To all my ecf brothers and sisters.....please read.

[Levitas]

I never attacked you personally or made any comments about your character. I did disagree with your attitude which has gotten considerably worse with this condescending and childish post. And I disagreed with your position that vaping is not safe for anyone until some mysterious, unknown entity, that you do not name, blesses vaping through their research sometime in the unknown future. Yet you apparantly believe that we should keep quite, vape only with smokers and hope someone saves us.

Okay, so what do you believe then? How would you go about the banning of vaping in Starbucks? Inform them with information made with present studies in the hopes that they will just say, "Well, this guy clearly knows his stuff, we should probably allow it." Or do you believe you'll raise an eyebrow from the CEO at Starbucks, so much in fact that he/she will personally fund a long term experimental study as to how dangerous vaping is or isn't long term (gee, I guess I've got to make that bold now, as you're not really acknowledging it).

And since you seem to imply that the fact that in your words, I "just took some university courses" somehow disqualifies my ability to understand basic socialogy and psychology, whereas you are "in school" to some day be an RN as if that means anything. Not that this means anything either but I do have my Masters degree and I didn't just take some courses.

So, why even mention it in the first place? Why would it even be necassary to make a comment like, "Your understanding of yada yada subjects is different than that I've learned from University."? As if that in itself was an effort to disqualify my own opinons on the subject. Basically, you know you're right, and any other opinion that isn't on the same level with yours, is wrong. No?

And if you have done all of this research and still believe that vaping could be harmful to those near the person who is vaping, then no level of research or studies will satisfy you, which is quite sad. I have read all the studies and papers provided by CASAA, AAPHA and the FDA. There is no evidence that anything in exhaled vapor is harmful to others.

Now you're saying that my opinion is sad. I agreed that there is no evidence of vapor harming anyone, nor is there evidence of it being completely safe. My arguement is, long term exposure, which no one has any solid proof as of now because it's still too early. How is this so hard to comprehend?

On writing letters on behalf of vaping, I've written, emailed and called over 45 different organizations, senators, congressman, local officials and buinesses.

Other than being sarcastic and condescending, I have not read anything from you that supports your belief that we all need to do nothing because vaping may not be safe and we could harm untold innocent people.

Yes yes, list your accomplishments. I too have written to my congressman and senator and governor, but my letters were more along the lines of asking them what measures or steps are being taken to ensure the complete safety of these products so that they can be dispersed without prejudice or false glorifications such as, Vaping is completely safe and will do no harm. (Edit: The exception was the first letter I've written to my senator, which was completely in favor of ceasing the ban on the electronic cigarette. http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...issouri-senator-today-interested-reading.html ) I've since then, written another letter to Roy Blunt asking what Missouri is doing to ensure that the electronic cigarette is being researched and validated as safe.

We're not enemies, we're misunderstanding one another. I want what you want, but I do not believe that fighting a ban at Starbucks will do much to ensure that vaping will not become taboo or frowned upon. It already is in some aspects. I never said do nothing to the cause of vaping, you're putting those words into my mouth. I say, other than asking, what can be done about vaping in Starbucks, ya know the OT we're talking about here and got a little de-railed?

I think you even said you agree with the statement, "Pick your battles wisely." Do you honestly believe that Starbucks is one that should be pressed?

 

[WAC_Vet]

Let's take another view here..... second-hand vapor, how dangerous can it be? From what I've read, 98% of the nicotine is absorbed by the person using the PV. That leave 2% (let's use the highest premixed percentage of 36% nic) exhaled. The vapor that is exhaled is relatively short lived, especially in comparison to how long second-hand cigarette smoke lingers in the air. PG, VG is much heavier than our surrounding air, so they will not stay in our airspace very long at all.

Now, let's look at another form of vaporizer.... the home hot vaporizer most of us have used at some point in our lives (especially us older folk). Vaposteam is 6.2% camphor, according to the bottle.... what are the other ingredients? Let's see what some are.....camphor, ethnol, and laurithyl are listed in P&G material safety data sheet. Camphor itself can cause seizures, laurithyl (polyoxyethylene dodecanol) has some safety issues also.....
Safety (MSDS) data for camphor
ScienceDirect - Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology : Studies on the toxicity of polyoxyethylene dodecanol

If, there is a safety/health issue with PV use, it would be for the actual user, not from second-hand vapor.

 

[wv2win]

.....1.No one knows 100% for sure how bad vaping is for you, or those around you. As you put, there have been no studies showing it's safety or it's potential harm, long term, because there are none. It is irresposible to think that vaping is safe with no evidence showing it so.

2.Is it not? To the general public, I mean. What is the biggest difference between a cigarette and vaping, as far as these establishments and the "general public" perceive? Safety. We don't want to be around smoke because it is proven to cause harm. But, vaping hasn't been proved or disproved to be safe or not. As I had said, it is irresponsible to say otherwise. I hold no illusions to vaping, but you seem to think that nothing at all can happen to you or those around you, after vaping for long periods of time. And you do not know that, period.

3.I never said that, not once. I said that I personally do not vape in establishments and I ask why is it so hard to just wait to vape privately in the comfort of your car or home. If the establishment allows it, AWESOME! You won't see me giving lectures to the owner, I'll bust out the MonkeyBoxx and vape away. But, since this is such a new product still being evaluated and tested for safety purposes, don't you think that if they don't want it around, we should respect that? At the very least until concrete evidence showing that vaping will cause no harm to anyone can be produced? ..............

The only person who is being "irresponsible" is you by twisting the facts. Every study done to date shows that vaping is safe for those around the person who is vaping. You saying otherwise means exactly "ZERO" other than believing anything you say would be a bad proposition.

Second, stating that vaping must be proven (by who or how, you never state) 100% safe to others, is a straw man arguement that is used by those with a weak and indefensible position. For example, are all antibiotics 100% safe? How about pain medications, are they 100% safe? Is driving a car 100% safe for those riding a bike or walking along the street? Is being admitted to a hospital 100% safe? Is going to a concert where vapor machines are being used 100% safe? How about the water heater in your house or the insulation - are they 100% safe. Is drinking water 100% safe?

Your unexplained and unsupported position that vaping must be proven 100% safe by some all-knowing entity is an absurd position that is basically childish.

And the main point that we have been stating, is that it has already been proven that vaping is not the same as smoking and we should respectful challenge those who think otherwise. You want us all to do nothing and wait for "mana from heaven". You seem to live in a childish fantasy world that demands perfection and ironclad guarantees. That is not reality although I would surmise you will not understand that.

 

[WAC_Vet]

All military Veterans know..... you win the war, one battle at a time. As a military Veteran myself, I will fight each battle, until the war is won! I feel we need to fight the battle through education.... sometimes that does mean a good street education, via financial means!

 

[Levitas]

The only person who is being "irresponsible" is you by twisting the facts. Every study done to date shows that vaping is safe for those around the person who is vaping. You saying otherwise means exactly "ZERO" other than believing anything you say would be a bad proposition.

Second, stating that vaping must be proven (by who or how, you never state) 100% safe to others, is a straw man arguement that is used by those with a weak and indefensible position. For example, are all antibiotics 100% safe? How about pain medications, are they 100% safe? Is driving a car 100% safe for those riding a bike or walking along the street? Is being admitted to a hospital 100% safe? Is going to a concert where vapor machines are being used 100% safe? Is drinking water 100% safe?

Your unexplained and unsupported position that vaping must be proven 100% safe by some all-knowing entity is an absurd position that is basically childish.

And the main point that we have been stating, is that it has already been proven that vaping is not the same as smoking and we should respectful challenge those you think otherwise. You seem to live in a childish fantasy world that demands perfection and ironclad guarantees. That is not reality although I would surmise you will not understand that.

Man oh man, I don't know how I cannot get this through to you. How do I get it through? I honestly do not know!?

You're arguement is of products used by a user and not affecting anyone else around them, antibiotics? Riding a bike? I'm talking about inhaling something and exhaling it to those who have no wish to inhale what you're using. I hold no ground saying that I am at all correct in my assessment, not in the least. That's where you're misunderstanding me. You know that what you're saying is correct, I am questioning every possible negative repercussion. You seem to think that I am just outright saying, "Vaping IS harmful to yourself and those around you." But I am not. I wish to know the long term possible negative repercussions, I'm sure we ALL do. Until we do know, for sure, if it is safe, partially safe, not safe in the least (long term and hell, even short term - for example, have their been any studies for those severely allergic to pg? Will the 2nd hand vapor effect them? They're just questions! Not accusations, or attempts to de-rail vaping. May I ASK some questions?) I cannot endorse fighting for our right to vape in a public indoor establishment, if there is ANY chance of causing ANY harm to anyone else, aside of yourself. I don't know how ANYONE could! (Edit: Yes, I am aware at this point there has been nothing showing any second hand harm and that's fantastic! When the years roll by and yes, you know as well as I, it will take years, and all of the myths are transformed into solid facts backed up with years of research, then and only then will I be comfortable endorsing public vaping. Sorry, just my opinion!)

I never said smoking was the same as vaping, nor do I believe that. To me, this has nothing to do with smoking, though you believe it does because of the correlation that vaping suffers to cigarette smoking. So be it. Once definitive research has been conducted on most if not all possible effects of vapor inhaled into our system and recycled into others, long term as well, smoking cigarettes will have nothing to do with vaping and we can all dance naked and be happy, vaping all over the place.

You continue to mock me, I care not. If it helps you, enjoy! I will NOT endorse a product to be used around others if there is ANY chance of harm falling on an innocent because of my vice. I will however, enjoy vaping from the comfort of my home because I do not personally believe that it is harmful. Enjoy digesting that one!

 

[seantex]

ohhhhh shhiiiiizzzzzz! FLAME WAR ON!

 

[wv2win]

All military Veterans know..... you win the war, one battle at a time. As a military Veteran myself, I will fight each battle, until the war is won! I feel we need to fight the battle through education.... sometimes that does mean a good street education, via financial means!

Good point. The other option is to not go into battle until we were 100% sure we would win and no one would get hurt. I guess we would all be speaking German and Japanese if we took that position.

 

[WAC_Vet]

Good point. The other option is to not go into battle until we were 100% sure we would win and no one would get hurt. I guess we would all be speaking German and Japanese if we took that position.

Unfortunately, I would not be speaking anything, as I'd be one of the ones that would be causing first hand smoke.

 

[wv2win]

Man oh man, I don't know how I cannot get this through to you. How do I get it through? I honestly do not know!?

You're arguement is of products used by a user and not affecting anyone else around them, antibiotics? Riding a bike? I'm talking about inhaling something and exhaling it to those who have no wish to inhale what you're using. I hold no ground saying that I am at all correct in my assessment, not in the least. That's where you're misunderstanding me. You know that what you're saying is correct, I am questioning every possible negative repercussion. You seem to think that I am just outright saying, "Vaping IS harmful to yourself and those around you." But I am not. I wish to know the long term possible negative repercussions, I'm sure we ALL do. Until we do know, for sure, if it is safe, partially safe, not safe in the least (long term and hell, even short term - for example, have their been any studies for those severely allergic to pg? Will the 2nd hand vapor effect them? They're just questions! Not accusations, or attempts to de-rail vaping. May I ASK some questions?) I cannot endorse fighting for our right to vape in a public indoor establishment, if there is ANY chance of causing ANY harm to anyone else, aside of yourself. I don't know how ANYONE could! (Edit: Yes, I am aware at this point there has been nothing showing any second hand harm and that's fantastic! When the years roll by and yes, you know as well as I, it will take years, and all of the myths are transformed into solid facts backed up with years of research, then and only then will I be comfortable endorsing public vaping. Sorry, just my opinion!)

I never said smoking was the same as vaping, nor do I believe that. To me, this has nothing to do with smoking, though you believe it does because of the correlation that vaping suffers to cigarette smoking. So be it. Once definitive research has been conducted on most if not all possible effects of vapor inhaled into our system and recycled into others, long term as well, smoking cigarettes will have nothing to do with vaping and we can all dance naked and be happy, vaping all over the place.

You continue to mock me, I care not. If it helps you, enjoy! I will NOT endorse a product to be used around others if there is ANY chance of harm falling on an innocent because of my vice. I will however, enjoy vaping from the comfort of my home because I do not personally believe that it is harmful. Enjoy digesting that one!

You don't appear to live in the "real" world. Nothing is 100% safe for everyone and never will be. Any study that could possibly get the risk level, NOT to 100% safe, but about 94% safe from a long term stand point would take about 25 years - THAT is what you are proposing which is absurd. Plus there already have been studies both short and mid-range on the major components of eliquid that have shown they are safe for human consumption, including inhaling. BTW, to add one more, there are studies that show that other people's perfume/cologne is not safe for some people - but there are NO bans on people using perfume and cologne. You have basically made the criteria for "safe" unattainable which helps no one.

 

[Levitas]

You don't appear to live in the "real" world. Nothing is 100% safe for everyone and never will be. Any study that could possibly get the risk level, NOT to 100% safe, but about 94% safe from a long term stand point would take about 25 years - THAT is what you are proposing which is absurd. Plus there already have been studies both short and mid-range on the major components of eliquid that have shown they are safe for human consumption, including inhaling. BTW, to add one more, there are studies that show that other people's perfume/cologne is not safe for some people - but there are NO bans on people using perfume and cologne. You have basically made the criteria for "safe" unattainable which helps no one.

You still mock me? Don't you understand? I do not care what you think of me?

Yes, I understand it will take a LONG time to figure out the long term repercussions, if any, that exist. It's not absurd, not at all. When it comes to the safety of a human life, nothing is absurd. Perfume? What does that have to do with anything? You sound like a lobbyist. Avoiding the subject at hand by using examples of other products that have no place in this conversation.

Did you read my last statement? Perhaps I should've worded my comments better, I didn't wish to say 100% safe, I wished to say 100% to be proven safe, partially safe, or not safe at all. Mid-range? If 25 years is long-term, then wouldn't mid-range be about 12 years? The electronic cigarette hasn't been around for 12 years, it's been around and available for what? 7 years?

Look, what do you want me to say? I straight up told you that I personally do not believe vaping is dangerous. But, I'm not an expert, nor have I personally done the studies, no matter how long or not. I've read many studies, and I am pleased with the outcome thus far. That doesn't mean that I am going to go off and start vaping around everyone else when I am not 100% sure on how safe it is or isn't, no matter what the present research is stating. If you have a problem with that, then go squeeze a stress ball or something, it's just the way I feel. I don't fold and simply agree with every study that comes into play. Else, I could be accused of believing that e-liquid might contain TSNAs because of the study done from the FDA.

But hey, just for fun. Why not insert some of these links on the Mid-Range studied? So that I may return to the real world with you

 

[WAC_Vet]

"Few, if any, chemicals at levels detected in electronic cigarettes raise serious health concerns". "Although the existing research does not warrant a conclusion that electronic cigarettes are safe in absolute terms and further clinical studies are needed to comprehensively assess the safety of electronic cigarettes, a preponderance of the available evidence shows them to be much safer than tobacco cigarettes and comparable in toxicity to conventional nicotine replacement products." From the Boston University School of Public Health Evidence Suggests E-Cigs Safer Than Cigarettes, Researcher Claims | Recent News

 

[Levitas]

"Few, if any, chemicals at levels detected in electronic cigarettes raise serious health concerns". "Although the existing research does not warrant a conclusion that electronic cigarettes are safe in absolute terms and further clinical studies are needed to comprehensively assess the safety of electronic cigarettes, a preponderance of the available evidence shows them to be much safer than tobacco cigarettes and comparable in toxicity to conventional nicotine replacement products." From the Boston University School of Public Health Evidence Suggests E-Cigs Safer Than Cigarettes, Researcher Claims | Recent News

Yes, when comparing to cigarettes, vaping is much safer. I don't really think that is the issue here.

I cannot access the full article without paying for it. Is it essentially the same as this? http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/centers-institutes/population-development/files/article.jphp.pdf

 

[wv2win]

You still mock me? Don't you understand? I do not care what you think of me?

Yes, I understand it will take a LONG time to figure out the long term repercussions, if any, that exist. It's not absurd, not at all. When it comes to the safety of a human life, nothing is absurd. Perfume? What does that have to do with anything? You sound like a lobbyist. Avoiding the subject at hand by using examples of other products that have no place in this conversation.

Did you read my last statement? Perhaps I should've worded my comments better, I didn't wish to say 100% safe, I wished to say 100% to be proven safe, partially safe, or not safe at all. Mid-range? If 25 years is long-term, then wouldn't mid-range be about 12 years? The electronic cigarette hasn't been around for 12 years, it's been around and available for what? 7 years?

Look, what do you want me to say? I straight up told you that I personally do not believe vaping is dangerous. But, I'm not an expert, nor have I personally done the studies, no matter how long or not. I've read many studies, and I am pleased with the outcome thus far. That doesn't mean that I am going to go off and start vaping around everyone else when I am not 100% sure on how safe it is or isn't, no matter what the present research is stating. If you have a problem with that, then go squeeze a stress ball or something, it's just the way I feel. I don't fold and simply agree with every study that comes into play. Else, I could be accused of believing that e-liquid might contain TSNAs because of the study done from the FDA.

But hey, just for fun. Why not insert some of these links on the Mid-Range studied? So that I may return to the real world with you

How about some "reading comprehension" on your part. The point about perfume is that it is "inhaled" through the nose, which in some instances can be harmful - get it - goes to your - must be something that can harm someone by inhaling since you believe all the other examples do not apply.

And on the point about "mid-range" studies (goes to my comment about your "reading comprehension"), I stated the "major components" of eliquid have been studied - such as PG and nicotine - get it!! I did NOT say personal vaporizers had mid range studies.

I will state one more time, slowly, your criteria for "safe" is unattainable in the next 20 years if ever. If we all followed your position/criteria, vaping should be banned for the next 20 years at the least. Your position actually tracks well with ASH, who is the most vehement opponents to vaping in any form.

 

[Levitas]

How about some "reading comprehension" on your part. The point about perfume is that it is "inhaled" through the nose, which in some instances can be harmful - get it - goes to your - must be something that can harm someone by inhaling since you believe all the other examples do not apply.

And on the point about "mid-range" studies (goes to my comment about your "reading comprehension"), I stated the "major components" of eliquid have been studied - such as PG and nicotine - get it!! I did NOT say personal vaporizers had mid range studies.

Are you getting angry? Relax there, champ. Nothing to get worked up for. To you, I am nothing, right? So, why get worked up because of my questions?

Do you have the links for the mid-range studies of the major components used in e-liquid then? Do these studies involved inhaling these ingredients at the same temperature as e-liquid is inhaled at? (Are you speaking of the MSDS?) You know, I am trying to empathize with you here and gain information but you continue to mock and degrade me. Are you sure you're trying to educate or was all of that just jibberish for posture and good presence?

Yes, inhaling perfume, that's great. Still, I thought we were talking about vaping? Not antibiotics, not bike riding, not perfume, I do not like green eggs and ham, I do not like them Sam I am.

What of the flavorings? Are there any studies on the effects of inhaling the flavorings? Or, how much is absorbed into our lungs and how much retain in the exhaled vapor? Again, these are just questions, don't get all Boogity Boogity on me now

 

[WAC_Vet]

Yes, when comparing to cigarettes, vaping is much safer. I don't really think that is the issue here.

I cannot access the full article without paying for it. Is it essentially the same as this? http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/centers-institutes/population-development/files/article.jphp.pdf

Yes, it is.
As I stated before, if there is any harm that PVs could cause, it would be to the user, not from second-hand vapor. I've yet to hear one PV user state that he/she blows their vapor into the faces of others! Watch your vapor, how long does it really last once you've exhaled? Cigarette smoke lasts for a long time, but not our vapor. How many people can "stealth" smoke, or hold the smoke in long enough for nothing to show when exhaling, so that others aren't aware that the person is smoking? When I did smoke, even if I blew the smoke down my shirt, not in it... the smoke still would spread out, plus you have the smoke from the lit cigarette. The smoke lingered, whereas my vapor does not.

 

[Levitas]

Yes, it is.
As I stated before, if there is any harm that PVs could cause, it would be to the user, not from second-hand vapor. I've yet to hear one PV user state that he/she blows their vapor into the faces of others! Watch your vapor, how long does it really last once you've exhaled? Cigarette smoke lasts for a long time, but not our vapor. How many people can "stealth" smoke, or hold the smoke in long enough for nothing to show when exhaling, so that others aren't aware that the person is smoking? When I did smoke, even if I blew the smoke down my shirt, not in it... the smoke still would spread out, plus you have the smoke from the lit cigarette. The smoke lingered, whereas my vapor does not.

May I have the link to the study showing this? I in no way was ever comparing the dangers of smoking to vaping. I never once wanted cigarette smoke to be discussed, because to me, there is no comparison. I am merely wanting to know exactly how safe vaping is to those around you, and of course ourselves as well. Mainly, since it has not been shown to be an issue with short term exposure, I want to gain information on the long term. As my buddy wv mentioned, that could take up to 25 years. So be it.

 

[throatkick]

Yes, but, does drinking coffee cause those around you any potential harm? My point is, that if there isn't any possible repercussions to second-hand vapor, then FANTASTIC and do away with all of the bans! I'll vape in public and inform any who wish to know. But, without any proof, or if it is dangerous in anyway, no matter how small or large, no matter how it compares to anything else, it is WRONG to subject others to something that might potentially cause harm to them, when they had no desire to be around the vapor in the first place.

When someone bans something without knowing what it is, what would you say the chances are of them easily and objectively reversing that ban?

Starbucks is a laboratory now? Dude it is a COFFEE SHOP!

Fine..... just read this thread when you get a chance:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...s-open-government-advocacy-casaa-members.html

Read through carefully but pay special attention to page 4 where you will see a post from JustJulie that clearly proves all they want to do is BAN BAN BAN and openly admit they have no evidence to support their position.

 

[Ande]

Funny- I'm gonna go on the record here as SLIGHTLY agreeing with the OP, slightly not. I don't think we should covertly violate rules, where they exist.

The image of ecig users as rule breakers is going to hurt us all if it develops. When somebody gets badly busted for ecig use on a plane, they're gonna start making rules that we can't even carry the damn things. And then we all suffer.

I don't stealth vape. I think it's a bad idea to go around acting secretive with our ecigs, as that gives more fuel to the "ban-sters." (The fact that they're so easy to use secretly is one of the things they hate about ecigs.)

But I don't feel the need to follow rules that don't exist. I definitely DO use my ecig where smoking is not permitted. I also chew gum where smoking is not permitted. Get it? Like gum chewing, vaping is NOT smoking. Unless a specific rule includes ecigs in its wording, ecigs are NOT included in a "no smoking" rule, cause they aren't smoking.

I do not use an ecig anyplace where ECIGS are banned. (Like on airplanes. And it's ROUGH sometimes, cause I fly a lot, and fly far.)

But if there's no rule about using an ecig someplace, then I do. And I do it without trying to hide it. And if anybody has a problem with it, I'm delighted to discuss it.

I agree that a business owner has a right to prohibit vaping on the premises. Hell, a business owner has a right to prohibit swearing on the premises if he or she so chooses. But I won't assume a prohibition until/unless one is made.

Best,
Ande

 

[SimpleSins]

There have been people who have had family members have breathing difficulties around their ecig vapor. Not a whole lot in the grand scheme of things, but there aren't a whole lot of vapers ballsy enough to post any problems, either.

 

[WAC_Vet]

http://www.healthnz.co.nz/RuyanCartridgeReport30-Oct-08.pdf
The study was funded by Ruyan but an agreement was reached for publication, regardless of the results, from what I read.
Concerns over toxicity can also be checked at TOXNET