Provaping verse Antivaping

[Robino1]

CASAA

CASAA: Consumer Advocates for a Smoke free Alternative Association

The Consumer Advocates for Smoke-free Alternatives Association (CASAA) is a non-profit 501(c)(4) organization with an all-volunteer board and a grassroots membership of more than two hundred thousand individuals from all walks of life, and we are growing daily. We are a consumer organization, not a trade association. We are dedicated to ensuring the availability of reduced harm alternatives to smoking and to providing smokers and non-smokers alike with honest information about those alternatives so that they can make informed choices.

Just an FYI

 

[Tonee N]

We love you.[emoji9]

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

 

[Katdarling]

Robin, thank you for being the voice of reason and information.

 

[Stubby]

As to smokeless tobacco being 99% safer than cigarettes (be great if you could post a link or two to support that number) of what importance does it have to vaping? That's comparing apples to peanuts. Smokeless tobacco is not heated, nor does it contain VG, or any of the food flavorings and sweeteners found in vape juice. I have no opinion on whether vaping is safer, the same, or higher in risk to smokeless tobacco. But in light of my gabs in knowledge, some more info on just what smokeless tobacco you are referring to would help me out, are you talking snus or loose tobacco products.

Oh, and I was referring to Philips position as science director, which, my experience is a compensated position even in non-profits, not a board position. And typically above the minimum wage.

I would have to assume that any links I provided on the science of smokeless tobacco would not meet your standards of purity. I would suggest contacting Bill Godshall as he comes by ECF on occasion and was involved with a number of studies on smokeless tobacco. I am sure he would have lots of information on ST for anyone who ask. As for what type of ST, that would include all types of western style ST which includes snus (Sweden) and dip and chew (North America). They all have essentially the same risk profile (pretty close to zero).

The science of smokeless tobacco has a whole lot to do with the science of vaping. What ST tells us is that without in haling smoke, any risk are very hard to find. Essentially all of the harm comes from combustion.

People are still trying to compare vaping to smoking, but it is not a valid comparison (just as comparing ST to smoking is bogus. The basic chemistry is radically different). You are assuming harm and going from there. A known harm reduction product, as in smokeless tobacco is a much better comparison. That is where Phillips gets the 99% less harmful number (just so you know, the 1% harm is from nicotine and cardiovascular issues, which is the same for vaping, but that may well be a bit off as it doesn't consider the positives of nicotine on age related cognitive issues which may be a positive for overall health).

We know there are very good reasons to believe vaping is much less risky the cigarettes, so is there anything in vaping that would make it significantly more risky then ST. So far there is nothing showing up, and no reason to believe there will be, or at least anything that can't be easily fixed.

A good example of the fear and self-loathing (and misinformation) in the vaping world is the recent scare on coil temperature. I have looked at the data, and what it tells us is that the problem is from top coil devices. That makes sense as the long wicks make it difficult to keep the coil saturated. No problems found in bottom coil devices. This is simply common sense and pretty rudimentary mechanics. Keep the wick saturated as happens in bottom coil design and the problem disappears.

Of course that is not what you hear on ECF. There is now a 200+ page thread that covers the subject well beyond reason. It is taking a minor issue with an easy solution, and made it insanely complicated. Of course it doesn't help that ECF, in a very dumb move, has now made it into a sticky.

With these types of paranoid delusions that sweep through ECF (and the vaping world) on a regular basis it is no surprise people are wildly overestimating the risk.

 

[Alien Traveler]

...With these types of paranoid delusions that sweep through ECF (and the vaping world) on a regular basis it is no surprise people are wildly overestimating the risk.

Excellent optimistic point for manufacturers.
Vape as much as you can.

 

[englishmick]

A good example of the fear and self-loathing (and misinformation) in the vaping world is the recent scare on coil temperature. I have looked at the data, and what it tells us is that the problem is from top coil devices. That makes sense as the long wicks make it difficult to keep the coil saturated. No problems found in bottom coil devices. This is simply common sense and pretty rudimentary mechanics. Keep the wick saturated as happens in bottom coil design and the problem disappears.

Of course that is not what you hear on ECF. There is now a 200+ page thread that covers the subject well beyond reason. It is taking a minor issue with an easy solution, and made it insanely complicated. Of course it doesn't help that ECF, in a very dumb move, has now made it into a sticky.

With these types of paranoid delusions that sweep through ECF (and the vaping world) on a regular basis it is no surprise people are wildly overestimating the risk.

Maybe take another look at that thread. One of the tanks producing high temperatures was a Pro Tank with factory head. The division may well be between silica and cotton.

We have to be careful about misinformation and paranoia and delusions and other forms of idiocy, don't we.

bye

 

[motordude]

Well, it seems we can stop all learning and experimenting with vaping.
The THR folks know everything already.
I feel all warm inside now.

 

[stols001]

Oy. I don't think everyone on EFC is taking temp data as "fact". I certainly don't. I like the work Mike is doing but I don't consider any of it conclusive though interesting (there was another thread where I mentioned that....) It's interesting, it has caused me to change my vaping habits to notice my watts and the temp of my vape more, and I would like to use TC as it seems like an *excellent* way to avoid a (possible) harm, but I'm not rushing out to do it yesterday, and I'm okay with that. That said, I think that vapers doing their own research (and challenging false research), is an excellent thing. I ALSO think it demonstrates that ECF is a harm-reduction oriented site, though we have plenty of fun in the meantime. All I want from the temp data to be conclusive is peer review, and replication by two other labs, which is nothing less than I'd ask from any other scientist. But, I think it's pretty good data, so far. I'm not challenging methodology at this point, though I imagine if Mike reads this he's going to immediately test bottom fill tanks if he hasn't (have not read the ENTIRE blog). That guy clearly loves being a scientist That's a good thing.

I really don't think stickying a thread is going to do much for/against The Powers That Be, they've got plenty planned for us, already. So if I can build my own coils in a tank/mod that supports TC, I'll be happy to learn to do it before all temps and coils are "fixed" by The Powers That Be. I guarantee my version (however pitiful it is to start) will be more enjoyable than BT's offering....

Anna

 

[Eskie]

I would have to assume that any links I provided on the science of smokeless tobacco would not meet your standards of purity. I would suggest contacting Bill Godshall as he comes by ECF on occasion and was involved with a number of studies on smokeless tobacco. I am sure he would have lots of information on ST for anyone who ask. As for what type of ST, that would include all types of western style ST which includes snus (Sweden) and dip and chew (North America). They all have essentially the same risk profile (pretty close to zero).

All I want from the temp data to be conclusive is peer review, and replication by two other labs, which is nothing less than I'd ask from any other scientist.

Anna

I would be happy to see the science of smokeless tobacco that establishes 99% harm reduction in a peer reviewed journal and corroborated by two other labs and that would meet my standards of purity, although even better if it wasn't funded by the smokeless tobacco company. That's no higher standard than what Anna would like to see on the temp data. And just like Anna, I'd like to see that on the temp data AND demonstration of low aldehyde production all from the same tank/coil stuff to support a correlation between the two.

Having said all that, I am still happily vaping without any particular change in my vape habits (well, TC was pretty much all my vaping even well before the temp breakdown stuff got tossed on the table), nor have I advised anyone to change or stop vaping based on any of the paranoid delusions running rampant around here.

Still, I thought this thread was to avoid bringing personal agendas and preconceived options into evaluating vaping, something the anti-vaping crowd does, and apparently the pro-vaping crowd will as well. I guess the basis of this thread is then supported by the evidence in the posts.

And Anna, there are other benefits of TC that may, or may not, enhance your vaping experience than just for perhaps an incremental improvement in safety. I like it a lot more than wattage mode. The data on TC will be generated in the near future and it will be interesting to see how it plays out.

 

[stols001]

Yes, I have heard nothing but good things about TC mode. Fortunately, my engineer husband was around while I unpacked my coilmaster kit and it's the only vape product that he looked remotely interested in, he immediately started fiddling with it. I'm quite certain he will build SS coils for me when I ask, LOL, maybe I'll have him *test* the coil instead of myself. Gosh, I better hurry up, I can't stand seeing him suck down those rollies for too much longer. Maybe I'll read up on coils/watch videos while I convalesce from my oral surgery and we can do it after that, I ordered a few RTA/RTDA tanks... In fact I have a beautiful grey/silver steampunk coming to match one of the tanks I ordered, might be able to hand it over and keeping my fingers crossed.

I can't decide if I'm being a good or bad wife here, but I know husband pretty well, it was my thought that ah, enlisting his *expertise* might generate a bit of interest, LOL.

And yes, really, infighting isn't great nor is it necessary. We can disagree (politely) usually.... Now might be the time to start.

Anna

 

[Eskie]

Good luck on your oral surgery. I hope it all goes well, but I wouldn't jump right into building and wicking coils while still taking strong painkillers.

 

[AXIOM_1]

maybe I'll have him *test* the coil instead of myself.

Anna

lol

 

[stols001]

No painkillers I only use advil and PAIN TOLERANCE, LOL. Actually, I've done this twice before, not looking forward to time number 3, but it's amazing what the desire to not pickup a former addiction can do for you. I even wear a medical alert bracelet. So, I won't try building til I'm recovered, but when I'm not passed out, I'll have some cogntive function. So I might watch a few videos/read a few threads....

Also, I don't do sedation either, but I'm a very compliant dental patient, so my periodontist doesn't mind. This time, he's removing 3 denture posts that failed, and replacing them (upper and lower at the same time, EEEK). Since he's doing it for free, I can't complain too much, however. It's like 8 k of work, but since I stopped smoking he was kind enough to reevaluate my dental health and just redo it, though he told me not to tell any other dental patients, LOL.

Anna

 

[Stubby]

I would be happy to see the science of smokeless tobacco that establishes 99% harm reduction in a peer reviewed journal and corroborated by two other labs and that would meet my standards of purity, although even better if it wasn't funded by the smokeless tobacco company. That's no higher standard than what Anna would like to see on the temp data. And just like Anna, I'd like to see that on the temp data AND demonstration of low aldehyde production all from the same tank/coil stuff to support a correlation between the two.

Unknown to many, the recent report by the Royal College of Physicians on vaping was not that groups first venture in harm reduction. In 2007 they came out with a report on tobacco harm reduction with a good part of it on smokeless tobacco.

https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0...n-nicotine-addiction.pdf?15599436013786148553

They do their usually trick of overestimating the risk, though it has been awhile since I have read it so I can't tell you by how much. It is also a bit dated as the new studies are showing less risk from western style ST then what they indicate (studies after 1990 tend to be better as better methods for controls are used).

Good luck with the peer reviewed thing. When it comes to tobacco legitimate peer review doesn't exist. It has been broken for decades.

corroborated by two other labs and that would meet my standards of purity

I would hope you understand that the research on ST that I am taking about is not done in a lab. It is population studies through Epidemiology that is giving us the information. You are going to have to lower your standards of purity and look at the work of Brad Rodu and Carl Phillips to find the answers. CASAA would also be a good place to look.

 

[DC2]

My bet is there were politicians around since our population hit around 100

Someone had to determine who would get to live in the best caves.

 

[DC2]

it was the antivaping research that brought diketones and high heat into question, which prompted the provaping researchers to study it..come on folks.

I just wanted to correct you on this one, because I didn't see anyone else do it.
(Yeah, I'm not all the way through the thread yet)

The potential issue with diketones was brought to light HERE on this forum.
(Just wanted to set the record straight)

 

[DC2]

it seems like when we are asked to reflect upon our own side, it's crickets. It's all fun and games to distract a thread, but when hard questions are asked no one seems to want to answer the question. This is the very reason i don't trust provaping research, because everyone hears what they want to hear and dares not question it....because it's what they want to hear.

Again, I'm not to the end of this thread yet, so not sure if someone else said this...
But just do a search on this forum for Farsalinos.
You'll find a lot of what you said does not exist or happen.

 

[DC2]

Nice read, I didn't know who he was. Full disclosure, he is the the Science Director of CASSA so that is a paid opinion.

When did CASAA board members start getting paid?

Recently we have Mike that has taken it upon himself to test different devices to see how hot our coils actually get.

Can someone link me to this thread please?

 

[zoiDman]

...

Can someone link me to this thread please?

New studies find carcinogens in vg and pg at high temps, even in tootle puffers

Mike's testing Starts about half way thru that thread.

 

[DC2]

I would hope you understand that the research on ST that I am taking about is not done in a lab. It is population studies through Epidemiology that is giving us the information. You are going to have to lower your standards of purity and look at the work of Brad Rodu and Carl Phillips to find the answers. CASAA would also be a good place to look.

This is a good starting point, but it certainly isn't an unbiased source...
Swedish Match - The Swedish Experience

It cites studies and gives the references.
So there's that.