And i agree with you 100% discussing pros and cons has always been apart of this forum and why i love it so much. Maybe you misunderstood me, i was talking about researchers and the provaping research
Provaping verse Antivaping
- Thread starter DeAnna2112
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
And i agree with you 100% discussing pros and cons has always been apart of this forum and why i love it so much. Maybe you misunderstood me, i was talking about researchers and the provaping research
So what are we fighting about today? I'm SO out of the loop.
(kidding, kinda - just playing around so heed the "advice" under my avi)
<
(kidding, kinda - just playing around so heed the "advice" under my avi)
<
I don't trust antivaping research because it's all about what's possibly wrong with vaping. I don't trust provaping research that only points out the positive of vaping because that's what their research is all about. I trust research that brings forth both findings in their research. That tells me that they don't have agendas to support one side or the other, they are just sharing their findings whether it's good or bad. This is why i am such a huge supporter, even financially, of Dr. F. He has brought to the table the good and areas of concern, which has clearly ticked alot of people off who use to support him. I started a thread about saluting Dr. F for always being upfront with us in his research and all i hear in response is crickets. To each their own but honestly why would anyone expect less in a researcher? Don't you want research that is looking at both sides of the coin? doesn't it mean more when they share both sides of findings? We know vaping is not without some issues and we know that vaping is much healthier then smoking. i want a researcher who will provide me with both in their research. Antivaping research is not going to provide that, but then again neither is provaping research. And i will add, this forum has always been a place where research comes into discussion and debate...both sides of the coin are always explored. It's why i love this forum and the members in it soo much. Just want to add, thus far i have converted 15 teens ranging in age from 17 to 21 to vaping. I have given my advise on what to do and what not to do based on research that i believe in. Clearly where i stand with the total accumulation of research is clear, but i know there is room for improvement to make it safer. So come on provaping research, i am looking at you with a skeptical eye to work on what is wrong and what can be improved on to make it safer. STOP only feeding me what is right with vaping and leaving out the flip side of the coin where we can make changes and improve the safety of vaping. Vaping has issues that need to be addressed, nothing in this world is perfect, but according to provaping research vaping is..AND THAT IS NOT POSSIBLE OR REALISTIC.
I've read every thread I've come across that includes scientific testing results here on ECF and on Google links I've discovered. I'm sure I've just scratched the surface.
When you think about it, the nic is the closest we come to tobacco. It's the high temps that get the most press. With temps under 400F there's supposedly little to worry about. I like my vape with a tiny detectable warmth. I didn't like hot boxed cigarettes and I don't care for hot vapes. It's why I stay around 10W and below. I just want something that approximates a light filter cigarette and produces moderate vapor.
PG and VG can turn into some bad chemicals at high temps, but I'd like to think that most of us don't get nearly into those levels. It's what's in the mid range levels that I'd like to know about. Most impartial articles agree that the levels needed to produce harmful chemicals is also a level at which we'd turn up our noses and try to figure out what we did wrong.
I suppose that in between the safe temps and the bad temps there are borderline points when formaldehyde and diacetyl and other unwanted chemicals start to emerge in the vapor.
At what temperature do PG & VG burn? • r/electronic_cigarette
When you think about it, the nic is the closest we come to tobacco. It's the high temps that get the most press. With temps under 400F there's supposedly little to worry about. I like my vape with a tiny detectable warmth. I didn't like hot boxed cigarettes and I don't care for hot vapes. It's why I stay around 10W and below. I just want something that approximates a light filter cigarette and produces moderate vapor.
PG and VG can turn into some bad chemicals at high temps, but I'd like to think that most of us don't get nearly into those levels. It's what's in the mid range levels that I'd like to know about. Most impartial articles agree that the levels needed to produce harmful chemicals is also a level at which we'd turn up our noses and try to figure out what we did wrong.
I suppose that in between the safe temps and the bad temps there are borderline points when formaldehyde and diacetyl and other unwanted chemicals start to emerge in the vapor.
At what temperature do PG & VG burn? • r/electronic_cigarette
I have to wonder why any provaping researcher would feel the need to change their practices, after all, look at what happened to Dr. F for reporting both sides of the coin?? he got soo much backlash and push back. Hell, look at my thread called Dear Dr. F!!!! being a honest researcher who provides both sides of the coin is clearly not supported or a way to gain points. Shakes head!! The one person who tells us like it is whether good or bad. And everything he has reported back to us of concern is easily fixable.
OMG thank you!! you at least acknowledge there is room for improvement and seek more info to do so IF there is a problem with high temps
Cleary Dr. F is continuing his research with or without this forums support because he feels vaping is safer then smoking. He will not bend down to the level of provaping researchers. He will continue to report his findings whether good or bad. Godspeed Dr. F...Godspeed!!!
Dr F. is himself a vaper. I would assume that he shares most of our concerns about the potential negative aspects of vaping, and while he tries to accentuate the positive, his overall concern is that we have the most accurate assessment possible to base our decisions on.
@DeAnna2112 - in one sentence, and forgive me please my lack of understanding, but what is it exactly that you are either saying, or asking?
I've read every post in this thread and I'm still not quite understanding you.
I've read every post in this thread and I'm still not quite understanding you.
wow i give i seriously do, continue on supporting research that does not have an agenda
I'm unfamiliar with any research that has been done sans agenda.
I will go back to watching the star trek marathon, seriously people!! you don't get it. I feel like i am becoming repetitive.
So what are we fighting about today? I'm SO out of the loop.
(kidding, kinda - just playing around so heed the "advice" under my avi)
<
lol
- Status
Similar threads
