propylene glycol, and glycerine...... see this, if you havent already.

[lorikay13]

hey Katya....does that mean PG makes you gain weight??? With all that sugar floating around an all....8-o

so paladinx....has any of us told you what you want to hear yet? Obviously we are all trying The funny thing about this is that if you really read what everyone has said, accounting for different communication styles etc....it seems like we all agree. And it's pretty straight forward....we don't claim to know the "answer" to the safety issue completely but if we are vaping....obviously we have made a decision that we are comforatable with. I assume that includes you,paladinx. The only thing left is that if by now you are not comfortable with vaping....Quit doing it.

 

[PlanetScribbles]

I think I have a good analogy that puts the issue to bed, for me.
If I drive to the white cliffs of Dover and do a kamikaze jump from the top I can be pretty sure it will kill me. Not definitely, but probably. No study will convince me otherwise.
When I get there, what if I don't go through with it? What if I just drive home and forget about it? Am I guaranteed to get home without being taken out by a drunk driver on the M25. No, but the latter option is magnitudes more likely to get me home safe than the former.

 

[lorikay13]

Hey that's good....I like it!!

so can we officially call this a zombie thread and shoot it in the head????? I'm think our efforts might be better spent trying to keep e-cigs legal.

 

[paladinx]

What is my point lol. Come on guys. When I first started talking about the PG, i made a very simple point. When I did a few members got ...... off and said the discussion on PG is closed and that you are basically an idiot if you think PG could cause any ill effects. That is how this long debate got started. I never asked for a guarantee or anything. I was just making a simple point about long term side effects being unknown and that we shouldn't act like we are 1000 percent definitive on the subject if someone raises a concern. That was my only point from the begining.

Btw, I also thought the nasa study was going to be the most valid to me. It was from that study that they quoted that the studies done in 1940 were inconclusive to them. And it was also shown that PG was an irritant during short periods of time.

The general point being, although the current evidence for PG would suggest its safer than cigarette smoking, (reason why I keep trying to vape to quit), don't ridicule information or people who might bring up a concern. Because again, the bottom line is, no one in history has ever been inhaling straight heated PG and other ingredients from an electronic device before, every day, 7 days a week.

I am not looking for a gurantee, there are none in life no matter. But at the current time, we are in some ways comparing apples to oranges to form our opinions. So we should just keep an open mind to the good and the bad.

 

[PlanetScribbles]

I do get the point about PG paladinx I really do.
I accept that the long term health effects of vaping PG is an unknown, because PG has never had the opportunity to be vaped long term before now.
My point was merely that it is a risk that I am willing to take, confronted with an option of smoking tobacco which I know will kill me in the long term. It killed my mother, and it killed my father. So I wouldn't be laying the odds against it killing me too.
I'd happily lay odds against PG killing me, all day long. Not long odds, but longer odds than tobacco would get.
I am an addict, so I am willing to accept a compromise that doesn't include side effects like choking, wheezing, skin discolouration and smelling like a landfill.

 

[lorikay13]

okay....speaking of zombies...here is a real zombie thread....let's go have some fun!
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...1187-not-just-survival-zombie-survival-4.html

 

[paladinx]

I agree, thats why I am here, and thats why I own a few 510 s and a 901. But, If someone says something, or if I see people getting symptoms etc. I will keep a look out and an open mind towards it. I will not just say everyone who feels anything is allergic to PG. I just want to keep an open mind that is all.

 

[lorikay13]

Yes paladinx...an open mind is good. For you. But I think what you might not be seeing here is that just because it's good for you doesn't mean it's good for everyone.It may make sense to you....it may seem simple to you....but if it doesn't to someone else...well...what are YOU going to do about that? Someone said to me in one of my infamous "make an ... of myself" posts.....it wasn't my job to tell people how to think or feel. Now granted...in my opinion that guy was a jerk. But he did have a point. And I am making a real effort to keep it in mind. oh...wait....here I go again...trying to tell YOU how to think and feel! Nevermind......

 

[harleyrider]

I don't know if anyone has seen this but PG is used as a laxative. The normal dose is 17 grams. I am a nurse and currently work with the elderly. May of whom have bowel issues as the are not physically active.I can't post a link but google Miralax. It is simple PG.
Just my 2 cents, we all have to make our on choices.

 

[Kate51]

Btw, I also thought the nasa study was going to be the most valid to me. It was from that study that they quoted that the studies done in 1940 were inconclusive to them. And it was also shown that PG was an irritant during short periods of time.

There was, however, conclusive evidence to some regarding the 1940's testing....those poor Monkeys!
Necropsy showed no obvious sign of degeneration or unsuitable changes in the microscopic views of lung tissue. However, per your argument, there was no DNA testing done on the "before" and "after" tissues. That would have been more conclusive, possibly; I know of testing animal tissues regarding "stray voltage" did show cellular DNA changes.
The Monkeys, sadly, would still be "concluded".
In this day and age, we probably should be more concerned with effects of EMF's than with the effect of PG on the lungs.
Did you drink your approximate daily 1.6L of water today? Perhaps an even more pertinent question.

 

[paladinx]

LoriKay, People are gonna feel or think whatever they want. I am not telling people how to think. But this is a forum where people are supposed to post and share information and their opinions. And that is all I am doing. People argue their side, I argue mine. Whether you agree or disagree with me, at least agree that the forum should be a non biased place where everyone can share their opinion whether or not it is appealing to what everyone wants to hear..

Harleyrider. I hear you. PG is also in food colorings, cosmetics, and some say even inhalers. It seems to be a common, everyday household chemical. But again, it has never been used in the manner in which we are using it. I can ingest water into my stomach and it is healthy, If i inhaled water into my lungs, well thats a different story.

Kate, I hear ya. However the fact alone that nasa didnt take that 1940's study as something conclusive should suggest something at least. No one will retest Einsteins laws of physics when they do space missions. They are on a budget and a time schedule. For them to really want to look into it and study PG used in this manner means that previous experience and testing was not conclusive enough for them. On the other hand if breathing in PG was something studied for years and totally common, they would not waste time, money and resources even looking into it.

 

[Kate51]

Drinking your approximate daily water requirement would be much more advantageous than inhaling it.

 

[Quick1]

3) Any ingredient present in e-cigs which is also present in cigarettes in similar amounts is clearly not more dangerous than smoking. But any ingredient which is in e-cigs and is not in cigarettes requires more analysis than that.

[I'm ALL for e-cigs]

This statement isn't valid. The delivery method is quite different. You also can't take each substance in isolation, there may be interactions when mixed with other substances or burned or heated with other substances.

 

[Quick1]

My point was merely that it is a risk that I am willing to take, confronted with an option of smoking tobacco which I know will kill me in the long term. It killed my mother, and it killed my father. So I wouldn't be laying the odds against it killing me too.
I'd happily lay odds against PG killing me, all day long. Not long odds, but longer odds than tobacco would get.

Simply because it's an unknown right?

 

[lorikay13]

Paladinx...I think you totally misunderstood my last post! I was poking fun at MYSELF...just trying to lighten things up a little. Your right...this is a forum...but that's all it is....an electronic forum. If I was trying to tell you anything I guess it was just not to take it all so seriously...or maybe a better word would be personally. It is a serious subject....but you just seem to be getting a little stressed out trying to deal with all of us. Vaping is supposed to be fun! That's all...I really wasn't saying anything against you.

edit....now that I think of it...what got me interested in this thread was watching the way other people were treating you,paladinx. I've seen some veteran ecf-ers stooping to some pretty nasty personal comments and that made me sad. So I was just hoping to make a point for all of us...not just you.

 

[Quick1]

Hey that's good....I like it!!

so can we officially call this a zombie thread and shoot it in the head????? I'm think our efforts might be better spent trying to keep e-cigs legal.

"our"? That would be you and PlanetScribbles? Please don't include me in "our". Simply shouting someone down or declaring the argument over is unconvincing. I prefer to debate with facts and science.

 

[paladinx]

LoriKay, People are gonna feel or think whatever they want. I am not telling people how to think. But this is a forum where people are supposed to post and share information and their opinions. And that is all I am doing. People argue their side, I argue mine. Whether you agree or disagree with me, at least agree that the forum should be a non biased place where everyone can share their opinion whether or not it is appealing to what everyone wants to hear..

Harleyrider. I hear you. PG is also in food colorings, cosmetics, and some say even inhalers. It seems to be a common, everyday household chemical. But again, it has never been used in the manner in which we are using it. I can ingest water into my stomach and it is healthy, If i inhaled water into my lungs, well thats a different story.

Kate, I hear ya. However the fact alone that nasa didnt take that 1940's study as something conclusive should suggest something at least. No one will retest Einsteins laws of physics when they do space missions. They are on a budget and a time schedule. For them to really want to look into it and study PG used in this manner means that previous experience and testing was not conclusive enough for them. On the other hand if breathing in PG was something studied for years and totally common, they would not waste time, money and resources even looking into it.

 

[paladinx]

.... sorry about the double post. Nah im a light hearted person, and im not one to be overly serious. Maybe I come off that way on here, but you have to understand, I only wanted to make a simple point that turned into a huge debate which alienated a lot of people. My objective is not to piss anyone off, or have everyone burn me to the stake as a forum troll. I am not claiming ecigs are bad for you or anything negative. I am just trying to make people keep an open mind and see both sides. Dont be so definitive with such a new technology. I just think that some people are so excited about E-cigs that they found the "safe" cigarette that they do not want to hear ANYTHING, even the possiblity of something negative is too much for some.

 

[lorikay13]

"our"? That would be you and PlanetScribbles? Please don't include me in "our". Simply shouting someone down or declaring the argument over is unconvincing. I prefer to debate with facts and science.

see paladinx...my point exactly....nasty personal comments and no sense of humor! jeez.... Besides...if people want a debate with facts and science that's fine...but I don't think denegration and name calling is part of a scientific debate. anyway...have fun...I'm gonna go hang out with the Zombies!

 

[Quick1]

see paladinx...my point exactly....nasty personal comments and no sense of humor! jeez.... Besides...if people want a debate with facts and science that's fine...but I don't think denegration and name calling is part of a scientific debate. anyway...have fun...I'm gonna go hang out with the Zombies!

Not nasty at all. Personal yes. I prefer you not designate yourself as the representative for "we", "us", and "our". I am afraid that someone (even you) might assume I am part of your "we", "us" and "our". If you look back in this thread you have spoken for "we", "us", and "our" in almost every other post. Your inference is that the large majority of ECF is in agreement with you and that somehow validates what you're saying.