If you continue to fight with a stupid person they will drag you down to their level and beat you up with experience.

Save your self the head-ache. You've been the good Samaritan and shared the truth. It's not up to you to force them to accept to believe it.

 

[gdaym8]

It's an integral part of our friendship... we're both intelligent and have have strong opinions (obviously some in opposition). You must understand that spirited debate is quite engaging, educational, and helps you strengthen your arguments. That's not to say that debating is all we do but it is a component.

I get along best with people I can hold spirited debates with (perhaps this is why I have been married to my favorite sparring partner for 27 years). I have long held the opinion that I would never learn a thing from someone who always agreed with me and educating oneself is one of life's many pleasures. Keep in mind when I type "spirited" I am excluding name calling and ugliness!

 

[cactus71]

I get along best with people I can hold spirited debates with (perhaps this is why I have been married to my favorite sparring partner for 27 years). I have long held the opinion that I would never learn a thing from someone who always agreed with me and educating oneself is one of life's many pleasures. Keep in mind when I type "spirited" I am excluding name calling and ugliness!

The .......ization of debating is quite frustrating... the media crap and political nonsense put forth are not debates. They're just two opposing views spewing their talking points with no interest in learning from, or educating, the "opposition" or audience. Every time I have the displeasure to see a debate I've left without learning or being persuaded at all. I don't understand why more folks don't embrace true debate... a dying art I suppose. So when you have a good "sparring partner", enjoy the process - you just might learn a thing or two, open your mind, or just solidify your stance.

 

[gdaym8]

The .......ization of debating is quite frustrating... the media crap and political nonsense put forth are not debates. They're just two opposing views spewing their talking points with no interest in learning from, or educating, the "opposition" or audience. Every time I have the displeasure to see a debate I've left without learning or being persuaded at all. I don't understand why more folks don't embrace true debate... a dying art I suppose. So when you have a good "sparring partner", enjoy the process - you just might learn a thing or two, open your mind, or just solidify your stance.

Indeed! One of my favorite sayings "If you can't change your mind are you sure you have one?"