I'm pretty sure ecigs are a gateway to poverty, because I'm going to go broke buying all the new shiny accessories I want.
Sent from my Droid Maxx via Tapatalk
Sent from my Droid Maxx via Tapatalk
Outrageous Distortions, Cont. Fox News calls E-cigs a "Gateway Drug"
- Thread starter Vwls
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
I am actually the author of this articlethank you for reading it and sharing it. I just recently started writing articles for that website, and I have yet to link or publicize here because I have to register under forum rules (I'll have to get on that shortly...). This is actually the first article I've ever had published anywhere
Unfortunately, given my interests and writing style, I'm pretty sure mainstream media is not in my future.
Well done! I was going to skip it til I saw that.
You implied a few times that nicotine use made for a better high from the c-drug. I don't think thats quite right. The mice ACT like the c-drug was better. But I think the scientists were claiming that the nic altered the reward circuitry in the brain. So they became more dependant on the c-drug and displayed more seeking behavior (Acted like they wanted more ... more). So was it better? or their reward system provided a stronger dependance even tho it wasn't better. Or both?
Hard to get a straight answer from a mouse tho.
Why gee, all this babble would make you think there were no gateways at all before e-cigs made it onto the scene.
Waiting them to go full blown stupid and report "being alive is a gateway to death." It could happen, maybe on an even slower news day. I'm sure the CDC will have something to do with it.
Waiting them to go full blown stupid and report "being alive is a gateway to death." It could happen, maybe on an even slower news day. I'm sure the CDC will have something to do with it.
Thank you
That kind of depends on how you define "better" - what the research shows is that the high is enhanced by using nicotine repeatedly for a long period of time beforehand. They did a lot of neuroscientific analysis to show exactly how it altered the reward pathway in the brain, but I left that out of the article because (a) it was very complex and I only understood some of it, and (b) it was irrelevant to the topic at hand.
They did not show increased dependence though, only an enhanced high. They predicted (read:guessed) that this could lead to increased dependence, mainly on the premise that the greater the reward is, the more likely you are to go back to it. But no, they did not prove greater dependence with this study.
Basically, if they wanted to be honest researchers (ha!), they should have just called the article "Prolonged use of nicotine leads to enhanced effect from ......... use and alters reward pathways for ...... in the brain" or something like that. But instead they pulled the "E-cigs are a Gateway!!!" nonsense and made themselves look like a couple of buffoons.
This, but I would say whoever paid for the study got exactly what they wanted, something that could be slightly twisted and used for more "scientifically backed" propaganda against e-cigarettes in the press.
Sorry, I am a lazy alien hating politicians; I do not have any good suggestions. And I am rather pessimistic for the case. I adore your activity and wish more lazy vapers (like me) follow your steps. But from the other side activity may be harmful. What if most emails and calls will be on the level of this one:
They can be easily dismissed as opinions of nicotine addicts dumbed down by irresponsible bloggers.
I am pessimistic.
General population is rather in anti-vaping mood, and what suggestion I see on ECF to improve things?
- Lets make a Vaping day, lets demonstrate in front of public while vaping (too many people may see such an activity as a disgusting one)
- Lets tell people there is no nicotine in exhaled vapor (its not true, and people will learn that vapers are lying to keep their addiction alive)
- Lets vape more in public (but now people include air in their personal space and do want to see clouds around)
- Etc.
I little while ago, when FDA was still gathering opinions of future regulations, the longest one and most prized on ECF one contained Obamas name (usually as Obamas FDA) about 15 time. It made vaping a partisan issue and its certainly bad for vaping.
Activity could be very two-sided and since I am not on receiving side of this activity I have no idea how it works.
So, I am rather pessimistic (or prefer to be pessimistic to rationalize my stockpiling).
Activity could be very two-sided and since I am not on receiving side of this activity I have no idea how it works.
Lost in (alien) transition.
So, I am rather pessimistic (or prefer to be pessimistic to rationalize my stockpiling).
I tend to agree.
Lost in (alien) transition.
So, I am rather pessimistic (or prefer to be pessimistic to rationalize my stockpiling).
I tend to agree.
Alien Traveler,
I can see where you are coming from. I'll be using parts of the comment you reference, without any references to Obama etc, in various discussions. I see the partisan stuff all over politics, it's the problem with having people pretend to belong to a 'party' or at least to vote based on some imaginary party line... ooh, almost went into a really long rant there.
Just remember... a few of the things being considered would be to prohibit online sales of NIC or pre-mixed juice... that would have to be done face-to-face. They may prohibit any flavors outside of 'tobacco' and 'tobacco with menthol'. They may start limiting the NIC percentage available, perhaps nothing above 1.2 - 2%. Whatever you are currently paying for pre-mix, could double or triple due to taxation and associated costs for vendors and stores.
Other possibilities...
Possession of high % NIC without a license, could become a crime.
You could be asked to pay the appropriate tax on your current supply ( doubt it, but they could set a volume and above that needs to buy stamps )
It could become a federal crime to add any flavoring to tobacco or ejuice
I agree that we need a louder voice and to take better actions. We definitely need to be careful what we say to politicians etc, and be prepared to rebut their quackery studies.
Not everyone has to fight though You still have the right NOT TO... so far anyway
I can see where you are coming from. I'll be using parts of the comment you reference, without any references to Obama etc, in various discussions. I see the partisan stuff all over politics, it's the problem with having people pretend to belong to a 'party' or at least to vote based on some imaginary party line... ooh, almost went into a really long rant there.
Just remember... a few of the things being considered would be to prohibit online sales of NIC or pre-mixed juice... that would have to be done face-to-face. They may prohibit any flavors outside of 'tobacco' and 'tobacco with menthol'. They may start limiting the NIC percentage available, perhaps nothing above 1.2 - 2%. Whatever you are currently paying for pre-mix, could double or triple due to taxation and associated costs for vendors and stores.
Other possibilities...
Possession of high % NIC without a license, could become a crime.
You could be asked to pay the appropriate tax on your current supply ( doubt it, but they could set a volume and above that needs to buy stamps )
It could become a federal crime to add any flavoring to tobacco or ejuice
I agree that we need a louder voice and to take better actions. We definitely need to be careful what we say to politicians etc, and be prepared to rebut their quackery studies.
Not everyone has to fight though
You still have the right NOT TO... so far anyway 
Normal cigarettes are gateway drugs too, even coffee can be considered a gateway drug and I won't even mention beer. The newsies are just after the sensation , shocking headlines and fear mongering ...
hi all,
i have posted about the gateway effect in other post's
not to be redundant i'll repeat my opinion again for the benefit of this thread.
back in the 60's when the push against tobacco started to gain momentum many studies
where done. one interesting but, not necessary relevant factoid revealed that roughly 80% of the adult
population had tried a cigarette,even if only just one. at the time no significance of any import was placed
on it.
now we fast forward to the 70's. illegal drugs running rampant. of course many studies,new laws and,policies where made
to deal with the emerging problem. although illegal usage was well below that of tobacco use somewhere along the line
it was noted that about 80% of users had used tobacco before. with a 8 in 10 chance who would of thunk it?
then when the big push against tobacco gets going full bore along with the children,second hand smoke and, illness,
someone noted,look we know from previous studies 8 of 10 adults have smoked it must be a gateway to those
other things. so was born the gateway effect. it was not invented so much as to help understand why those
other things where so addictive or,how that information might be helpful in getting them unhooked.
its only purpose was to used as another hammer to beat big tobacco over the head.
since then it has been ingrained into the American psyche.
as far as i know there is no credible science behind it
it sure was effective though.
regards
mike
i have posted about the gateway effect in other post's
not to be redundant i'll repeat my opinion again for the benefit of this thread.
back in the 60's when the push against tobacco started to gain momentum many studies
where done. one interesting but, not necessary relevant factoid revealed that roughly 80% of the adult
population had tried a cigarette,even if only just one. at the time no significance of any import was placed
on it.
now we fast forward to the 70's. illegal drugs running rampant. of course many studies,new laws and,policies where made
to deal with the emerging problem. although illegal usage was well below that of tobacco use somewhere along the line
it was noted that about 80% of users had used tobacco before. with a 8 in 10 chance who would of thunk it?
then when the big push against tobacco gets going full bore along with the children,second hand smoke and, illness,
someone noted,look we know from previous studies 8 of 10 adults have smoked it must be a gateway to those
other things. so was born the gateway effect. it was not invented so much as to help understand why those
other things where so addictive or,how that information might be helpful in getting them unhooked.
its only purpose was to used as another hammer to beat big tobacco over the head.
since then it has been ingrained into the American psyche.
as far as i know there is no credible science behind it
it sure was effective though.
regards
mike
Last edited:
And that's the thing, the whole "gateway drug" idea is just a theory. So I especially hate articles like that.
Sent from my Droid Maxx via Tapatalk
In fact the very idea of anything being a gateway drug is flawed because no one has ever proved causality - only correlation. And correlation can be due to multiple variables - even unique combinations of variables. So in essence, it's a load of malarkey. The only truth to it when applied to substances (not legal ones like cigarettes or vaping) is that spending time with the people that have the drug, sell the drug, and do the drug will inevitably end up exposing you to other drugs. Just because of the company you're keeping.
You're right and even 'correlation' implies a 'relationship' (although not causal) and sometimes even no relationship is present. Sometimes it's only an observation with a faulty assumption. Or in the case of propaganda - a forced or implied assumption.
Having had many complex experiences during my growing years, and college years, with both various people and various substances...
I feel confident in saying that "the company you keep" is a better indicator of "gateway effects" than anything else.
Last edited:
Very true, and one of the PRIMARY ideas they hammer you with in rehab is "you have to change the players to change the game" -- if you go back to hanging around drug users/drinkers, you'll very likely relapse yourself. Actually one of the major reasons I wanted to STOP using was because of all the skanky people I had to be around. "Birds of a feather," "lie down with dogs, get up with fleas," and all that. Then I became a mom, and I sure didn't want losers like that anywhere near my child.
Andria
MASSIVE FAIL!!! The mice study proves nothing because the mice had no choice on the matter of introduction of ......., as well as no potential to comprehend the consequences of ....... usage.
Last edited by a moderator:
If they repeated this study but with alcohol, caffeine or even sugar they would find the same "coloration"
@dragonpuff congrats on being published! I am glad to see that 716 has a leg in the race now!!
@dragonpuff congrats on being published! I am glad to see that 716 has a leg in the race now!!
- Status
