Provaping verse Antivaping

[Stubby]

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

You might want to take a look at this video from the global forum on nicotine conference. The silica/cotton issue is brought up (I can't tell you the time, but the whole video is well worth watching with a comparison between vaping, HnB, and cigarettes).

Another issue with an easy fix.

What is interesting is seeing the very low toxicology of both heat not burn and vaping compared to smoking. Without the smoke there really is a vast reduction of toxins. Most people, even in the vaping community, don't really understand just how significant the reduction in harm is.

 

[motordude]

You might want to take a look at this video from the global forum on nicotine conference. The silica/cotton issue is brought up (I can't tell you the time, but the whole video is well worth watching with a comparison between vaping, HnB, and cigarettes).

Another issue with an easy fix.

What is interesting is seeing the very low toxicology of both heat not burn and vaping compared to smoking. Without the smoke there really is a vast reduction of toxins. Most people, even in the vaping community, don't really understand just how significant the reduction in harm is.

Thank you for this!
See this is the type of info that needs to be shared, not just opinions on it.
Kudos to you for backing up your previous posts.

 

[DeAnna2112]

Thank you @Robino1 and @classwife for your words of wisdom and sanity. I have been following this thread from the get go and wanted to answer the original question but I really don't think it is possible. I vape instead of smoking. If not for vaping I would still be smoking. I consider it harm reduction.

As others have said...Nothing in our lives can be guaranteed 100% safe and I don't think there is an answer to the confusing question that this thread is about. Like a few of the other posters here I really don't understand what you are wanting to hear. It seems to me like you are just trying to get us to agree with you that there is a problem when to most of us, no problem exists. as always, JMHO

Hey mattiem, i was never questioning whether vaping was harmful and looking for a answer to that. It was about the agendas that both sides of research play into. Finding frustration that the antivaping research can not find one good thing about vaping in their research, while it's no different with the provaping research. I want to see provaping research be more realistic in their findings, like Dr. F has been. He has brought to the table alot of good data regarding vaping, but he has also brought to the table concerns.This is what i call balanced researching without an agenda. I want to see more of that and less agendas being served. I hope i have clarified the point i am trying to make. This thread was never about proving whether vaping is harmful or safe, it's always been about how research is conducted and the one sided driving force behind it in it's findings.

 

[DeAnna2112]

Cite links to these pro-vaping reaserchers that are making false claims. In other words, substantiate your claims. (Edited out by classwife)

I am not saying that provaping research is making false claims at all, what i am saying is that they seem to have their own agendas much like antivaping research. It's clear when they only have good reports to make about vaping, and we all know vaping is not perfect, it raises eyebrows. It's like i can see them sitting around the table and disregarding what fits into their agenda and what doesn't. We get the final report that has been cherry picked. There is no way they did not come across things of question or concern, no way.

 

[GaryInTexas]

Who is going to pay for this scientific unbiased accurate research you seek? If associated with ANTZ or BT or provaping research you will not accept it. So who else can and will pony up significant money to sponsor this scope of research to satisfy you.
Sometimes we just have to analyze the data available and accept if it was performed under realistic conditions or not. Long term vaping health issues (if any) won't be known for decades. I've read enough research over the years to eliminate any major concerns for me so I vape and will continue to do so.

 

[Stubby]

I am not saying that provaping research is making false claims at all, what i am saying is that they seem to have their own agendas much like antivaping research. It's clear when they only have good reports to make about vaping, and we all know vaping is not perfect, it raises eyebrows. It's like i can see them sitting around the table and disregarding what fits into their agenda and what doesn't. We get the final report that has been cherry picked. There is no way they did not come across things of question or concern, no way.

You have brought up the issue of pro-vaping studies but I am not at all sure what you are referring to. Please post links to what you consider biased pro-vaping studies. The truth is I have never seen anything that could be labeled as what you are describing.

Edit; I see someone else has ask the same question, but still waiting for links.

 

[Alien Traveler]

What got Dr F the back lash was his comments about coil wire leaching metals into the liquid and not his research. These were comments base on nothing at all and most of the backlash came from those with metallurgical experience. You really are posting a lot of false/unsubstantiated claims in this thread and making ridiculous assumptions. For example, there has been no dedicated pro-vaping research. Just non antivaping researchers testing theories put forth by the anti crowd.

You are 100% wrong and you post false claim. It's a shame.

 

[Alien Traveler]

You have brought up the issue of pro-vaping studies but I am not at all sure what you are referring to. Please post links to what you consider biased pro-vaping studies. The truth is I have never seen anything that could be labeled as what you are describing.

Edit; I see someone else has ask the same question, but still waiting for links.

Read CASAA site.

 

[Stubby]

Who is going to pay for this scientific unbiased accurate research you seek? If associated with ANTZ or BT or provaping research you will not accept it. So who else can and will pony up significant money to sponsor this scope of research to satisfy you.
Sometimes we just have to analyze the data available and accept if it was performed under realistic conditions or not. Long term vaping health issues (if any) won't be known for decades. I've read enough research over the years to eliminate any major concerns for me so I vape and will continue to do so.

That is a very good point and something that many people miss. You really have to look at the integrity of the research (and the integrity of the researcher). Who pays for it should be keep in mind, but it is a fairly minor point. There are a few people I ran into earlier in the thread that refuse of look at the research of two of the leading researchers in the field of THR (Brad Rodu and Carl Phillips) because they have received money for studies from tobacco companies, without understanding that they both have very high integrity in there methods of research.

We are certainly not getting unbiased studies from the FDA. Just take a look at who is getting the millions they are handing out in grants. From the many studies I have read, almost without exception the studies coming out of grants from BT take great pains to be completely above board. They ask good questions and there methods are beyond reproach.

It is a complete reversal of what it was in the past. People who refuse to look at studies because they question what was done 50 years ago are living in the long gone past.

 

[DeAnna2112]

Who is going to pay for this scientific unbiased accurate research you seek? If associated with ANTZ or BT or provaping research you will not accept it. So who else can and will pony up significant money to sponsor this scope of research to satisfy you.
Sometimes we just have to analyze the data available and accept if it was performed under realistic conditions or not. Long term vaping health issues (if any) won't be known for decades. I've read enough research over the years to eliminate any major concerns for me so I vape and will continue to do so.

I am looking to the provaping researchers to provide this, just as Dr. F has. Dr. F is my example of what i am looking for..someone who will conduct research and provide me with findings either way. There is your example. There use to be a researcher, and i believe he worked for Dr. F, i could be wrong, his name was Todd i believe and he was on this forum alot for a while bringing to light some concerns so we could alter our way of vaping and make it safer.

 

[Stubby]

Read CASAA site.

This is CASAA's take on it, and I see nothing in it that would be considered bias. In fact they take a pretty cautious approach. What are you getting at?

About Electronic Cigarettes - CASAA

 

[DeAnna2112]

Let's dig down deep here folks, both sides are cherry picking their findings. Just depends on which side of the fence your financing comes from. CHERRY PICKING

 

[zoiDman]

I am looking to the provaping researchers to provide this, just as Dr. F has. Dr. F is my example of what i am looking for..someone who will conduct research and provide me with findings either way. There is your example. There use to be a researcher, and i believe he worked for Dr. F, i could be wrong, his name was Todd i believe and he was on this forum alot for a while bringing to light some concerns so we could alter our way of vaping and make it safer.

Have you contacted this member and Asked if he can point you in a direction you want to go?

Kurt

 

[DeAnna2112]

Have you contacted this member and Asked if he can point you in a direction you want to go?

Kurt

MY DIRECTION IS AIMED AT ALL RESEARCHERS FOR PROVAPING. STOP CHERRY PICKING THEIR FINDINGS JUST LIKE ANTIVAPING RESEARCHERS DO. AND THANK YOU IT WAS KURT I WAS THINKING ABOUT.

 

[GaryInTexas]

I am looking to the provaping researchers to provide this, just as Dr. F has. Dr. F is my example of what i am looking for..someone who will conduct research and provide me with findings either way. There is your example. There use to be a researcher, and i believe he worked for Dr. F, i could be wrong, his name was Todd i believe and he was on this forum alot for a while bringing to light some concerns so we could alter our way of vaping and make it safer.

I too respect Dr. Farsalinos opinion and research but I assumed since he was involved in Flavourarts Clear Stream project that he would be too far in the pro-vaping category for you.

 

[Tonee N]

MY DIRECTION IS AIMED AT ALL RESEARCHERS FOR PROVAPING. STOP CHERRY PICKING THEIR FINDINGS JUST LIKE ANTIVAPING RESEARCHERS DO. AND THANK YOU IT WAS KURT I WAS THINKING ABOUT.

Don't you just hate it when you accidentally hit the caps lock button when typing, I always think it's the tab button.[emoji4]

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

 

[DeAnna2112]

Don't you just hate it when you accidentally hit the caps lock button when typing, I always think it's the tab button.[emoji4]

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

sorry about that..the all caps

 

[DeAnna2112]

I just want the cherry picking research to stop on both sides, but especially on the provaping side. I set them to a higher standard.

 

[zoiDman]

MY DIRECTION IS AIMED AT ALL RESEARCHERS FOR PROVAPING. STOP CHERRY PICKING THEIR FINDINGS JUST LIKE ANTIVAPING RESEARCHERS DO. AND THANK YOU IT WAS KURT I WAS THINKING ABOUT.

Wow.

You don't seem to like Anyone's Research. No Mater what they say.

 

[DeAnna2112]

Wow.

You don't seem to like Anyone's Research. No Mater what they say.

not true, i just have a issue when one side or the other can't find something outside of their agenda