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

[throatkick]

Dude. Thats exactly right. The reason people assume it is unsafe is because it looks like smoking. And they don't believe the reports because they have never seen them.

The question is the opposite. Why would a non smoker who has never seen a PV or read an article on it think it is safe?

I think it's obvious that anyone who is a non smoker who does not like smoking will absolutely assume vaping is not safe.

One of the main reasons why threads like these are important.

 

[PKZap27]

Priceless. Don't call the FDA. Call a modder and get me a 510 adapter for that thing!

I'm stealing that link for future reference.

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/modders-forum/62775-wizard-why-not.html

 

[rothenbj]

Interesting article on vapor toys-

It isn't really smoke; it's a fog: a cloud of microscopic droplets so small that they float in the air.

To understand why the smoke (fog) from these guns (or larger fog machines for that matter) hangs in the air for a long time like smoke, we have to make some tea.

Imagine a teapot. Inside, as the water vaporizes it becomes water vapor (steam): individual free molecules of water. When the steam leaves the pot it mixes with the cool air outside it and the water vapor condenses into microscopic droplets. These tiny balls of water act like lenses, reflecting and refracting light so that they appear like a white cloud. Within a second or two, unless you are in an extremely humid location, the individual droplets of water evaporate and disappear.

That's the same way a fog generator works. It has a heating elements that vaporizes a liquid which then condenses into droplets we can see because they reflect light. The only difference between a fog generator and a teapot is the liquid used in them.

Fog generators use a non-toxic mixture of propylene glycol, trifthylene glycol and water. This mixture boils at a higher temperature than water. The two glycols slow the rate of evaporation of the individual droplets that make the fog so it lasts much longer than simple water fog. They also change the refractive index of the droplets so that they appear brighter, making the fog look thicker. Different companies use slightly different mixtures for their fog juice and for this reason it is always important to use only that company's fog juice in its machines. Failure to do so could result in a low-temperature fog juice being used in a high-temperature machine, with the result that the juice starts burning and emitting dangerous compounds.

While some companies offer scented fog juices, there is no way to create colored fog. Adding food color to the fog juice doesn't work and can burn on the heating element.

Emphasis mine

Something to think about as you increase your voltage.

 

[Colonel]

Thanks for providing the perfect set-up. They ".../u/me" and we know what that means. Never read an article that shows safety although they are there. So what have we been saying? Advocate and educate. Quite simple and the course of action needed to bring vaping into the main stream in a positive light. Thanks again for leading us to the right conclusion.

Alright. Now really, this is sounding childish. Are you really suggesting that people go out and read up on something they have yet to even see? Have you done research on things that you don't know exist?

That's ridiculous. People will always fear what they don't know. That's human nature. You won't be able to help them until after they have shunned you.

This whole thread has been me saying just what you wrote. Bring vaping to the public the right way.
And the point is, that way is not through boycotts and throwing peanuts.

You're acting like you tricked me into saying something besides that. All you've done is agreed that us vapers will always hit a brick wall before an open door. And we need to do our best to deal with that in a mature way.

If all you're going to do is try to find ways to disagree with me simply for the sake of arguing, then I guess thats it.

 

[swedishfish]

I think we all want the same thing. Methods to get there might differ. Like I said, I'm not interested in the non-smokers as much as I am the smokers or family members of smokers. They see it, they may try it. As far as I'm concerned vaping is close to a miracle for me. No way, no how could I quit on my own and I tried. And I tried everything. The more people that see it in action, find out how economical it is compared with smoking and more importantly, it works the better for all of us.

I just don't get the mindset of people saying they won't vape in public because you don't actually know it's safe. They're free to feel this way, I don't want to debate it. If you read all the information posted on this board and there's a lot of it and still have doubts I don't know if anything anyone here says will change their mind.

 

[wv2win]

Why would anyone assume that vaping is not safe for others? Has it been proven that it is not safe? Is there any evidence that it is not safe? From every test conducted, even by the FDA, there are no carcinogenetic substances in eliquid that is considered "not safe" for humans and none at all in the vapor. So because it looks similar to a supposedly (second-hand) unsafe activity for others, that is the reason it must be considered unsafe, even though all studies conducted state otherwise?

Who has the professional credentials to state that the studies done by the FDA, UV, AAPHA and NZ, are all faulty and incorrect in their conclusions?

Dude. Thats exactly right. The reason people assume it is unsafe is because it looks like smoking. And they don't believe the reports because they have never seen them.

The question is the opposite. Why would a non smoker who has never seen a PV or read an article on it think it is safe?

I think it's obvious that anyone who is a non smoker who does not like smoking will absolutely assume vaping is not safe.

Thanks for providing the perfect set-up. They ".../u/me" and we know what that means. Never read an article that shows safety although they are there. So what have we been saying? Advocate and educate. Quite simple and the course of action needed to bring vaping into the main stream in a positive light. Thanks again for leading us to the right conclusion.

Alright. Now really, this is sounding childish. Are you really suggesting that people go out and read up on something they have yet to even see? Have you done research on things that you don't know exist?

That's ridiculous. People will always fear what they don't know. That's human nature. You won't be able to help them until after they have shunned you.

This whole thread has been me saying just what you wrote. Bring vaping to the public the right way.
And the point is, that way is not through boycotts and throwing peanuts.

You're acting like you tricked me into saying something besides that. All you've done is agreed that us vapers will always hit a brick wall before an open door. And we need to do our best to deal with that in a mature way.

If all you're going to do is try to find ways to disagree with me simply for the sake of arguing, then I guess thats it.

I really have to question your reading comprehension when you twisted my comments into something "childish". Really?? My consistent position has been to respectfully advocate and educate the uninformed about vaping so it can grow into acceptence. I actually thought that with your next to last post that I commented on, that we were closer in agreement. But you turn that into "boycotts and throwing peanuts". What you are doing, which IS childish, is infer that I have stated something that I have not.

"People always fear what they don't know" - wrong - many don't and some actually are interested and embrace technological change.

"You won't be able to help them until after they have shunned you" - wrong, advocting respectfully usually results in a positive outcome except for the closed minded.

"Bring vaping to the public the right way. And the point is, that way is not through boycotts and throwing peanuts."

I have never stated that we should "boycott" an establishment. I do believe that as a last resort, we should be willing to show our disagreement with a company policy by not giving them our money. I never inferred or stated that "throwing peanuts" was a way to show disagreement with a companies' position on vaping. In fact, I stated the exact opposite. You bringing it up in response to one of my posts, is dishonest and misleading. That is childish.

"All you've done is agreed that us vapers will always hit a brick wall before an open door." wrong - my experience is by following the path of respectfully advocating and education about vaping, I have found many more "open doors".

"And we need to do our best to deal with that in a mature way." I believe anyone with a minimul grasp of English, would agree, that "respectfully advocating and educating" on vaping, IS the mature way to present what we do.

 

[Levitas]

I think we all want the same thing. Methods to get there might differ. Like I said, I'm not interested in the non-smokers as much as I am the smokers or family members of smokers. They see it, they may try it. As far as I'm concerned vaping is close to a miracle for me. No way, no how could I quit on my own and I tried. And I tried everything. The more people that see it in action, find out how economical it is compared with smoking and more importantly, it works the better for all of us.

I just don't get the mindset of people saying they won't vape in public because you don't actually know it's safe. They're free to feel this way, I don't want to debate it. If you read all the information posted on this board and there's a lot of it and still have doubts I don't know if anything anyone here says will change their mind.

I have to agree with this for the most part.

Personally, I am one that doesn't wish to vape in every public indoor establishment I frequent (I vape outside in public, daily). It's hard to write this without someone coming along and linking my ideals with one as, "Well, you absolutely must believe that vaping is smoking, otherwise, you'd vape anywhere and everywhere. You're either with the plan or against it." But, I don't believe it's as simple as that, far from it in fact.

I think an exception, for myself, might be a restaurant, or a vape meet and only if they openly allowed the use of pvs. Otherwise, I just don't see any need to vape in public indoor establishments (unless, I guess if you're at work?) But, if your work allows it, then awesome.

I say that I don't know why it's hard to wait until you're done shopping or whatever you're doing to enjoy your pv in the comfort of your own property, or a place that allows it, or under God's skies. But then, this brings the counter, "Well, why shouldn't I be able to vape anywhere I want? It hasn't been proven dangerous, and if I do what you say, then I am only stigmitizing vaping and correlating it with something as bad as smoking." That itself is absurd. I could say the same thing, but instead of correlating it with smoking cigarettes, I could say smoking crack. Does that make any sense? Nope.

It's generally conceived as the same as smoking because of it's general purpose. A nicotine replacement, heck, a full smoking replacement therapy. Educating and advocating is definitely the answer to public acceptance of vaping. But it needs to be backed up with as much solid proof as possible to alleviate any doubt on how safe it is. Even if 'x' amount years, months, days down the road, that vaping is proven to have absolutely no harm to the 2nd handers, I still don't believe it's in our right to vape anywhere we absolutely please. Vaping is a habit, a vice, our vice. I think that it's rude to vape around those who do not wish to be around it. If you don't feel this way, that's fine, it's just my opinion.

Regardless of any health repercussions, I feel that we need to use our pvs with respect, not only for the establishments we visit, but for everyone who frequents them as well. (And I'm not just talking about avoiding blowing your vaper towards their faces, I'm sure no one said anything about this ever being a problem.) But that doesn't mean someone isn't going to be offended by the act of vaping. Vaping is only for adults, it contains nicotine and should never be used by children. You're not allowed to drink in Walmart, so why vape? I do believe that vaping can send a bad message towards children, but only if the user is irresponsible. This is just my opinion, like I had said. Health or not, I believe that we should limit our use of pvs in a respectable manner. Whether you agree or not, that's okay.

 

[wv2win]

Interesting. I have read several posts stating that until there have been long-term (about 20 year) studies that show whether vaping around others is 100% safe or not 100% safe, we should not vape around others.

Then I read that if an establishment or place of work says it's OK to vape inside - well that's great - vape away. Since that establishment could not have had long-term studies on vaping, how does their decision/policy, all of a sudden, make it OK? - Definite conflict in positions.

Maybe the establishment giving the OK to vape inside read the studies that already exist (provided by one of us), combined with reasoned common sense, and concluded it was safe, as the majority of us believe. I believe in a nut-shell that is what many of us have been advocating for and stating is what we need to work towards.

 

[Colonel]

Wv2win.

Please please please read the first post.

You and I are saying the same thing.

Educate and inspire where possible.

The initial post was urging members to not participate in rash actions to obtain justice. That is why I mention boycotts. Because the thread was started about boycotts. Not letters or emails. I didn't mention boycotts because I thought that was your intention. I mention them because banning a business is not the right thng to do. I agree. Write letters. Have your friends write letters. Educate responsibly.

To not 'ban' people that ban us.

The 'childish reference is towards your attempt to trick me into something I already agree with. People assume. And they will. Forever.

The point still stands. Someone who has never smoked will never just wake up on Saturday morning and sift through the hundreds of thousands of reports on ecigs, VG, PG and tobacco use and second smoke and etc etc.

So. Knowing that they have no idea what you are doing, they will see smoke coming out of your mouth and assume you are smoking (it would be childish for you to think otherwise). They will shun you. The purpose of the first post (of this thread) was to urge you to meat the challenge with mature dignity and respect for these people. They are not stupid just because that don't know what a PV is.

If somebody walked up to me on the street, pointed what appeared to be a gun at me chest, pulled the trigger, I heard a loud bang and saw red splatter all over me; I would assume I had just been shot. Then the person tells me it's a paint ball and merely latex paint that is water based and won't even stain my clothes. Well, I would still want to punch that person in the face.

Tom Cruise (admittedly he is an odd ball) was walking down a red carpet giving interviews when he was sprayed in the face with liquid. Of course it turns out it was water. But he had no idea what it was and got really upset with the person.

People have to be exposed to it to be educated. And that exposure has to be done tactfully. First impressions and all.

I can bet you all my stash that the people on board the plane with that dumb A that flipped out are all anti Vaper.

Stop attacking me. I'm not changing any of my opinions. I have been saying the same thing since my first post on this thread. And it is all in response to the very original post. Not yours. Banning the ban-er is compounding the problem. Not solving it.

Fire with fire?
Eye for an eye?
Be the bigger person?
Take the high road?
Don't stoop to their level?

Any of these phrases ring a bell?

Ps. The peanut thing is a reference to the article (posted in the very thread) about the guy who wasn't allowed to vape on a plane so he threw peanuts and pretzels at the stewardess and cockpit. He was arrested by the FBI for interfering with a flight crew, not for vaping.

 

[KeysBum]

Eye for an eye?
Be the bigger person?
Take the high road?
Don't stoop to their level?

Any of these phrases ring a bell?

.

How about "Give me liberty or give me death" -Patrick Henry

Extreme? perhaps.

There are some of us that are willing to forfeit our liberties quite quickly and conveniently. That’s OK, it is their right to do so.

There are others of us who have been and are willing to protect our liberties (including the liberties of the above group) with everything we have at our disposal. So long as the latter group acts within the law, that is their right, and in my opinion obligation.

 

[WyattDerp]

Having an opinion and making a stand can require you to sometimes turn the other cheek. Just saying boycott an establishment if you want to based on their products, not because they banned something you do, not you yourself.

 

[Colonel]

Eye for an eye?
Be the bigger person?
Take the high road?
Don't stoop to their level?

Any of these phrases ring a bell?


How about "Give me liberty or give me death" -Patrick Henry

Extreme? perhaps.

There are some of us that are willing to forfeit our liberties quite quickly and conveniently. That’s OK, it is their right to do so.

There are others of us who have been and are willing to protect our liberties (including the liberties of the above group) with everything we have at our disposal. So long as the latter group acts within the law, that is their right, and in my opinion obligation.

Yeah. That's a whole different argument.

Your liberties? Or the liberties of the people around you? Touchy touchy. Don't be that guy who uses such liberties to defend everything you do.

The people around you have the right to go into Walmart without me doing something they don't like.

Seriously. Like it was said before. You can't drink booz at Lowes. Does that piss you off too? Be realistic.

Just because you and I know it's not a health hazard for anyone around us doesn't mean they are not allowed to be concerned.

Do you like it when the people at the mall try to spray you with perfume or put lotion on you? No. Is it because it will harm your health? No. It's because it's plain annoying.

Anyway. We're not talking about civil liberties. We're talking about being open minded towards people that don't understand vaping.

Please don't turn this thread into the government bashing our rights.

And by the way. Liberty or death was in reference to England being more than happy to take our taxes, but not providing us anything in return.

The FDA that you may hate or love or both, is funded mostly by your tax dollars. And the liberty you got is just that. The ability to have you tax dollars do something for the entire country. Even if they take their sweet ... time doing it.

Liberty isn't about being able to have an automatic assault rifle or vape anywhere you want. It's about not having to deal with the people who think that way.

You rights activists kill me. You didn't raise a finger over smoking bans in new York and new jersey and Philadelphia and wherever else. But now the government is stripping your rights away? Why, because you knew cigs were deadly and now that your 99% sure vaping isn't?

Whatever. Take your hatred of law to another forum where it's actually being discussed. I wont post there because I do t want to entertain those conversations. It's like talking about religion or miracle whip vs mayonnaise.

 

[Colonel]

I can't get over the ignorance.

Give me liberty or give me death? It's a quote. Not a saying. And it is not in the same league as my sayings. People don't direct the ethics and morals of their everyday life based on "give me liberty or give me death". Lmao.

Mine are in reference to the way you treat other people. Not an attitude towards the way elected (or birth righted) officials govern their colonies.

Get outta here. It seems like you were just itching to get that 'giving up liberties' comment in wherever you can.

 

[Colonel]

Eye for an eye?
Be the bigger person?
Take the high road?
Don't stoop to their level?

Any of these phrases ring a bell?


How about "Give me liberty or give me death" -Patrick Henry

Extreme? perhaps.

There are some of us that are willing to forfeit our liberties quite quickly and conveniently. That’s OK, it is their right to do so.

There are others of us who have been and are willing to protect our liberties (including the liberties of the above group) with everything we have at our disposal. So long as the latter group acts within the law, that is their right, and in my opinion obligation.

It's my right to cruise around the waters on my jet ski. If you happen to be fishing in a no wake zone. I'll knock you over and ruin your day. Tell me I should be courteous of my wake around fishing boats? I'm not giving up my liberties man! It's my right to have fun. Even if it is at the expense of your right to have fun.

Yeah that makes plenty of sense.

Keep your liberties in the keys and off the mainland. I won't sacrifice mine for yours.

 

[ricks]

In my world, I will vape where I want and when I want. Anyone who asks me what Im doing will be taught all about my quitting anologs and how safe and harmless my vapor stick is. That is if someone ever confronts me.

 

[Colonel]

In my world, I will vape where I want and when I want. Anyone who asks me what Im doing will be taught all about my quitting anologs and how safe and harmless my vapor stick is. That is if someone ever confronts me.

Right. I agree.

But the question is. What if you tell them. And then they ask you to stop anyway? What do you do?

If you stop, does that mean they win? If you don't stop, do you win?

And if somebody wins, does that mean that there is a loser?

 

[ControlledChaos]

*****This was a response I put in a thread about Starbucks banning ecig use in their stores. I felt this was important enough to post for more to see. *****

To be totally and completely honest, I honestly feel that we are digging ourselves into a hole that we may not be able to climb out of. I personally have not tried aerating in a Starbucks and I won't because of the fact that when I smoked analogs I never whipped out a cigarette and tried smoking in one. Starbucks is a COFFEE shop. We should be lucky that there are even bars that allow us to use our PV's and don't make us conform to the non-smoking ban they've put in motion on real cigs. The way I feel about it is, we have a chance to do a lot of good and spread the information about our cause but it is flat out unreasonable for us to demand something that wasn't remotely possible when we used analogs. We wonder why so much is negatively said about our use of PV's but don't stop to take a look in the mirror and realize that pushing our choice on other people may not be the best way to get vaping seen as a ray of hope. I am proud to be an ecig user which is why I joined this forum but I can't agree with the "bans" we put in place on establishments that ask us to respect their decisions while giving them reasons to disrespect ours.

Sincerely, Jeromiah Emanuel, Proud Ecig User.

We have a responsibility as E cig users to NOT use them in places that don't want us vaping. Use your head and be respectful. If they ask you not to DON'T. For example that idiot who got upset on the airplane and started throwing bags of peanuts at the employees because they asked him not to use it. It looks bad on all of us.

 

[Colonel]

We have a responsibility as E cig users to NOT use them in places that don't want us vaping. Use your head and be respectful. If they ask you not to DON'T. For example that idiot who got upset on the airplane and started throwing bags of peanuts at the employees because they asked him not to use it. It looks bad on all of us.

Thank you twice. Once for replying to the actual topic of the thread (opinion regardless), and a second thanks for quoting it and reminding us what it was.

 

[swedishfish]

Right. I agree.

But the question is. What if you tell them. And then they ask you to stop anyway? What do you do?

If you stop, does that mean they win? If you don't stop, do you win?

And if somebody wins, does that mean that there is a loser?

"If" and this is a big if for me because I really can't vape anywhere here especially inside. I'd probably ask first if it bothered someone or if they told me it bothered them I wouldn't. I put this in the catagory of not talking in a movie. Don't annoy people if you can help it because you never know how truly nutz someone is. Are they truly bothered by the vape? Doubtful but when in doubt don't. I'm pretty fit but I doubt if I could take on anyone in a fight. Maybe my 12 year old nephew but the smart money would probably be on him.

We're talking about two different things here, annoyance and banning due to second hand smoke.

This is OT, but maybe a little little relevant. Someone in Parade Magazine wrote to the etiquette person asking what to do about someone that brings fish to lunch and it smells.

The magazine expert told her that the person shouldn't be bring fish to lunch especially if she knew people didn't like it. And that the person that wrote to her should go to HR and suggest to HR that there should be some sort of list of items that people shouldn't bring for lunch.

Really? Isn't there a point where it's up to you (the person that doesn't like the fish smell) to get up and move? In a way, I do feel a little like this about vaping. Is anyone truly offended by my peach juice and some vapor that dissipates quickly? Hopefully there will come a point where we don't have to be vaping mascots and have to take one for the team so we don't give vaping a bad name. But I sometimes think these winey babies need to learn to accept that's how it is if you live in a society with others and unless you move to a deserted island, that's part of life.

 

[WAC_Vet]

The official word on PG and VG. 98% of the nicotine is absorbed by the inhalation of the vapor There are nicotine inhalers, nicotine nasal sprays, nicotine patches, nicotine gum, etc., with NO warnings concerning release into the atmosphere from these products.

The only concern would now be the flavoring. Let's take a look at the flavoring.... In a 10ml bottle of Carmel Apple (one recipe), there's 3ml PG, 5ml nicotine (if one uses nic), FLAVORING: 1.5ml apple .5ml caramel Now how long does a 10ml bottle of juice normally last? Can anyone go through a 10ml bottle in a day? It will last each of us a different amount of time, but look at the amount of flavoring in a 10ml bottle! I'm sure someone out there can figure out how many DROPS are in each ml. We are talking trace amounts that MAY be exhaled. If, someone has a PG or VG allergy, then the vapor that's exhaled should not be blown in that person's face, or in the direction of that person, nor should that person be around the vapor in a small enclosed space.

Common courtesy dictates that you should not invade another person's space, so blowing smoke, vaper, spritzing with perfume, etc., should not be done in such a way as to invade another person's space, without their permission. Vapor is short lived, unlike cigarette smoke, so indoor vaping, even with the minute amounts of flavor pose no risk, other than allergy. Allergy risks can not be a cause for banning vaping, as there are so many different allergens that would also have to be banned.

Vaping in enclosed areas, such as cars (with windows closed), elevators, etc., does not allow for proper ventilation. If, you are in a restaurant, there is no reason why a person should not be allowed to vape, as long as they are not vaping clouds of vapor in the direction of others, or their vapor is blowing in the direction of others (which actually makes it dissipate quicker). Most juice have little aroma, a great deal less, then the perfumes worn by many women.