Vaping causes heart attacks

[Moonbogg]

they may be of concern. whats the probability?
the good Dr. F says that the amounts of diacetyl
in the concentrations found in e-juice where
ten to a hundred times below work place standards.
he estimated 1 out of 1000 might develop lung
disease over a 45 year exposure period.
that risk factor is so low as to be barely detectable.
even though he now is apparently saying diketones
should be avoided i'm all in.
where are all those bakery flavors at?

regards
mike

That doesn't comfort me. Know why? Because lung disease might be classified as full blown popcorn lung and you may be expected to die. That could mean that perhaps 25% of people who have only 20 years of exposure may not have "lung disease" but they may have lowered lung function, say by perhaps 20%? See what I'm getting at? If all people are concerned with is catastrophic lung disease, then that's not a very high bar to set.
I don't want my lung function impacted in any measurable way. You might then say, "So stop vaping you idiot", but is that really where we want to go as far as acceptable risk is concerned? It seems we actually DO need more study with regard to E-cig safety. None of this, "It might not kill you in 45 years, but good luck running a few miles, lol?"

 

[caramel]

[...]I don't think steve would be saying Dr Farsalino's is ANTZ [...]

No, he wouldn't dare saying it, he was trying to provoke someone else to say such. He did not get the proper result but he still came on this thread pretending that he did.

[...]bring up the question of whether Dr F will now be considered ANTZ.[...]

Sure Hazy if you want to have that discussion let's start by defining ANTZ. What's your definition?

 

[caramel]

[...]You might then say, "So stop vaping you idiot", [...]

We won't say that. We'll say "consider procuring your liquid from a reputable shop that is testing their liquid against known questionable ingredients".

If you can't find such shop or the price is prohibitive, the next recommendation is "consider DIY, possibly unflavored".

 

[Lessifer]

All scientific studies should be thorough, with detailed methodology and results. They should also be repeated by independent researchers, and the results verified. If anyone tries to say "I have proven this to be the case" without following scientific protocol, is merely expressing an opinion. We may be more amenable to some researchers as they are more amenable to us, but we should hold all to the same burden of proof.

 

[HazyShades]

Thank you Hazy, always so helpful!



And the industry responded as expected - see ECTA in Canada and AEMSA in US.

Pretty much against ANTZ position "everything shall be banned right now and ginormous funding sent to us to study it for the long term before a final decision could be made".

You're very welcome, caramel.
I always try to be helpful as well as courteous to everyone, especially my friends.
However, I fail to see your point.
The industry may have responded in an acceptable manner
but the members of the industry as well as the zealot vapers
are complaining about having to stop using certain flavors.

That some guidelines for membership n some professional organizations
have been published has little to do with whether the facts will be accepted as such and whether Dr Farsalino
will be condemned in forums such as this.

Regards,
Hazy

 

[defdock]

“Even some of the flavorings are dangerous — like cinnamon, if you inhale it, can be quite toxic,”


im suprized i dont hear any stories on the news from someone dying from vaping some cinnamon juice

 

[HazyShades]

No, he wouldn't dare saying it, he was trying to provoke someone else to say such. He did not get the proper result but he still came on this thread pretending that he did.



Sure Hazy if you want to have that discussion let's start by defining ANTZ. What's your definition?

I think you give steve either too much or not enough credit.
He's not out here trying to manipulate anybody into saying anything, caramel.
I don't think he was pretending anything, he's not ANTZ or a secret agent or lobbyist, and he isn't sub either.

No. I don't have time to have a silly discussion about something that is obvious.
ANTZ, as the little dotted line underneath defines the acronym means
Anti-Nicotine and Tobacco Zealots.

I won't deny that there are certainly many anti-tobacco zealots
and also anti vaping zealots who like to lump vaping in the same category as smoking cigarettes.
But perhaps a better point is that neither steve or I are such only because
we prefer to read the unaltered truth regarding substances that may damage our health as vapers,
but are consistently labeled as being that,
and more importantly
that there are many vaping ZEALOTS who prefer to not hear the truth
and insist on condemning anybody who would cast a bad rep on the vaping industry.

In context of this particular discussion, those are the fellows
that I , and possibly steve are referring to
as people who would now label Dr F as ANTZ.

I must go now, stuff to do. Places to go people to see.
Regards,
Hazy

 

[Lessifer]

You're very welcome, caramel.
I always try to be helpful as well as courteous to everyone, especially my friends.
However, I fail to see your point.
The industry may have responded in an acceptable manner
but the members of the industry as well as the zealot vapers
are complaining about having to stop using certain flavors.

That some guidelines for membership n some professional organizations
have been published has little to do with whether the facts will be accepted as such and whether Dr Farsalino
will be condemned in forums such as this.

Regards,
Hazy

Yes, I would complain vehemently about HAVING to stop using certain flavors. By all means, bring attention to potential risks, study what those risks actually constitute, and then provide me with the information to make an informed choice.

Tell me that something MUST be removed because there is an as of yet unverified POTENTIAL for risk, and you are overstepping.

 

[DaveP]

PG has lots of medical uses. It's the fog you see when someone is given a "breathing treatment" in a hospital. It's used in injected medications as a carrier for the active ingredients in those medications. It's a skin softener, toothpaste additive, and it's in your soft drinks where it acts as a de-foaming agent. The list is huge.

I'm a label reader and I happened to notice that it's also the active ingredient in my over the counter eyedrops, recommended by my eye doctor. Nicotine and flavorings are generally the other ingredients in e-juice.

There is some concern about high watt vaping or dry wicks reaching temperatures where other unwanted chemicals can be formed, but no one would voluntarily vape something where the flavor was acrid and hot. One hit and I'm done if I can detect wick dryout. I like nice flavorful cool to slightly warm vapor.

 

[Woofer]

Do realize that the samples chosen by Dr F were done so with the suspicion that they had the best chance of containing diacetyl.
No point to my post other then this sample is not representative of the spectrum of juice flavors available and their potential to contain diacetyl.

 

[Kurt]

I do not understand why Dr. F, or anyone else on the team that did the DA/AP study, could be considered ANTZ. Can someone please explain this?

 

[DaveP]

I do not understand why Dr. F, or anyone else on the team that did the DA/AP study, could be considered ANTZ. Can someone please explain this?

I don't think anyone on ECF thinks Dr. F is ANTZ. He's highly recognized as a reputable researcher who's recognized the benefit of electronic cigarettes over tobacco.

 

[Lessifer]

I do not understand why Dr. F, or anyone else on the team that did the DA/AP study, could be considered ANTZ. Can someone please explain this?

He's not, what was referenced was someone saying that stating that something MUST be pulled from the market because there is POTENTIAL for harm, regardless of how small that potential is, is similar to ANTZ rhetoric.

 

[rothenbj]

Glad we had this deep concern for our health while we were smoking.

 

[Kent C]

I guess when one sees - Is Dr. F an ANTZ? - on a few threads now, people begin to wonder. Those who were part of the old dead thread know, but newbies who have no idea of the context, may just take it as a statement.

 

[Jman8]

I do not understand why Dr. F, or anyone else on the team that did the DA/AP study, could be considered ANTZ. Can someone please explain this?

As one who has come closest to this assertion while not making it, here's my explanation.

I think statements of "should be avoided" with regards to anything that is currently being consumed by the majority of vapers are the type of statements that "should be avoided." I don't see how one can see "should be avoided" as a matter of scientific fact. It is opinion, and if worded in this fashion, it feeds our adversaries. Thus, if Dr. F. would say that vaping consumers should avoid diacetyl, I do see this in the vein of ANTZ rhetoric. Yet, I've not seen/heard Dr. F. say this and instead have seen Dr. F. say industry (eLiquid manufacturers) should avoid it in production. Even here, this strikes me as opinion, and a bit on the zealous side, but somewhat the norm for how scientist types speak with regards to various industries. Because I don't think Dr. F. can control the market, nor has any desire to do so, I see it as a recommendation and not a mandate. If it were treated as a mandate by a scientific body, that can control the market (i.e. TPSAC), then I would see it as ANTZ-like.

In summary, I do not see Dr. F. as ANTZ.
But I do think one of his voiced opinions could be considered ANTZ-like or feeding ANTZ viewpoints on vaping. For a true, or full blown ANTZ, vaping "should be avoided."

Feel like saying more, but pretty sure I've said enough.

 

[caramel]

Jman - the easiest way to figure out ANTZ is by what they're selling: oppresive regulations and excessive taxation.

 

[skoony]

Sure, caramel.
I don't think steve would be saying Dr Farsalino's is ANTZ
but rather that he will soon be or is already considered ANTZ because of his latest findings regarding
the effects of diacetyl.

Now, as usual the threads in this forum go on and off topic a lot,
but in the thread in question, where I believe Steve saw that Farsalino's
study would be raising issues is referred to in my quoted post, skoony's and the article skoony linked to.

See Thread: Sleazy propaganda re diacetyl in e-cigs
It goes full circle in other threads, too numerous to refer to
where at least one medical doctor member of this forum as well as several other posters
bring up the question of whether Dr F will now be considered ANTZ.

I know I myself have brought up the likelihood of that occurring, seeing
the apparent vast numbers of
vapers who would seemingly prefer to hide their heads in the sand regarding the
possible ill effects of our "hobby".

Best Regards,
Hazy

just for the record i do not believe the good doctor is ANTZ.

mike

 

[caramel]

I guess when one sees - Is Dr. F an ANTZ? - on a few threads now, people begin to wonder. Those who were part of the old dead thread know, but newbies who have no idea of the context, may just take it as a statement.

I wonder if it would be good form to keep repeating the same question about Steve too.

 

[skoony]

That doesn't comfort me. Know why? Because lung disease might be classified as full blown popcorn lung and you may be expected to die. That could mean that perhaps 25% of people who have only 20 years of exposure may not have "lung disease" but they may have lowered lung function, say by perhaps 20%? See what I'm getting at? If all people are concerned with is catastrophic lung disease, then that's not a very high bar to set.
I don't want my lung function impacted in any measurable way. You might then say, "So stop vaping you idiot", but is that really where we want to go as far as acceptable risk is concerned? It seems we actually DO need more study with regard to E-cig safety. None of this, "It might not kill you in 45 years, but good luck running a few miles, lol?"

i don't know where you are getting your figures from but, you don't seem
to understand how this works.your lung function gets impacted every day of your
life whether you vape,smoke or do neither.
to add some perspective 76.2 men per 1000 who smoke will get lung cancer.
62.6 will die from it. i am not certain what the time of exposure these rates cover.
now compare that to maybe 1 per 1000 that may develop a problem after 45 years
of exposure. statistically that's such a low rate and in the margin of error and may
mean nothing at all. in a 45 year exposure rate to living your chances of accidental
death are 185.85 per 1000.
i begrudge no one their right to control what they want to put into
there bodies,that's there business. however when you look at these
figures there is absolutely no reason for anyone to be concerned at
all in terms of potential harm and regulating my right to have access
to these products nor,prohibitively tax me to do so.
i have said this before if diacetyl is so harmful where are all the missing
millions of popcorn lung cases that should be there considering the total
amount of workers in the industry that were exposed in the past?

regards
imke