New studies find carcinogens in vg and pg at high temps, even in tootle puffers
- Thread starter mikepetro
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
It's a little different than choose the less harmful. More like choose between a 95/5 chance of doom versus a 5/95 chance of no doom. (Based on Royal College of Physicians and their Australian equivalent)
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/imj.13761That's covered in the "vaping leads to smoking" part
I have consistently found that the "gateway" theory explains nothing. It is merely a logical fallacy used by those who wish to ban, limit or tax a product they don't like.
I know that the argument is flying in the face of studies that have been done. They adamantly insist on it though and it seems that there's no amount of evidence that'll change the dance they chose to do.
There's this ad company in California still getting money to produce propaganda supporting that drivel.
There's this ad company in California still getting money to produce propaganda supporting that drivel.
I'm pleased to see the heath studies. They do matter, as far as converting smokers to vaping (mainly, as more docs read them and find it more acceptable to actually recommend vaping to smokers).
Whether they will be "recommended" to a closed, tobacco/menthol vape remains to be seen.
I agree the FDA knows vaping has the potential of HUGE reduction of risk in comparison to smoking. That is why the move was made to "the children." Unless and until we can prove vaping has 0 harm (and perhaps even then) the FDA is going to pursue their strategy, and unless something drastic happens (IMHO, as always) they will win, using that method.
Interestingly, at least the last time I checked, neo-natal survivability rate is the lowest in the industrialized world. More children live in povety, become homeless (just heard a study about the huge increase in homeless kids. It wasn't stated, but I assume they were teens on their own, not families). It has extremely high rates of child poverty, malnutrition, and abuse and neglect.
But, none of that matters provided we can use teen statistics to prove that vaping works, even for new users.
The war against children has been going on for some time now, and now the pols are going WAY too far as far as conscripting them to a lot of ideas, such as the 2nd amendment being a bad thing.
But overall, the US government cares little about its child citizens--unless and until they can be used to useful political gain.
To say it's upsetting is an understatement.
Anna
Whether they will be "recommended" to a closed, tobacco/menthol vape remains to be seen.
I agree the FDA knows vaping has the potential of HUGE reduction of risk in comparison to smoking. That is why the move was made to "the children." Unless and until we can prove vaping has 0 harm (and perhaps even then) the FDA is going to pursue their strategy, and unless something drastic happens (IMHO, as always) they will win, using that method.
Interestingly, at least the last time I checked, neo-natal survivability rate is the lowest in the industrialized world. More children live in povety, become homeless (just heard a study about the huge increase in homeless kids. It wasn't stated, but I assume they were teens on their own, not families). It has extremely high rates of child poverty, malnutrition, and abuse and neglect.
But, none of that matters provided we can use teen statistics to prove that vaping works, even for new users.
The war against children has been going on for some time now, and now the pols are going WAY too far as far as conscripting them to a lot of ideas, such as the 2nd amendment being a bad thing.
But overall, the US government cares little about its child citizens--unless and until they can be used to useful political gain.
To say it's upsetting is an understatement.
Anna
The devil in assessing survival rates for the new born in industrialized countries is the definition for "live birth". The narrower the definition, the greater the survival rate. Have you read the definitions and the variability from country to country? It is worth a search.
The studies on infant mortality make interesting propaganda if read without definition.
The studies on infant mortality make interesting propaganda if read without definition.
I'm pleased to see the heath studies. They do matter, as far as converting smokers to vaping (mainly, as more docs read them and find it more acceptable to actually recommend vaping to smokers).
Whether they will be "recommended" to a closed, tobacco/menthol vape remains to be seen.
I agree the FDA knows vaping has the potential of HUGE reduction of risk in comparison to smoking. That is why the move was made to "the children." Unless and until we can prove vaping has 0 harm (and perhaps even then) the FDA is going to pursue their strategy, and unless something drastic happens (IMHO, as always) they will win, using that method.
Interestingly, at least the last time I checked, neo-natal survivability rate is the lowest in the industrialized world. More children live in povety, become homeless (just heard a study about the huge increase in homeless kids. It wasn't stated, but I assume they were teens on their own, not families). It has extremely high rates of child poverty, malnutrition, and abuse and neglect.
But, none of that matters provided we can use teen statistics to prove that vaping works, even for new users.
The war against children has been going on for some time now, and now the pols are going WAY too far as far as conscripting them to a lot of ideas, such as the 2nd amendment being a bad thing.
But overall, the US government cares little about its child citizens--unless and until they can be used to useful political gain.
To say it's upsetting is an understatement.
Anna
Like the lawyers say, "If you have neither the Law nor the facts then pound the table". Tugging heart strings, like table pounding, is a cover for having no substance.
Got this e-mail from the VTA today
Sounds promising.....
May 4, 2018
E-CIGARETTE SUMMIT - WASHINGTON, D.C.
On Monday, April 30th, 2018, public health experts from around the world gathered in Washington DC for the E-Cigarette Summit. Both the substance and the tone of this year's conference presented a significantly improved view of vapor products. Public health experts and academicians discussed the current state of science as it relates to both the efficacy and safety of vapor products. What was remarkable was a consistent strain about the significance and importance of vapor products in reducing cigarette smoking as well as in supporting general principles of harm reduction. Here are just three of many highlights from the conference:
First, Dr. Nancy Rigotti - Director of Tobacco Research & Treatment Center at Massachusetts General, Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School, and one of the principal architects of the National Academy of Science Engineering and Medicine (NASEM) 2018 report on e-cigarettes - stated that while concerned about youth vaping initiation, the "ecological evidence" of a continuing and rapid decline in youth smoking makes it, "hard to say there is a gateway to smoking." This is a point that VTA made in its presentation to Commissioner Gottlieb and Director Zeller in January of 2018, and it was refreshing to hear the same explanation come out of the mouth of a United States Public Health leader.
Second, Clive Bates, Director of Counterfactual Consulting, offered another clearly-articulated and impassioned perspective on the importance of calming what he has referred to as the "moral panic" about vaping. Mr. Bates highlighted the intellectual and scientific inadequacies behind anyone suggesting that vapor products or their flavors should be banned. In addition, Mr. Bates questioned whether the media and public health groups in the United States have got it all wrong. Rather than promoting and stirring the hysteria related to one particular product, JUUL, he reminded the audience (which included FDA, American Cancer Society, and Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids) to focus on the fact that an independent vapor company has dramatically altered the landscape for combustible cigarettes at the retail level. Mr. Bates asked: "How does the FDA know that JUUL is not driving cigarettes out of schools all together? How does the FDA know that it is not sabotaging a public health success story?"
Third, Director Mitch Zeller of the FDA Center for Tobacco Products laid out FDA's plan and strategy for reducing nicotine dependence and moving smokers to lower risk alternatives. Again recognizing that nicotine is not the culprit, he expressed concern that 60 to 70% of the public have "profound misperceptions of nicotine safety." Of course, Director Zeller also foreshadowed the FDA's additional enforcement actions against companies who are marketing their products in ways that FDA claims violate both the Tobacco Control Act and Federal Trade Commission regulations.
Sounds promising.....
May 4, 2018
E-CIGARETTE SUMMIT - WASHINGTON, D.C.
On Monday, April 30th, 2018, public health experts from around the world gathered in Washington DC for the E-Cigarette Summit. Both the substance and the tone of this year's conference presented a significantly improved view of vapor products. Public health experts and academicians discussed the current state of science as it relates to both the efficacy and safety of vapor products. What was remarkable was a consistent strain about the significance and importance of vapor products in reducing cigarette smoking as well as in supporting general principles of harm reduction. Here are just three of many highlights from the conference:
First, Dr. Nancy Rigotti - Director of Tobacco Research & Treatment Center at Massachusetts General, Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School, and one of the principal architects of the National Academy of Science Engineering and Medicine (NASEM) 2018 report on e-cigarettes - stated that while concerned about youth vaping initiation, the "ecological evidence" of a continuing and rapid decline in youth smoking makes it, "hard to say there is a gateway to smoking." This is a point that VTA made in its presentation to Commissioner Gottlieb and Director Zeller in January of 2018, and it was refreshing to hear the same explanation come out of the mouth of a United States Public Health leader.
Second, Clive Bates, Director of Counterfactual Consulting, offered another clearly-articulated and impassioned perspective on the importance of calming what he has referred to as the "moral panic" about vaping. Mr. Bates highlighted the intellectual and scientific inadequacies behind anyone suggesting that vapor products or their flavors should be banned. In addition, Mr. Bates questioned whether the media and public health groups in the United States have got it all wrong. Rather than promoting and stirring the hysteria related to one particular product, JUUL, he reminded the audience (which included FDA, American Cancer Society, and Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids) to focus on the fact that an independent vapor company has dramatically altered the landscape for combustible cigarettes at the retail level. Mr. Bates asked: "How does the FDA know that JUUL is not driving cigarettes out of schools all together? How does the FDA know that it is not sabotaging a public health success story?"
Third, Director Mitch Zeller of the FDA Center for Tobacco Products laid out FDA's plan and strategy for reducing nicotine dependence and moving smokers to lower risk alternatives. Again recognizing that nicotine is not the culprit, he expressed concern that 60 to 70% of the public have "profound misperceptions of nicotine safety." Of course, Director Zeller also foreshadowed the FDA's additional enforcement actions against companies who are marketing their products in ways that FDA claims violate both the Tobacco Control Act and Federal Trade Commission regulations.
I will reply more in depth Sunday night if nobody has answered by then.
The short answer is DONT WORRY ABOUT IT right now. Just worry about staying off the stinkies and vape however you need to in order to accomplish that. We are talking about nuances here compared to the difference of vaping almost any method versus stinkies.
Temperature control and a little bit of faith.
Also taste, I didn't look at what they are saying is made but going by the old claims, our tastes are very sensitive to the bad things that can be created so even without any scare stories or gadgets people tend to vape very clean.
But I agree, if a little roughness to your vape taste edges is what it takes to get and keep you off cigarettes you will still be orders of crap loads better off than smoking.
The short answer to finding out what the temperature you're vaping at is to use a temperature controlled mod/device. But don't worry too much about temperature, yet. Like Mike said, as long as you're staying off of tobacco you're, more than likely, significantly reducing the nasty effects of tobacco use.
You'll find that vaping is sort of a journey or exploration. All of us "old timers", in vaping years anyway, started out in the same boat you're in right now. Over time we learned the "do's" and "don'ts" of vaping. If you're using a "modern" set-up and not a cheap convenience/gas station set-up you are light years ahead of where we started and in a pretty safe place compared to tobacco.
In terms of relying solely on taste, or nasty taste, to maintain safety that can be very subjective. Some "real world" tests, conducted by a certain luminary in this thread, showed that he could not taste the increasing "nasties" as temperatures started getting too high and only "tasted" them when they were really on the high side of where we'd like to be. The answer, here, is to use as low a power level as you can and still produce the vape you want/enjoy. You'll still be far safer that what a cigarette produces.
I got into TC as quickly as I could, but there is more to take away fro this thread. I had to vape max VG in tiny MTL setups, and my temps definitely got hot. Prior to (and ongoing with my drop in non-TC tanks) I implemented some suggestions, like adding 10% DW to my mix to lower temps, as I had to use VG (I am PG sensitive). When chainvaping I rotate setups. I've started mixing with a PG variant that I can tolerate, etc.
BUT my main point is that for several months I did not vape using "best practices" even slightly. I'm sure there were times my tank overheated. REGARDLESS my docs noted health improvements and noted they continued even not using best practices.
Most vapers do NOT start there, even these days, it's far easier to find your vaping feet in wattage mode first. But, DO not let the info on TC alarm you, it's good information and this is now currently best vaping practice. Even with all this, I still have non TC tanks, some that I like just can't really do TC. But by using it some of the time, combined with other best practices I am fairly confident I am not doing my body enough measurable harm and I continually get told by my docs that my lung health is improving.
So, don't let TC scare you off, and don't stop vaping. You will get to TC eventually if it's your goal and it's a good goal to have. Just don't freak and try to buy TC capable mods and rebuildable tanks quite yet, it's likely you'd have trouble using them and being able to choose a good setup for you, takes time. So, don't panic basically, is what I am trying to say. Enjoy your current vapes, make TC a goal for sure, but one that doesn't have to happen immediately. Etc.
Welcome to the thread
Anna
BUT my main point is that for several months I did not vape using "best practices" even slightly. I'm sure there were times my tank overheated. REGARDLESS my docs noted health improvements and noted they continued even not using best practices.
Most vapers do NOT start there, even these days, it's far easier to find your vaping feet in wattage mode first. But, DO not let the info on TC alarm you, it's good information and this is now currently best vaping practice. Even with all this, I still have non TC tanks, some that I like just can't really do TC. But by using it some of the time, combined with other best practices I am fairly confident I am not doing my body enough measurable harm and I continually get told by my docs that my lung health is improving.
So, don't let TC scare you off, and don't stop vaping. You will get to TC eventually if it's your goal and it's a good goal to have. Just don't freak and try to buy TC capable mods and rebuildable tanks quite yet, it's likely you'd have trouble using them and being able to choose a good setup for you, takes time. So, don't panic basically, is what I am trying to say. Enjoy your current vapes, make TC a goal for sure, but one that doesn't have to happen immediately. Etc.
Welcome to the thread
Anna
When Dr F came out saying we tasted them in small amounts I found it easy to believe. Without testing myself I couldn't DTL until TC. And I've had irritation issues when I'd get too hot either from dealing with winter, hot spots on a mesh wicked gennie or a dirty coil. But I also suspected some had a preference for them considering some of the recommended set ups I've tried. I think I even said they're trying to smoke their ecig at times.
Also worth noting is these are a few carcinogens vs many. And that unless you buy into smoking causing every cancer known to man with loose association studies the risk of cancer from smoking is not extremely high. Everyone who smokes does not get cancer. COPD's are the real killer.
I had someone medical talking about how the risk of cancer from a drug is only X%, "Uhh, you do realize that risk is higher than the risk from cigarettes, right?"
More importantly, COPD is irreversible. You can BEAT cancer, even while smoking. A heart attack is over swiftly.
I have zero desire to drown slowly, in my own fluids, and lack of lung capacity, over the course of say, 20 years. I don't want to cart around an oxygen tank (even if my purse could hold it, and it possibly could). I don't want to do that to my family and friends.
COPD may well be the REAL killer, but it is entirely, 100% (IMHO as always) one of the WORST ways to die. People with COPD are MISERABLE. When I went to see my retirement community, she said, "Oh, gosh, we don't tend to see the folks with COPD much, they stay in their homes due to lack of mobility.
That is NOT the way I want to go out. That is not the way ANYONE should want to go out. The very first time I spotted someone with an oxygen tank (I was pretty young) I asked what it was. From that moment on, my goal was to die of a heart attack, but unfortunately I guess my Creator was paying attention. My family just doesn't GET cancer, and my heart is in fine shape.
What motivated me to quit, finally? It was after I went to the urgent care infinity number 375, to get my pneumonia treated, and my practitioner noticed my fingers, and pointed out their "Clubbed" state, and that it was a sign of poor circulation as a smoker. When the dude asked me if I was going to quit ,he said, "Okay." and then loaded me down with STRONGER abx, MORE steroids (they make me nuts, BTW) and an at home nebulizer. Then he said, "This may not help."
I went home and really, really considered his words. For a LONG time. I decided I owed it to myself to quit. The next time I saw him (for a recluse bite) I told him I was now a vaper and he gave me a fist bump, LOL.
But, based on my short 18 month "taste" of COPD, I decided I did not want it. And, as far as I know, COPD is the most known and likely outcome from smoking these days. Whether it's due to additives or what, IDK. But, I was not going to become a 43 year old patient with COPD.
COPD is horrific. And, I hadn't even been diagnosed with it yet. I've had two colds since starting vaping, they passed quickly and with little difficulty. I just rested a bit more.
I can guarantee that if I were still smoking, they would have turned into pneumonia, or worse.
Anna
I have zero desire to drown slowly, in my own fluids, and lack of lung capacity, over the course of say, 20 years. I don't want to cart around an oxygen tank (even if my purse could hold it, and it possibly could). I don't want to do that to my family and friends.
COPD may well be the REAL killer, but it is entirely, 100% (IMHO as always) one of the WORST ways to die. People with COPD are MISERABLE. When I went to see my retirement community, she said, "Oh, gosh, we don't tend to see the folks with COPD much, they stay in their homes due to lack of mobility.
That is NOT the way I want to go out. That is not the way ANYONE should want to go out. The very first time I spotted someone with an oxygen tank (I was pretty young) I asked what it was. From that moment on, my goal was to die of a heart attack, but unfortunately I guess my Creator was paying attention. My family just doesn't GET cancer, and my heart is in fine shape.
What motivated me to quit, finally? It was after I went to the urgent care infinity number 375, to get my pneumonia treated, and my practitioner noticed my fingers, and pointed out their "Clubbed" state, and that it was a sign of poor circulation as a smoker. When the dude asked me if I was going to quit ,he said, "Okay." and then loaded me down with STRONGER abx, MORE steroids (they make me nuts, BTW) and an at home nebulizer. Then he said, "This may not help."
I went home and really, really considered his words. For a LONG time. I decided I owed it to myself to quit. The next time I saw him (for a recluse bite) I told him I was now a vaper and he gave me a fist bump, LOL.
But, based on my short 18 month "taste" of COPD, I decided I did not want it. And, as far as I know, COPD is the most known and likely outcome from smoking these days. Whether it's due to additives or what, IDK. But, I was not going to become a 43 year old patient with COPD.
COPD is horrific. And, I hadn't even been diagnosed with it yet. I've had two colds since starting vaping, they passed quickly and with little difficulty. I just rested a bit more.
I can guarantee that if I were still smoking, they would have turned into pneumonia, or worse.
Anna
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
