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

Status
Not open for further replies.

Drael

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Oct 29, 2012
359
229
47
New Zealand (Middle Earth, lol)
I read through the report and although I believe it to be true... all someone has to do to "debunk" this is to refer to the studies performed by "Big tobacco" in the past here in the US. A study performed by the manufacturer is immediately scrutinized and questioned: "Financial disclosure. This report is funded by Ruyan" so it wont hold up and won't get any traction from "non-receptive" folks. Thanks though it was informative.

Well true, but this is how all medicinal trials are done. Otherwise the studies would never get done. In fact thats how 90% of research is acheived, by private funding of some sort. It's only medical post-marketing thats ever not funded by the company itself in medicine, because its cheap.

If this research is invalid, so is half of medical science (probably a fair chunk of ALL science, seeing as the majority is privately funded), which tends to be funded by big pharma....

And non-private funding does not ensure a lack of bias either....

I think the better way to view any study is this - can you interpret studies and critique the science involved?

If not, assume it can always be untrue, or true, and you just don't have the ability to discern yourself. Look to others actual scientific critiques for an objective veiw on the controls, the interpretation, the methodology.

And if so, read it. Even if the funding is biased, they can fudge the interpretation, or the controls, but not the data itself. And they have to write their whole method down. You can pick apart anything thats not done right, just by reading it and thinking about it. The only true distortion that even happens is if the researchers are employees, or biased for non-commercial reasons, sometimes they omit stuff. But this particular science doesnt work like that - it relies on their included measurement of the vapers own intake of nicotine.

Science is science, funded or not. This particular science measures that the vaper absorbs 98% of the nicotine, because they actually physically measured it.

What makes this researcher even more interesting, is he was a researcher that investigated tobacco - alot. This gives him credibility IMO.

Anyway, that all aside - your freind has a heart issue. He mentioned he thought nicotine effected the heart (which actually it can, not near as bad as smoking, but it does have an effect on the heart). He also mentioned "second hand vapor", which isn't really a thing, as you now know.

Maybe he's personally worried, for his own health, when you vape around him? Health issues can be a real scare. Can throw you mental space right off, leave you with all sorts of fears and anxieties....

So maybe this isn't intellectual, maybe he wants reassurance, that you vaping around him won't hurt him? In which case that study may help....just look up the reference where they measure the nicotine absorbed, in that section, and find that, so he can read the details of how they measured it. Then at least he knows the vast majority (98%) of what amounts to less than a smoking (just under 50% nic absorbed via vaping per puff @ 16mg/ml), ends up in you not him.....

That might be his angle, or part of it. Might be worth considering ...I mean if we wants to generalize his anger at tobacco for his situation, to a relatively unrelated product, e-cigs, then he's going to do that reason or not, specially if he's partly jelly - but at least if hes got some reassurance he personally is safe around the things, thats more the issue between the two of ya...
 
Last edited:

Tanti

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Jan 22, 2013
494
364
Nebraska
There was a study done by the Italians I think it was, that they put vapers in a very small room using a controlled situation and they metered the air after a long session of vaping and they found no Nic in the air, I think it was like 6 or 8 vapers in this small room.
They also put the same amount of smokers in the same room and wow what they found was nasty.
I wish I could find that study again I forgot to bookmark it.

Somebody put a link up here at ECF a few days ago.
 

Tanti

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Jan 22, 2013
494
364
Nebraska
Yeah that could be true... and since we've been good friends (like brothers really) for nearly half our lives, maybe there's a bit of (unwarranted) concern over my health - you know - projection right. That's why I cut him some slack with the griping but damn I wish I could just reason with him on this... I just don't want anybody bad-mouthing or ill-willing vaping.

The way I see it he should be happy for you, he should want to see you do whatever you can to get away from analogs.
Nobody is the same on how they can do this and that is what he needs to understand, what worked for him is fine and good but it might not work for you, and its not like your blowing vape in his face right.

Its cool that he might be worried about your health but you are on the right track to a better health. Just not the same way he did it. Friends support friends they dont give them greef or discourage them.
Really there is nothing worse than an x-smoker. "well if I went cold turkey so can you" Ive heard that so many times wish I had a dime for each time Id be rich.
 

Rusty_Shackleford

Full Member
Jan 13, 2013
46
4
tx
Yes, I have one of "those" ex-smoker friends who will not accept vaping... he had health concerns to the point he went to see a cardiologist and since quitting "cold-turkey" (i.e. meds) all he does is cite his cardiologist about the terrible harm nicotine causes. He feels that e-cigs should be treated the same as analogs... the more we debated I could tell I wouldn't be able to reason with him, but he did bring up a point that I couldn't argue. So, does anyone know if there is "second-hand nicotine" or is 100% the nicotine that we intake as vapor stay within our own body (i.e. immediately absorbed) - regardless of inhalation, mouth-hold, etc., or would one have an argument that we are still "inflicting" poison upon others?

I use to work at a convenience store, one of my fellow employee's was an ex-smoker. He considered himself very high & mighty because he was able to quit and always looked down on people who smoked. He would card a 90 yr old grandmother if she wanted to buy a pack of smokes just because he could. Ive found this attitude is quite common with ex-smokers. Just cant win with some people.
 

mikejm

Moved On
Dec 5, 2012
695
354
United States
Smokers with a heart condition also should not use the patch or the gum. Nicotine is a vascular constrictor. People with heart conditions can't do a lot of things or take in a whole lot of different foods and drugs. They shouldn't even drink coffee or beer either.

If he's going to et his nicotine, then he should self regulate his own vaping. Maybe use a pre filled device like a disposable and set a limit. Everybodies different. Most people don't have heart conditions.
 

rwhite4520

Full Member
Jan 15, 2013
22
4
idaho
This is completely unscientific but I measure my BP daily because we have a machine at work. I was consistantly 137/85 to 140/90 with a resting heart rate of 77. The HR would jump to the 80's if I measured after coming in from a smoke. I have been vaping for a month and off the analogs. I am now at 135/75 with a 62 resting rate. Fnny thing is that it doesn't change that much after a vaping session. The great flavors have resulted in no temptation to eat all the time and a weird side effect is that I don't crave beer at all. I used to have 1-2 every night and figured I'd stop since I craved cigs when drinking. Haven't had a beer in over a month. Same for sodas. It could be the result of me deciding that I needing to get my health in order but either way I feel better since I started vaping. So I say let them argue. It works for me.

BTW I always smoked in seculsion and continue to vape the same way. It's not the 2nd hand vape but I didn't let my kids see me smoke and I don't let them see me vape either. They know I do it but I don't do in around them or in crowds.
 
Last edited:

Beretta

Unresolved Status
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jan 14, 2013
395
209
Mars
Yes, I have one of "those" ex-smoker friends who will not accept vaping... he had health concerns to the point he went to see a cardiologist and since quitting "cold-turkey" (i.e. meds) all he does is cite his cardiologist about the terrible harm nicotine causes. He feels that e-cigs should be treated the same as analogs... the more we debated I could tell I wouldn't be able to reason with him, but he did bring up a point that I couldn't argue. So, does anyone know if there is "second-hand nicotine" or is 100% the nicotine that we intake as vapor stay within our own body (i.e. immediately absorbed) - regardless of inhalation, mouth-hold, etc., or would one have an argument that we are still "inflicting" poison upon others?

Atherosclerosis (heart disease) is caused by inflammation of the arteries, not by blood vessel constriction caused by the stimulant nicotine.

See: Inflammation and Atherosclerosis

Conclusion

Our understanding of atherosclerosis has evolved beyond the view that these lesions consist of a lifeless collection of lipid debris. Current evidence supports a central role for inflammation in all phases of the atherosclerotic process. Substantial biological data implicate inflammatory pathways in early atherogenesis, in the progression of lesions, and finally in the thrombotic complications of this disease. Clinical studies affirm correlation of circulating markers of inflammation with propensity to develop ischemic events and with prognosis after ACS. Intralesional or extralesional inflammation may hasten atheroma evolution and precipitate acute events. Circulating acute-phase reactants elicited by inflammation may not only mark increased risk for vascular events, but in some cases may contribute to their pathogenesis. This new insight into the role of inflammation in the pathobiology of atherosclerosis has initiated important new areas of direct clinical relevance. We can use inflammatory markers today for risk stratification. Future studies will gauge their utility as guides to monitor therapy. Finally, the quest to identify proximal stimuli for inflammation, as one pathogenic process in atherogenesis or trigger to lesion complication, may yield novel therapeutic targets in years to come.


Nicotine is not an inflammatory agent in the body: The Good Side of Bad Nicotine - MDNJ Magazine Spring/Summer 2008

We have been studying nicotine as a pure chemical compound with some very specific effects because it taps into the body’s own potent anti-inflammatory mechanisms


Further....

Electronic cigarettes do not damage the heart
First-hand smoke, second-hand smoke or electronic cigarettes

http://www.escardio.org/about/press...nic-cigarettes-heart-damage.aspx?hit=dontmiss

Myocardial function was examined using cardiac ultrasound (echocardiography) and hemodynamic measurements (blood pressure and heart rate).

The researchers found that smoking one tobacco cigarette led to significant acute myocardial dysfunction but electronic cigarettes had no acute adverse effects on cardiac function. Smoking a tobacco cigarette had important hemodynamic consequences, with significant increases in systolic and diastolic blood pressure and in heart rate. In contrast, electronic cigarettes produced only a slight elevation in diastolic blood pressure. Dr Farsalinos said: “This is an indication that although nicotine was present in the liquid used (11mg/ml), it is absorbed at a lower rate compared to regular cigarette smoking.”

The echocardiography examination focused on the function of the left ventricle, the part of the heart that receives oxygenated blood from the lungs (filling or diastolic phase) and then delivers the blood to the whole body (pumping or systolic phase). The investigators found significant defects in the diastolic phase of left ventricular function after smoking one cigarette, with four echocardiographic parameters indicating worsening function. In contrast, none of the echocardiographic parameters showed any significant worsening in subjects after using the electronic cigarette. “Diastolic dysfunction is very important because it is usually the first defect that is detected before any clinically-evident cardiac disease develops,” said Dr Farsalinos.
 
Last edited:

Innogen

Full Member
Jan 20, 2013
34
5
Queensland
Funnily enough I get the same reaction from a mother of a ...... addict. He became addicted to methadone and then subutex which in the long run, he spent more time getting off than the original ....... It is very difficult to explain to such a mother that vaping is nothing like these opiod replacements and I am lost for words when trying to explain it to her. I can understand where she is coming from but I am not, nor have been a drug user and the only thing I could compare nicotine to was caffeine. ??????
 

tj99959

ECF Guru
ECF Veteran
  • Aug 13, 2011
    15,116
    39,600
    utah

    Beretta

    Unresolved Status
    ECF Veteran
    Verified Member
    Jan 14, 2013
    395
    209
    Mars
    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.

    If that's true, the same standard should apply to Big Tobacco and their products, which they can't prove as being safe. Safe is a subjective term being thrown around to destroy the ecig industry. It's an utterly specious argument to make. Society is responsible for studies to be conducted on ecigarettes, because it affects all of us by second vapor, and the health of vapers, which will eventually replace tobacco smoking in 10 years, some predict. The ANTZ argument that ejuice vendors are completely responsible for coming up with the money to fund the studies, is also an utterly specious argument. You are right, that they will just dismiss the research, saying the studies are biased because the ejuice manufacturers funded it. When we tell them it was their recommendation, the ANTZ will stick their fingers in their collective ears and go.... LALALALALALAALALALALALALALALALALA!!!!!!!!!! I CAN'T HEAR YOU..... LALALALALALALALALALA
     

    ChrisGaynor

    Unregistered Supplier
    ECF Veteran
    Jun 16, 2012
    132
    20
    48
    Claremore
    www.BlackMesaVapors.com
    I had a heart attack in November, so I talk to a cardiologist pretty regularly. According to mine, nicotine -- in the amount we vape or smoke it -- doesn't cause any permanent harm. A temporary increase in blood pressure, and that's it. It's the other stuff (the stuff you don't get when you vape) that kills you.

    Now, as far as second-hand nicotine... there are going to be trace amounts of it in exhaled vapor. But, again, it's not going to hurt anyone. If there's a danger in second-hand smoke (and it's debatable how great that danger really is), it's not the nicotine.

    Incidentally, when I told my cardiologist I was vaping now, he smiled, shook my hand, marked me down on a chart as a non-smoker, and congratulated me.

    Thanks for the information. I hear the "nicotine is harmful" argument way too often.
     
    Status
    Not open for further replies.

    Users who are viewing this thread