Not really. It's just a complicated situation that isn't resolved with easy answers.
Provaping verse Antivaping
- Thread starter DeAnna2112
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Not really. It's just a complicated situation that isn't resolved with easy answers.
Ok first off we can extrapolate what the effects might be based on the track record from other uses. For pg and vg look at the long term effects from asthma inhalers. No significant lung damage found in any asthmatics from the inhalers.
For flavorings we can look at scented candles to a point or aroma therapy studies. We can also look at the studies done on the basic chemicals used to make flavorings.
Pretty much everything used in vaping has been tested for years and determined GRAS. The only exception so far is diketones and that has yet to be proven beyond an associative relationship. No diketone study has shown a causal relationship to anything.
so you have answered the pros in provaping research, but you seriously don't have any cons..things you wish the provaping research can do better? maybe i am not explaining myself well enough in what i am asking.
What could provaping research improve upon? i say stop researching old technology like the antivaping researchers do.
What do you want provaping research to improve upon, what can they do better in providing us research
I don't want pro-vaping research. I don't want anti-vaping research. It's not scientific if you enter the situation with an agenda.
As we know the harm reduction benefits of vaping, I appreciate that pro-vaping responds to the anti-vapers.
I appreciate that the community as a whole responds to acute problems with vaping, with improvements in the industry.
I appreciate the air quality studies done.
I honestly don't think more even can be done atm. I'm simply not worried. If our bodies can heal even though we are vaping from the damage we did to it from smoking, then it's just not bad, and I don't see any negatives in the future.
We use it to get OFF cigarettes, and it's simply not as addictive so I am not worried for future generations who want to pick up a vape.
well it sounds like me and you are in the same boat, neither side has proven to me that vaping is harmless or harmful. I go by what my body tells me at this point in time after smoking for 30yrs
Vapers greatly exaggerate use of PG in asthma inhalers. It looks like it is not used in them. And anyway, dose provided by inhalers is so small compared to vaping that comparison make no sense at all.
There is no pro-vaping or anti-vaping research (there certainly is biased studies, but by reading the protocols and conclusions it is normally evident). You are asking the wrong question. There is only well done research and badly done research.
There is research with good protocols and ask good questions, and badly done research with lousy protocols and bogus questions, and quite often strange studies with conclusions not supported by the actual study (an all to common occurrence with agenda driven studies).
Trying to split this into pro and anti studies is a bad idea. All it does is confuse the issue. You end up asking all the wrong questions.
The scariest part with vaping at least for me is a lack of long-term health effects. I was a smoker for 14 years, 1,5 pack/day of West Silver. I am almost 30 years old now so I will probably see long-term studies from vaping and I can just hope that I'm not going to be a part of bad statistics. I loved to smoke, smoking was my pleasure in life. When I decided to quit and switched to vaping (because obviously I like to inhale stuff) I hoped that I made a right desicion but right now I can't know this for sure. I am following the studies and I made some modifications in my vaping style because of the studies. I am vaping only unflavoured high NIC e-liquids (9 mg/ml), 50/50 PG/VG, TC with Titanium, up to 230°C, about 5 - 6 ml/day and just mouth to lungs. I am doing this because I believe this is the safest vaping I can get. But maybe I am wrong. Maybe I am putting myself into an early grave with my vaping style. Nobody knows. Global scientific consensus on vaping is that vaping is much safer than smoking. But what if it isn't? Research in vaping is focused primarly on chemicals in aerosols. But what if are not chemicals which are causing long-term harm in vaping? What if it's something else? I am being hypothetical I know but... We know that we can smoke for 20, 30, 40 years without getting lung-cancer, COPD and other major diesases but we don't know this for vaping. Sometimes I feel that is better to stick with the devil we already know (smoking) and not with the devil we have no clue about (vaping). I want to be 50 years old some day and with smoking I have pretty good chances to get there but with vaping... I just don't know. But that's just me...
Sweetheart, if a COPD patient who smokes, HEALS and improves by switching to vaping, if an emphysema patient who smokes, can HEAL and improve by switching to vaping, I find it seriously doubtful that vaping would cause those diseases.
As for cancer. I lost my father to cancer when he was 42. I lost my daughter to cancer when she was 23. Neither of them smoked (I take that back, my daughter smoked two or three cigarettes a day during the later stages of her cancer, but it didn't cause her cancer, nor did it make her worse)
People Do die, regardless of what they do. And sometimes, they die young. Sometimes, they die old in their beds.
Death isn't something to fear. A poorly lived life is. And if vaping doesn't negatively affect your life and quality thereof, then I say go for it.
I know for a fact if you smoke for 30 years it WILL affect the quality of your life, even if it doesn't kill you, be cause it certainly negatively affected mine. I can assure you that in 20 more years of smoking, that you don't want to be the person who cannot breathe well enough to make it to your own mailbox without several rest breaks along the way, and so addicted that you can't lay that cigarette down, even though it's the cause.
Last edited:
Oh my God. I am really sorry for your losses...
I think I can agree with you at some point. Ricardo Pollosa is performing a quite good research on lung patients and the research is quite promising... As I said my fears are hypothetical and maybe they have nothing to do with reality but inside me they are real...
As I said my fears are hypothetical and maybe they have nothing to do with reality but inside me they are real...
First, thank you for your kind sentiments.
Now.. it's okay to have fears - all I'm saying is don't let them become unhealthy or irrational fears. Remove yourself from your own fear long enough to logically assess real information and that information lies in the actual facts laid before you. Look at the situation with what we do know for a fact; the people involved.
If I could have quit smoking after 14 years, I would be better off for it. You found that way.. don't let fear of the unknown create bad decisions. Sometimes the devil we don't know is the savior and not the devil; and sometimes it's for reasons we cannot imagine at the time of choosing between our two "devils".
Last edited:
What amazes/amuses ME is that after smoking cigarettes for years (often decades) with full knowledge of how harmful they are, so many of us become obsessed vaping "safely" and go into an absolute panic over any perceived "risk" involved.
That being said, the research/science being done should be neither pro, nor anti vaping, it is what it is, good or bad. I understand being skeptical of the agendas of the researchers on either side, but that's usually pretty obvious based on the funding/sponsorship sources of a given project.
I'm not sure it's fair to query a particular member about what they like or dislike about vape research at this point, though I'm glad it's starting up and would be pleased to hear more reasearch from any country not under the FDA, as a lot of what is happening now it political.
I agree the research should be done but I think DeAnna's main point is that she feels it is safer than smoking at this point, I would concur, if only because what I've SEEN of hazards is being dealt with by manufacturers, but it's early days yet.
As far as anecdotal evidence, doctors see more in aggregate the positives of vaping over smoking, and COPD and emphesima improving. I do listen to my docs, actually, and I have yet to meet a medical professional who didn't think it was a good thing (for me). Since I listen to my docs in other regards, I'm not going to complain about it....
Anna
I agree the research should be done but I think DeAnna's main point is that she feels it is safer than smoking at this point, I would concur, if only because what I've SEEN of hazards is being dealt with by manufacturers, but it's early days yet.
As far as anecdotal evidence, doctors see more in aggregate the positives of vaping over smoking, and COPD and emphesima improving. I do listen to my docs, actually, and I have yet to meet a medical professional who didn't think it was a good thing (for me). Since I listen to my docs in other regards, I'm not going to complain about it....
Anna
Life is a crap shoot. I was a heavy smoker for decades. My wife was a light smoker for for the same period of time. I'll be 50 this week. She died of Cancer in her 40's. My father was a hard drinker and smoker for all of his adult life, died at 62 of Cancer. My step-grandfather never smoked and lived a relatively healthy lifestyle, died at 95 of Cancer. My cousin was ran over by a school bus before he was even 10. I served with people in the USN who just disappeared off of ships while underway in the middle of the night. We're all going to die eventually. I will, you will. Everybody you know will die at some point. So...you make decisions based on quality of life and hope for the best.
- Status
Similar threads
