never smoked an analog, but vaping is awesome!
- Thread starter stillalive
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
went ahead and deleted it, folks thinking he was serious is a little to much...I'll let you jokers yell at him 
Yell...he....I'm gonna skin him alive....Sweedish is coming back to edit quoting post......
Thanks Rose, he's a good guy, but sometimes he can be a loose cannon.went ahead and deleted it, folks thinking he was serious is a little to much...I'll let you jokers yell at him
Shoe, whether you are serious or not, there are just some things that you can't do. The OP doesn't know you and may have taken your "advice". The end results for her probably wouldn't have been good. You also can't say that you are under age. No one here really knows you, so we have to take you at your word.
I agree, and if someone is hell bent on starting nicotine, better to start vaping than to start smoking. Weren't all smokers non-smokers at some point?
That was my whole point in post#2 before "Stillalive" clarified her OP with subsequent posts. I called my 2 grown gay grandchildren and their partners and told them to take a look at this thread. They laughed at the Idea that I'm being pegged a homophobic as they know me too well.
Stillalive, I suggest you try the Maple Cream from Mad Vapes. It's only 7.95 for a 30oz bottle and boy is it good. I thought I was a tobacco vapor when I started but once I tried the maple cream I was hooked. Just ordered another 60 ml of it. The taste is to die for.
Last edited:
Not me. I was born with a cigarette in my mother's mouth. (Now someone will slam me for being against mothers)
Aw, I missed the offending post. I miss all the fun while I'm working.
I'm pretty excited. I wanna try them all! Oh, and I'm getting the 6pack samples... they only come in 16mg nicotine, so I'm going to try cutting them with 0mg vg. Barring that, I guess I just won't be vaping too much until I buy the big bottles. My friend's e-cig is pretty high (18mg?) and I seem to do okay with a little puff every few hours, lol. It's probably more economical to do it that way, anyways, I guess, but I look forward to not getting borderline high off of a single puff of steam. 
And steeping... I assume that's something like letting bottles of red wine sit open overnight? I'll have to research it! I don't know if it would be a good idea with the organics, since they don't have preservatives, but who knows?
I miss all the fun while I'm working.I'm pretty excited. I wanna try them all! Oh, and I'm getting the 6pack samples... they only come in 16mg nicotine, so I'm going to try cutting them with 0mg vg. Barring that, I guess I just won't be vaping too much until I buy the big bottles.
My friend's e-cig is pretty high (18mg?) and I seem to do okay with a little puff every few hours, lol. It's probably more economical to do it that way, anyways, I guess, but I look forward to not getting borderline high off of a single puff of steam. And steeping... I assume that's something like letting bottles of red wine sit open overnight? I'll have to research it! I don't know if it would be a good idea with the organics, since they don't have preservatives, but who knows?
Nicotine slaves, caffeine slaves, chocolate slaves, sugar slaves, greasy fast food slaves... not to mention prescription drugs, alcohol and illegal drugs it seems the average human being can't cope without some sort of ingestible chemical crutch. Smoking is a deadly delivery system, nicotine as addictive as it might be is hardly the worst drug of choice. Better vaping than smoking. Better to vape than drink a six pack of diet cola every day, IMO.
The reason the vaping community is so concerned about non-smokers taking up vaping is because most vapers are former smokers and the FDA/government/non-smoking do-gooders have put so much emphasis on demonizing nicotine rather than the delivery system for decades.
How many of these previously non-smoking vapers would eventually give up their convictions about inhaling smoke, and turn to nicotine or chewing tobacco for a habit?
Wouldn't you have rather started vaping than smoking, if vaping had been around X years ago? A big part of the battle that vaping faces when coming up against the FDA is the fact that the general public thinks tiny amounts of nicotine, not pounds of sludge (soot) is the problem with smoking.
If coffee was as bad for people as smoking, how many millions of Americans would be criticized for their "caffeine addiction".
What about people that need 3 chocolate bars, or 4 mountain dews to get them through the day? They are no less addicted, but don't get criticized because the delivery system. Vapers tend to buy into that same FDA approved mindset of demonizing nicotine.
Unless someone starts vaping, then switches to analogs, I don't see much harm in it. Of course the FDA would love to convince every vaper that they are encouraging others to smoke cigarettes, rather than quit them.
A non smoker starts smoking for the first time... that makes even less sense... yet we all (or most of us, at least) did it once, didn't we.
A non coffee drinker taking up drinking coffee for the first time... etc.
It makes more sense that someone interested in trying nicotine for the first time would want to use a device that is far less dangerous to their health, less expensive, and comes in 1,000 more flavors.
As a former non-smoker, smoker, snuff user, coffee drinker, alcohol drinker, someone with mild ADHD/ADD (who tried prescription drugs that made my mouth drier than vaping does, made me feel weird, gave me a fever, made me nauseous, cost $90 a month, required regular doctor visits, and interfered with my plumbing), and a current vaper, I totally get it.
That's because the powers that be have everyone convinced that nicotine is evil (unless it is in a gum or a patch and making big pharma big bucks). If people had started smoking coffee beans to get the caffeine, we'd be on a coffee drinkers forum now debating whether or not people who weren't addicted to caffeine already should be allowed to start drinking coffee, or if it should only be allowed of former coffee smokers because us current coffee drinkers didn't want the FDA to take our coffee away or force us onto caffeine patches.
When people aren't dropping dead from nic patches, gum, and vaping 20 years from now, people might start to put two and two together and realize that it was smoking, not nicotine that was the problem... and that the FDA lies.
Yes, vaping the great gateway drug... it leads to smoking analogs, which leads to pot, which leads to metham********. If the government had their way that's what they'd have people believing.
Looks like what we need is an Ethics Committee. Oh, sorry, I forgot - this is it, here
.
Lead us, oh Wise One!
I highly recommend avejuice's chai. Very clovey. =) If you want a milky chai, I expect it would mix well with any creamy flavour. =)
I'm trying to start out with the organics, but if there's a flavor I just have to have, av seems like one of a handful of good companies!
Never argued that it doesn't, It's about being informed and honest about the risks one is taking.
Its not about scaring it's about being honest about what is known and not known. We don't know what the long term affects of vaping will be. We think it's better for us than smoking and the preponderance of the existing evidence definitely suggest such but there are too many unknowns to be certain.
As far as feeling death approaching with every puff well death is approaching every breath we take whether there is nicotine in it or not so no I don't suggest feeling guilt over the activity.
People will always judge you just as you will always judge them in return. It's a part of human nature that most people feel better about themselves when they think someone is less than themselves in some manner.
It's a key control principle that's used to manipulate society. It's how rich slave owners convinced poor whites to support slavery in the U.S even though they gained no benefit from that institution and in fact were harmed by the effect unpaid slaves had on wages.
It's the core of racism, sexism and every other form of bigotry human societies suffer from.
I'm not saying it's a good thing in fact it's one of the worst aspects of our species psychology but it is a fundamentally human sentiment. It's why we enjoy watching Jerry Springer because no matter how bad our lives may be we can look at those fools and think "at least I'm not that screwed up"
The trick in my opinion is to be cognizant of this reality recognize it for what it is and give it exactly as much weight as it deserves, none.
People like those you complain about are generally just overcompensating for their own flaws and and failures or they are simply clueless and ignorant through a lack of education and life experience.
That said as bad as some anti's can be I find that there are an incredible number of smokers/vapers who are living in a fantasy world of rationalization and self deception. I don't look down on them because I've been there myself. I only try to make them see through their self deception to reality.
Because reality doesn't get any worse just because you accept it. Reality is reality whether you believe it or not. People didn't start dying of smoking related causes when those causes were finally recognized they'd been dying of them all long recognizing that reality simply enabled us to make better informed decisions.
The debate in question is complex with a number of consequences that could reach well beyond a single individuals choice. I'm trying to explain why some people would react in what you see as a moralizing way.
You see it as moralizing while they see it as sharing their own experience. Sadly it's a flaw of human beings that at a basic level we really think that everyone processes information in exactly the same manner we do.
This is utter nonsense as any cognitive scientist would tell you, brain chemistry is incredibly complex and poorly understood, Meds that work wonderfully for one person have the exact opposite affects on another. We each process differently on unique hardware filtered through our own unique set of experiences.
So what you see as moralizing condescension, they see as simply trying to share their personal experience and knowledge in the hope of helping you to see things as they do in order to give you the benefit of their knowledge and experience.
The perception of moralizing is most often in your own head. The defensiveness "I'll show them" is your attempt to deny something you fundamentally know as true.
I've dealt with a lot of anti-smokers in my time and I can't recall many if any instances of someone claiming that smokers "are lesser beings for being addicted and weak and smelly and a bad parent". Sure there are probably some who think this but most honestly just want to help. Neither I nor anyone I've seen in this thread have said such. That's your own insecurity talking there.
You are demonizing antis in your mind exactly the same way you imagine them demonizing you. You imagine them as these moralizing judgmental condescending monsters so you don't have to deal with them as individual humans and address their arguments in rational honest ways.
And don't think this is me moralizing and being condescending to you. I'm just as guilty of doing this sort of thing as anyone else, you should hear what I say about Republicans. It's always easier to identify this sort of self deception in others than in ourselves. I'm simply pointing it out.
In doing this you turn the opposition into a caricature in your mind and in so doing create a strawman. The problem with this is that instead of addressing their actual arguments in a rational manner you end up flailing about tilting at windmills that only exist in your mind and to the outside observer you appear to be a fool.
If you really want to promote vaping to the general public you have to be able to give rational arguments based on known and accepted science. You have to admit the truth of those arguments where the Anti's are right and concentrate on undermining those arguments where the science is against them.
Example Fact Inhaling burned tobacco has serious detrimental health effects. This is not a subject to debate it's a scientific reality, deny this and you surrender all credibility.
Fact Nicotine is addictive, Once again established scientific fact deny it and you surrender credibility.
Fact One of the known effects of nicotine is that it increases heart rate. Once again fact credibility and all that.
These are things that we have to admit because they are demonstrably true.
Doing this does not hand victory to the antis because we can go after some not facts that they like to use.
Not Fact, Nicotine causes cancer, The reality here is that there is no conclusive evidence that nicotine a carcinogenic. In fact as studied as this drug has been it's fairly safe to conclude that the absence of such evidence indicates that nicotine doesn't cause cancer
Not fact, Nicotine has no benefits. This is fundamentally untrue. Nicotine does indeed offer some beneficial effects particularly in the case of treating certain mental disorders such as schizophrenia and ADHD.
Then there are the strawmen.
My personal favorite
Flavors are used to appeal to children. This is just stupid on it's face no one accuses Absolut of being marketed to children because it comes in different flavors. Adults like tasty stuff too after all.
E-cigs are backed by big tobacco, Demonstrably false. None of the companies manufacturing these devices nor the company that created the concept have any connection to big tobacco.
There are also those arguments where the final reality simply isn't known.
E-cigs are no better than smoking, This is simply still up for debate. We vapers can accurately claim that based on the studies to date that vaping does indeed seem to be better from a health perspective than smoking. However this is a new technology and the amount of research that's been done up to this point is very preliminary. and honestly neither were particularly independent. As one it of testing was done by the FDA in order to try and justify their ban and the other was funded and sponsored by a company that wants to sell ecigs.
So in the end the best we can reasonably say is that the jury is still out on the ultimate safety of the device.
Obviously there is a hell of a lot more arguments out there on both sides and I'm not going to try and address them all.
What I want to do is try and help you understand why some vapers will hold some of the opinions you consider to be moralizing. As well as to point out where I think you are practicing some self deception.
I mean how the hell are you going to "show them"? Go out and smoke yourself to death?
20 years from now we'll probably have a good idea of who was right in this debate. As a vaper my only goal politically is to ensure that we get the opportunity to gain the potential benefit if the final reality comes out in our favor.
I think that smokers have plenty of reason to take the risk that there are unintended and unknown effects to vaping since we know the consequences of continuing to smoke analogues. Non-smokers however will in general be taking an unnecessary risk which I find hard to justify.
People like the OP who are using nicotine to self medicate are a special case. And frankly a problematic one from a regulatory and legal standpoint.
On the one hand the benefits to those individuals is probably sufficient to mitigate and justify the potential risks. After all we already take far more problematic drugs for treating some of these conditions (just started taking Vyvance myself which is essentially just prescription ....)
On the other hand this shifts the PV into the realm of a medical device as a drug delivery system, which was the original justification the FDA attempted to use to assert their authority over E-cigs.
The US regulatory structure at least, isn't well equipped to deal with homeopathic medicine and its not just because of the influence of big pharma.
After all snake oil salesmen have been plying their wares for centuries and a large part of the purpose of regulatory bodies like the FDA is to protect an ignorant public from such quackery that has as often proved to be not simply ineffective in treating what ever ailment it was purported to cure but turned out to be harmful in it's own right.
In the end, it's complicated.
- Status
Similar threads
