New study suggests bad things

[yellow]

Hey

I have been enjoying my DAV so much, and i havent had a cig or bought a pack in 2 days!

to keep my enthusiasm going, i wanted to read on the benefits of quitting smoking with e-cigs.

i was shocked to find a recent study suggesting e-cigs are possibly as carcinogenic as cigs.

part of it is due to lack of health regulations and sick companies use cancerous chemicals.

i know V4L isnt one of them, thank god, they operate with great quality controls

this is scary nonetheless because Ive had other e cigs and i know many who use other brands

this is a cause for concern and I would like to hear your thoughts on this recent development

thanks

 

[HarmonyPB]

If you could link the studies you read it would be easier to explain what's going on. I haven't heard of any ecig companies using dangerous chemicals, but I'm not very knowledgeable on those things. I do know that there are some chemicals some people do not like. I mean, some people are anti PG, some silica wicking and these are vapers.

In all fairness vaping has only been around for 10 years (I think?) so no one knows anything about long term usage and affects it has on people. Also, since scientific studies are expensive and vaping is so small there hasn't been a whole lot of that. But we are getting there! There are studies being done and fundraisers to support even more research.

Let us know which ones you were looking into and we will see what we can help with. If you feel like venturing out, there are subforums that address these things specifically. Many knowledgeable people post their opinions and ideas about it.
Ecigs in the media, this one posts studies as well as articles: Media and General News
This one isn't as active, but it's specifically for medical research: Medical Research
And this one is on legislation news, if you're interested in that side of it: Legislation News

 

[yellow]

No, I mean full blown carcinogens, as in cancer!

Levels of selected carcinogens and toxicants in ... [Tob Control. 2013] - PubMed - NCBI
10 chemicals identified so far in e-cig vapor that are on the California Prop 65 list of carcinogens and reproductive toxins | Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education
Do E-Cigarettes Have Carcinogens? French Consumer Study Finds Some Toxins At Same Levels As Cigarettes
Restrict the Sale of Electronic Cigarettes
E-cigarettes are as harmful as cigarettes and could cause cancer, claims study | Mail Online
Report: e-cigarettes are
Do e-cigarettes cause cancer? - The Week
10 chemicals identified so far in e-cig vapor that are on the California Prop 65 list of carcinogens and reproductive toxins | Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education

The first two are from actual medical sites! Yikes!

 

[Debra_oh]

Did you read the articles or just the headlines??? From your first article "The levels of the toxicants were 9-450 times lower than in cigarette smoke and were, in many cases, comparable with trace amounts found in the reference product."

And from the conclusion of the same article " Our findings are consistent with the idea that substituting tobacco cigarettes with e-cigarettes may substantially reduce exposure to selected tobacco-specific toxicants. E-cigarettes as a harm reduction strategy among smokers unwilling to quit, warrants further study"

A few of the articles you listed are just repeats of other articles. If you are going to be a consumer it would help to be a thoughtful one and evaluate the quality of an actual research study or a media article before panicking. The french study has been pretty much invalidated as have a number of other poorly done research studies. Not that I am saying that ecigs are 100% safe, nothing is, but most of the well done, research shows that vaper is overall safe but more quality research is needed.

Might want to read this and plenty of others on the CASAA.org website

http://publichealth.drexel.edu/SiteData/docs/ms08/f90349264250e603/ms08.pdf

.

 

[yellow]

Did you read the articles or just the headlines??? From your first article "The levels of the toxicants were 9-450 times lower than in cigarette smoke and were, in many cases, comparable with trace amounts found in the reference product."

And from the conclusion of the same article " Our findings are consistent with the idea that substituting tobacco cigarettes with e-cigarettes may substantially reduce exposure to selected tobacco-specific toxicants. E-cigarettes as a harm reduction strategy among smokers unwilling to quit, warrants further study"

A few of the articles you listed are just repeats of other articles. If you are going to be a consumer it would help to be a thoughtful one and evaluate the quality of an actual research study or a media article before panicking. The french study has been pretty much invalidated as have a number of other poorly done research studies. Not that I am saying that ecigs are 100% safe, nothing is, but most of the well done, research shows that vaper is overall safe but more quality research is needed.

Might want to read this and plenty of others on the CASAA.org website

http://publichealth.drexel.edu/SiteData/docs/ms08/f90349264250e603/ms08.pdf

And really, your whole V4L is the best everything else is second rate theme (this post and others) makes you sound like a shill for them. Not that I have anything against V4L, they are one among a number of good quality vendors.

When did I panic? How was I not thoughtful in giving some useful information, such as something like only having toxins "9 times lower than in cigarette smoke"? Overall safer does not mean anything with a conclusion like "E-cigarettes as a harm reduction strategy among smokers unwilling to quit, warrants further study."

You are quite off the mark with your presumption on both the reading of the articles (just reading headlines) and saying that I said V4L is the best thing over all others (which I never said...at all...in any way). I listed the articles for others to read if they were not aware and I gave a number of them from different places as requested. Its your job to read them yourself and decide what you wish to take from them. Carcinogens of any kind are a cause for concern and this new information is important, so I gave the evidence and asked for opinions on the issue, not for a critique of my posts.

And really, if you don't have something against V4L or my posts, why bring up that last unrelated point at all?

 

[Debra_oh]

When did I panic? How was I not thoughtful in giving some useful information, such as something like only having toxins "9 times lower than in cigarette smoke"? Overall safer does not mean anything with a conclusion like "E-cigarettes as a harm reduction strategy among smokers unwilling to quit, warrants further study."

You are quite off the mark with your presumption on both the reading of the articles (just reading headlines) and saying that I said V4L is the best thing over all others (which I never said...at all...in any way). I listed the articles for others to read if they were not aware and I gave a number of them from different places as requested. Its your job to read them yourself and decide what you wish to take from them. Carcinogens of any kind are a cause for concern and this new information is important, so I gave the evidence and asked for opinions on the issue, not for a critique of my posts.

Hmmm, when did you panic... starting with your title and continuing on. The new study does not suggest "Bad Things" quite the opposite. You then went on to post all the negative studies you could find. So not balanced and you did not read the primary article you posted. If you did read these articles how could you have come to the opinion
"i was shocked to find a recent study suggesting e-cigs are possibly as carcinogenic as cigs.
part of it is due to lack of health regulations and sick companies use cancerous chemicals."

Where does this come from? Why post three news stories that are all based on the same study? What is the validity of the research? Who is funding the study? These are important things to know before posting.

FYI, you posted and asked for the thoughts of others and I shared mine, why get so upset that I find your "research" biased and inaccurate and point it out.

 

[yellow]

Who got upset? Who panicked? My title = panic? Hmmm....I dont see it. Studies showing carcinogens in vapor = a bad thing. A study I read which I might not have included suggested that some cheap vendors, unlike V4L, might be responbile for adding carcinogenic chemicals, so there's nothing biased or inaccurate in simply presenting information.I dont care how much or how little compared to cigs it is, I didnt know it was carcinogenic before, and now I do.

The only thing inaccurate is your viewpoint on my post's point and what I presented in general. And dont tell me what I did or didn't do when obviously I read the article which is why I posted it. Very Presumptuous indeed

 

[Debra_oh]

No, you read the fear articles not the research. But fine, your life, your choices; it is not my job to teach you how to be a thoughtful, intelligent consumer of information nor to help you see your own drama. I will step away from this post and let you do as you will. Good luck

 

[yellow]

No, you read the fear articles not the research. But fine, your life, your choices; it is not my job to teach you how to be a thoughtful, intelligent consumer of information nor to help you see your own drama. I will step away from this post and let you do as you will. Good luck

No, you are just instigating me (because maybe you are possibly panicking or you feel it is important to defend your inaccurate, pointless position). I seem to be more intelligent and thoughtful than others because I read the main point that I brought to this discussion thread: there were carcinogens found, whether its 9 times or 500 times less than cigarettes, period. Stick with the issue and the facts presented instead of trying to find holes in the frame.

 

[K9Luvr]

Would a mod plz close this post.

 

[Ramjet]

Wait a minute...let me get this straight. Everyone here, including myself, has been chugging on so called "cancer sticks and coffin nails" knowing full well of the consequences. I'm pretty darn sure, that if smokes were .25 cents a pack, a lot of us wouldn't hesitate to pick it up the nails once more. That being said, if in the end, I find that I've poisoned myself still, I'm pretty sure that I only have myself to blame.

Which leads me to confess, I vape while wrestling with doubts of an unsafe analysis. I personally feel better physically than when I smoked (mentally is a whole nother story) so from my perspective, I'm sorta gaining health dividends that I couldn't receive otherwise.

Conclusion: I was already tainted before, and maybe carrying the dreaded pest unknowingly today. So, while we all succumb to something, lets pray it's while we sleep

 

[Ramjet]

10,000,000... Hmmm, makes ya wonder

 

[JenJen]

I wonder if she realized that you POSTED this in the in the V4L forum - of course you mentioned V4L! To accuse you of being a shill for V4L when you were posting in the V4L forum was totally off base in my opinion.

As for your concerns, I think we all wonder about that from time to time and have concerns. Based on how I feel, and the many reports I have read I know that I do feel pretty confident that e-cigs are much safer than cigs. Are there risks, no doubt there are but as a person who has quit many times and always gone back to smoking - I feel good that I am at least reducing my risks. If I weren't using an e-cig now, I have no doubt I would be puffing away on a cigarette right now. And truth is, I enjoy e-cigs so much better anyway. For me, it's a win/win situation so I'm not going to worry!

 

[yellow]

I wonder if she realized that you POSTED this in the in the V4L forum - of course you mentioned V4L! To accuse you of being a shill for V4L when you were posting in the V4L forum was totally off base in my opinion.

As for your concerns, I think we all wonder about that from time to time and have concerns. Based on how I feel, and the many reports I have read I know that I do feel pretty confident that e-cigs are much safer than cigs. Are there risks, no doubt there are but as a person who has quit many times and always gone back to smoking - I feel good that I am at least reducing my risks. If I weren't using an e-cig now, I have no doubt I would be puffing away on a cigarette right now. And truth is, I enjoy e-cigs so much better anyway. For me, it's a win/win situation so I'm not going to worry!

Hi JenJen, Thanks for agreeing with my point that she was totally off base, as you can see she continued to instigate me on her bowing out. (and she removed the baseless comment)

Thanks also for your opinion on the matter. I also feel it is better to have quit cigs and use e-cigs, as it is less harmful. I was just very surprised to see a study saying that they arent 100% safe. 9x less than cigs, is what really was a concern.

Study says e-cigarettes may contain carcinogens similar to regular cigarettes

This is the one that worried me a little more, if its accurate of course. But like i said, i was just offering some information and not giving a definitive analysis. I was hoping to get some opinions on that (and not the credibility of the "research," after all, that is the point isnt? to read something and form an opinion/conclusion??)

Thanks again

 

[BHam]

Edit: Watching to make sure things don't get out of hand.

 

[K9Luvr]

Edit: Watching to make sure things don't get out of hand.

Thank you!!!!!!

 

[yellow]

Hey, it wasn't me my friends. I hope you see that

 

[K9Luvr]

Hey, it wasn't me my friends. I hope you see that

No blame, just got a little too heated for this forum, IMHO.

 

[mcol]

This is what I think. A bit about my background. I owned a couple of radio stations for
a few years. I know the ins and outs a little bit about how the media portrays things, and
what they want to air and what they don't air. I also have a very good friend at Duke University,
who gets grants for his colleagues to test things from our government. And I know how
second hand smoke was tested, thus leading to all the studies.
I DON'T watch or READ the news, period.

Bottom line is for every good article there is a bad article, regarding e-cig usage. There are
2 sides that are battling it out, as one side wants more control (imo to be able to tax and regulate).
So for the bad articles, here is a good one:
New Study: No Evidence E-Cigs Cause Cell Damage or Death | Ecig Advanced News

 

[K9Luvr]

This is what I think. A bit about my background. I owned a couple of radio stations for
a few years. I know the ins and outs a little bit about how the media portrays things, and
what they want to air and what they don't air. I also have a very good friend at Duke University,
who gets grants for his colleagues to test things from our government. And I know how
second hand smoke was tested, thus leading to all the studies.
I DON'T watch or READ the news, period.

Bottom line is for every good article there is a bad article, regarding e-cig usage. There are
2 sides that are battling it out, as one side wants more control (imo to be able to tax and regulate).
So for the bad articles, here is a good one:
New Study: No Evidence E-Cigs Cause Cell Damage or Death | Ecig Advanced News

Thanx for sharing some good news!