vaping is NOT smoking!!

[AndriaD]

Excellent posting, thank you
And I do believe that a former firefighter knows what he is talking about.

And now excuse me, I am engaging in some heavy drinking at the moment.
You see, my apple juice with mineral water looks just like beer. AND it is liquid. AND I am drinking it

ROFL... everytime I pour a bit of pineapple juice into a glass 3/4 full of coconut water, it reminds me of "the old days" when I'd pour that much OJ into that much gin... Except now the clear stuff is actually good for me, instead of poison!

Andria

 

[Anjaffm]

Same problem here...

I just checked my bp a moment ago, its 107/67... I find it a bit annoying whenever I go to the doctor and the nurse checks my blood pressure and goes, "Oh good, you're blood pressure's perfect." Um, yeah, wait til it gets really hot out and I have to drive my car with no ac, then we'll see how perfect it is! Last time I literally drove for 10 min, and I had to ask someone to take my dog's leash as soon as I got there cuz I couldn't hold on to her and I live in New York! It's not like I live in South Carolina or something!

Not to mention all the people who tell me to move south cuz it's so "nice" there, then they tell me I'm crazy for saying I'd rather live in Alaska

It goes to show that everyone's body is different and has different needs. This is why some people only smoke for a few years and quit, while others continue smoking for decades. It's why some people can quit cold turkey, others need help quitting, and others need a permanent replacement. We are all the same, yet we are all different.

This is why I always take unfounded criticism with a grain of salt. Chances are the other person truly does not understand you.

Excellent posting, thank you very much
I fully agree. And especially with the bolded part.

ROFL... everytime I pour a bit of pineapple juice into a glass 3/4 full of coconut water, it reminds me of "the old days" when I'd pour that much OJ into that much gin... Except now the clear stuff is actually good for me, instead of poison!

Andria

Ohhhh, that pineapple and coconut juice sounds yummy!
And yup.
Substitution. Not going without - but substitution.
To my mind, that is true for food (yes, snacking. But snacking on veggies and dip instead of potato chips), drink (yes, drinking. But drinking a tasty non-alcoholic drink instead of booze), nicotine consumption (yes, consuming nicotine. But consuming it in vapor instead of smoke). Substituting an unhealthy habit by a tasty, nice, satisfying thing. Instead of going without. Instead of depriving oneself. Deprivation will not work. It will only serve to make people bitter. Hard. Cold. And evil. Especially towards those who do enjoy nice things.

 

[jpargana]

(...)
your beer analogy vs NA beer is really not parallel to this because what was once an alcoholic is now no longer an alcoholic. if instead we called that person a beeraholic, and they suddenly switched to wine and ran around saying hey I'm no longer a beeraholic, that would be more like our situation here... if you are vaping 0 nic then yeah your on par with the guy who switched to NA beer, but if your vaping nic then your more like they guy who switched from beer to wine.

(...)

so here I'll ask why is it so shameful to just admit that hey, I don't want to quit because I have found an alternative that I am comfortable enough with that I just don't want to quit. I enjoy it... I don't know why so many have a problem with that and instead try to convince themselves that they have actually quit when all they have really done is substitute

Sorry, but I disagree... in that example, ALCHOOL is the issue, and the culprit of health problems - not the other components you can have in both NA and alchoolic beer. In our case, SMOKE is the issue, not the relatively harmless nicotine. If a patch user is not considered a "smoker", why should a vaper with zero nic be ALSO not considered a smoker, while a vaper WITH nicotine is a "smoker"? Aren't they both NOT inhaling "smoke"?

"suddenly switched to wine and ran around saying hey I'm no longer a beeraholic" it's the same as we saying "I no longer smoke tocacco cigarettes. I started using a pipe." That's silly, because a pipe still emits smoke, just like wine still has alchool in it. Once again, the problem is alchool; that's why some people are called "alchoolics" and not "beeraholic". Just being a "beeraholic" by itself would not pose any significant health problems, and not have people under some social stigma, as long as there's no alchool in it. Just like people who use the patch/gum, with nicotine, do not suffer from smoke-related problems. And most of all, they are not called "smokers".

The "shame", is why we should still pose ourselves, with no reason, under the negative light of a dangerous habit or activity, when we have switched that habit for a much healthier one.


So, back to the NA-beer example: why should anyone tell in public that "everyday I drink between 6 and 12 pints of beer, and I have no trouble in driving home afterwards, and I do not care about the police", WITHOUT explaining that what he actually drinks is NA-beer? Why give other people the impression that he is an irresponsible drunkard, with no real motive (actually, he is a responsible drinker), when he could honestly and accurately tell that "I have not 'drank' for five years" ??

Telling other uninformed people that we are still "smoking" will accomplish nothing into properly informing the uninformed public out there. That will simply make them believe the ANTZ's, when they sprout the "The e-cig may well be worse than smoking" stunt.


ETA:

If you look closely at the advertising made for both NA-beer and e-cigarettes, you will see that both are avertised as consumer products (not medicines; not "alchool/tobacco products") to be used as "cooler"/"carefree"/"more responsible" alternatives to their traditional counterparts already existing in market.

By definition, an "alternative" is not "the same thing":


al·ter·na·tive
[awl-tur-nuh-tiv, al-]

noun
1.
a choice limited to one of two or more possibilities, as of things, propositions, or courses of action, the selection of which precludes any other possibility: You have the alternative of riding or walking.


So, there you have it: I am NOT smoking, because I have found a smokeLESS alternative to tobacco.

 

[Tangaroav]

Vaping is NOT Smoking . As Jpargana pointed out above, the object of the discussion here is NOT nicotine it is SMOKE . Vapers do not emit SMOKE

Most advanced Societies are trying to get rid of smoking tobacco because of it negative effects on the smokers and on the non smokers who are subjected to the SMOKE of smokers. SMOKE is what is detrimental to our health.

Nicotine is another subject. Yes vapers can get a 'shot' of nicotine if they wish. Just like many get their 'shot' of coffee every morning. Nicotine is not detrimental to the public health. e-liquids should be considered the same as coffee since it has the same effect on society as coffee.

Even we, who should know better, are all mixed up as can be seen on this thread. Vapers have quit smoking. To argue otherwise only shows that the ANTZ are winning.

Realsis you quit smoking, no questions about it. You should stand your ground. We all should stand with you.

PS: We should also change the name of that ''smoking'' sub forum here on ECF. It should be called the ''vaping'' sub forum.

 

[DaveP]

Just about every negative article about ecigs ends up stating that, "Well, we just don't know what's in them". Well, we do. What we don't know is what's in the flavoring, especially tobacco flavors. PG and VG alone resemble a mild tobacco cigarette, so unless you need WTA (whole tobacco alkaloids) you are vaping PG and/or VG, water, some cake or candy or fruit flavoring made for cooking, and nicotine. It's no different than if you boiled this on the stove and inhaled the vapors through a straw, except that the atomizer controls the boiling process and concentrates it into a tube leading to a mouthpiece.

That, in itself is a good thing. You are not smoking because nothing is burning and there's no smoke. It's water vapor! That's the first thing that people need to know. In most ecigs, the only ingredient related to tobacco is the nicotine and it should be USP grade nicotine. We all need to ask our juice suppliers to confirm that they use USP (pharmaceutical grade) nicotine. They probably do because the good stuff is virtually the same price as non-USP nic.

Chemical analyses for nicotine impurities on e-liquids: have we learned something important?

 

[bluecat]

The definition of "smoke" is just what it is. You can try to change it. The government changes definitions daily to suit their needs.

Smoke - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Full Definition of SMOKE
1
a : the gaseous products of burning materials especially of organic origin made visible by the presence of small particles of carbon
b : a suspension of particles in a gas
2
a : a mass or column of smoke
b : smudge
3
: fume or vapor often resulting from the action of heat on moisture
4
: something of little substance, permanence, or value
5
: something that obscures


Anwyay our vapor is smoke by definition. Now whether you are smoking a cigarette, cigar, vapor or even toilet tissue. It is still smoke.

BTW if you want to smoke cigs, cigars, or food flavoring in glycerol, that is each individuals choice.

 

[Anjaffm]

@jpargana:
Excellent posting

@Tangaroav:
Excellent posting

And I firmly believe that some people here are just trying to stir the pot.
If they believe themselves to be smokers by not inhaling smoke, let them. Their problem, not anybody else's.
If they talk of "shame", let them. It is their problem, not anybody else's.

I wish them a good time in their "smoke-filled" kitchens when they boil potatoes. Their problem, not anybody else's.

And now excuse me while I continue my heavy drinking. That apple juice with mineral water looks so much like beer. It is liquid. I am drinking it. So it is beer. Cheers and bottoms up!

 

[choochoogranny]

Bluecat, my 1966 Funk and Wagnalls International Edition says:

smoke n. 1. The volatilized products of the combution of an organic compound, as coal, wood, etc., charged with fine particle of carbon or soot; LESS PROPERLY, fumes, steam, etc. 2. Chem. A colloid system of solid particles in a gas.

vapor n. 1. Moisture in the air; especially, visible floating moisture, as light mist. 2. Any light, cloudy substance in the air, as smoke or fumes. 3. Any substance in the gaseous state, which, under ordinary conditions, is usually a liquid or solid. 4. A gas below its critical temperature.

vaporescence n. The process of forming mist or vapor.

fog n. 1. condensed watery vapor suspended in the atmosphere at or near the earth's surface. 2. Chem. A collid system of the liquid-in-gas type (see collid system).

fogging v.t. 1. to surround with or as with fog. 2. To CONFUSE; BEWILDER........(Maybe we should call ourselves "foggers" who do "fogging". )

 

[USMCotaku]

The definition of "smoke" is just what it is. You can try to change it. The government changes definitions daily to suit their needs.

Smoke - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Full Definition of SMOKE
1
a : the gaseous products of burning materials especially of organic origin made visible by the presence of small particles of carbon
b : a suspension of particles in a gas
2
a : a mass or column of smoke
b : smudge
3
: fume or vapor often resulting from the action of heat on moisture
4
: something of little substance, permanence, or value
5
: something that obscures


Anwyay our vapor is smoke by definition. Now whether you are smoking a cigarette, cigar, vapor or even toilet tissue. It is still smoke.

BTW if you want to smoke cigs, cigars, or food flavoring in glycerol, that is each individuals choice.

you are missing a key element.....yes smoke is s gas...with PARTICULATES. When a combustible is heated (2 parts of the fire tetrahedron) it releases the gases trapped within, supplying the fuel for the flame (part three....). Smoke......by definition...the one you so kindly posted, but misunderstood, is the said released but unconsumed gases mixed with the residual particulate matter rendered small enough to be trapped and bourn aloft by said gases. The part you missed is vapor (generally the gaseous form of a liquid heated to its respective boiling point) doesn't contain particulate matter, which is why vapor from a liquid is called steam, not smoke....they are both a gaseous form, but they are NOT both the same thing. Calling our vapor smoke IS the change in definition you are trying to say we are doing. Firefighters aren't just guys who throw water on a flame....there is a lot of science in what we do (even algebra, yuck). I don't come by this info through quick googling, but many hours of study, and you are passing info that is not only scientifically incorrect, but also detrimental to the public opinion of vaping.

 

[Ed_C]

While you can find a definition of smoke that includes vapor, I don't believe it's accurate. I would go more with something like:

Definition: Smoke is a colloid comprised of solid particles and gases associated with the products of incomplete combustion and air.

 

[USMCotaku]

Short version of my post, lol
Sent from my RM-820_nam_att_100 using Tapatalk

 

[bluecat]

choochoogranny

aye.

vapor n. 1. Moisture in the air; especially, visible floating moisture, as light mist. 2. Any light, cloudy substance in the air, as smoke or fumes. 3. Any substance in the gaseous state, which, under ordinary conditions, is usually a liquid or solid. 4. A gas below its critical temperature.

 

[USMCotaku]

The ONLY reason it even bothers me so much is if vapor's don't understand and spread false info, it just makes it that much easier for the big tobacco's lap dogs (otherwise known as the FDA) to do the same and skew the public opinion negatively about vaping. We shouldn't be making it easier for them, we should be fighting them tooth and nail.
Sent from my RM-820_nam_att_100 using Tapatalk

 

[turbocad6]

Sorry, but I disagree... in that example, ALCHOOL is the issue, and the culprit of health problems - not the other components you can have in both NA and alchoolic beer. In our case, SMOKE is the issue, not the relatively harmless nicotine. If a patch user is not considered a "smoker", why should a vaper with zero nic be ALSO not considered a smoker, while a vaper WITH nicotine is a "smoker"? Aren't they both NOT inhaling "smoke"?

"suddenly switched to wine and ran around saying hey I'm no longer a beeraholic" it's the same as we saying "I no longer smoke tocacco cigarettes. I started using a pipe." That's silly, because a pipe still emits smoke, just like wine still has alchool in it. Once again, the problem is alchool; that's why some people are called "alchoolics" and not "beeraholic". Just being a "beeraholic" by itself would not pose any significant health problems, and not have people under some social stigma, as long as there's no alchool in it. Just like people who use the patch/gum, with nicotine, do not suffer from smoke-related problems. And most of all, they are not called "smokers".

The "shame", is why we should still pose ourselves, with no reason, under the negative light of a dangerous habit or activity, when we have switched that habit for a much healthier one.


So, back to the NA-beer example: why should anyone tell in public that "everyday I drink between 6 and 12 pints of beer, and I have no trouble in driving home afterwards, and I do not care about the police", WITHOUT explaining that what he actually drinks is NA-beer? Why give other people the impression that he is an irresponsible drunkard, with no real motive (actually, he is a responsible drinker), when he could honestly and accurately tell that "I have not 'drank' for five years" ??

Telling other uninformed people that we are still "smoking" will accomplish nothing into properly informing the uninformed public out there. That will simply make them believe the ANTZ's, when they sprout the "The e-cig may well be worse than smoking" stunt.


ETA:

If you look closely at the advertising made for both NA-beer and e-cigarettes, you will see that both are avertised as consumer products (not medicines; not "alchool/tobacco products") to be used as "cooler"/"carefree"/"more responsible" alternatives to their traditional counterparts already existing in market.

By definition, an "alternative" is not "the same thing":


al·ter·na·tive
[awl-tur-nuh-tiv, al-]

noun
1.
a choice limited to one of two or more possibilities, as of things, propositions, or courses of action, the selection of which precludes any other possibility: You have the alternative of riding or walking.


So, there you have it: I am NOT smoking, because I have found a smokeLESS alternative to tobacco.

you are talking about harm. I have already said that I know vaping is a much safer, healthier alternative.

I am not talking about harm, I am talking about addiction.

I'm not here trying to stir the pot. my opinion on this means nothing... my whole point is that many, if not most, will look at vaping as a form of smoking regardless of how I myself happen to look at it... why? because it is still an addiction (saying nothing about harm here) and it is still puffing then emitting a puff of "smoke" yes a puff of "smoke"... ergo smoking... forget what I believe as it makes no difference I'm talking about the general public perception here if you had your back to me and stood 50' from me and was vaping or smoking I wouldn't be able to tell the difference and neither would you or anyone else... no one would be incorrect in stating that that guy over there is smoking because he is smoking, weather he is smoking a cigarette or puffing on a vaporizer can not even be determined and most won't even care which it is. the general perception is smoking, you are inhaling and then blowing out "smoke" plain and simple, no argument is going to change that public perception because the perception is really not incorrect


I am talking about addiction... you can not substitute one addiction for another and then proudly call yourself a quitter... you are only kidding yourself. you can say I have quit # but I instead now *, that's fine, but to just say I have quit # insinuates that you have actually beaten that addiction, you haven't, you have just substituted it with *... this is not my perception this is public perception. what I think makes no difference at all, but what everyone in general thinks probably does make somewhat of a difference


no more walls of text, now I'm just beating a dead horse here... if you want to fool yourself into thinking you have actually quit then hey good for you. personally I don't fool myself and personally I hold myself accountable for my own actions, personally I have embraced my addiction and I don't want to quit because I have found an alternative that I can comfortably live with in vaping. everyone is entitled to there own opinions but the general population will always equate vaping with smoking regardless of what spin you put on things.

educating the public that this form of smoking is relatively harmless I can agree with, but trying to convince the general public that this is not smoking? yeah, good luck with that

 

[bluecat]

you are missing a key element.....yes smoke is s gas...with PARTICULATES. When a combustible is heated (2 parts of the fire tetrahedron) it releases the gases trapped within, supplying the fuel for the flame (part three....). Smoke......by definition...the one you so kindly posted, but misunderstood, is the said released but unconsumed gases mixed with the residual particulate matter rendered small enough to be trapped and bourn aloft by said gases. The part you missed is vapor (generally the gaseous form of a liquid heated to its respective boiling point) doesn't contain particulate matter, which is why vapor from a liquid is called steam, not smoke....they are both a gaseous form, but they are NOT both the same thing. Calling our vapor smoke IS the change in definition you are trying to say we are doing. Firefighters aren't just guys who throw water on a flame....there is a lot of science in what we do (even algebra, yuck). I don't come by this info through quick googling, but many hours of study, and you are passing info that is not only scientifically incorrect, but also detrimental to the public opinion of vaping.

Yes, firefighting can be science. I am not arguing that at all.

Yes.. except we have adding flavorings and other compounds to our liquids, ACV for example. These flavorings and such when heated release particulates. These particulates are in our matter. My guess is PG and VG release particulates as well. So please let me know where this is not scientifically correct.

"one piece of the definition: a suspension of particles in a gas." Or are you saying our vapor has no particulates in it?

Detrimental? Seriously? I am just calling it what it is or many other names it could be called.

 

[bluecat]

While you can find a definition of smoke that includes vapor, I don't believe it's accurate. I would go more with something like:

Definition: Smoke is a colloid comprised of solid particles and gases associated with the products of incomplete combustion and air.

You can believe whatever you like, which is fine. The generally accepted definition is what it is. Arguing that is not what the definition clearly is... is well...

 

[Tangaroav]

Dog lovers, may know that the dogs are part of the Phylum Chordata family and that NOT all Chordates are vertebrates, allthough all vertebrates are Chordates, and all dogs are vertebrates. There are many more classifications, including mammals before we get to call Rex, a Chordate, our Dog.

In semantics, all words classifications begin with the broadest definitions and become more specific as the subject is defined according to its physical/and other attributes. In the broadest general definition vapor can be classified in the 'smoke' family. But smoke is NOT vapor.

It is disingenuous ANTZ behavior or ignorance to insist on calling vapor smoke.

 

[bluecat]

The ONLY reason it even bothers me so much is if vapor's don't understand and spread false info, it just makes it that much easier for the big tobacco's lap dogs (otherwise known as the FDA) to do the same and skew the public opinion negatively about vaping. We shouldn't be making it easier for them, we should be fighting them tooth and nail.
Sent from my RM-820_nam_att_100 using Tapatalk

Hey mate, I agree with you on that. But some of the info isn't false. Does e liquid with liquid contain an insecticide? yes it does. Now at what % is that poison and how much does it. Does it contain an ingredient that is also used in anti freeze? yes it does. Now what percentage and is that ingredient harmful? no. Instead of trying to beat around the bush on this stuff... Like the government that is trying to ban this stuff.. We should be telling it straight up. Yes, it contain nicotine which was used as an insecticide and could be poisonous large quantity and high purity. Then we could also use other common household items that share the same characteristics.

I not sure if I buy into all the public negativity. Every one that I have spoken to about my switch to vaping from smoking cigarettes has been 100% on board. They may say yeah it is still smoke, but honestly? so what.

 

[USMCotaku]

Yes, firefighting can be science. I am not arguing that at all.



Yes.. except we have adding flavorings and other compounds to our liquids, ACV for example. These flavorings and such when heated release particulates. These particulates are in our matter. My guess is PG and VG release particulates as well. So please let me know where this is not scientifically correct.



"one piece of the definition: a suspension of particles in a gas." Or are you saying our vapor has no particulates in it?



Detrimental? Seriously? I am just calling it what it is or many other names it could be called.

do the exhale through a paper towel test, any particulates will be trapped for you to see.

 

[USMCotaku]

Hey mate, I agree with you on that. But some of the info isn't false. Does e liquid with liquid contain an insecticide? yes it does. Now at what % is that poison and how much does it. Does it contain an ingredient that is also used in anti freeze? yes it does. Now what percentage and is that ingredient harmful? no. Instead of trying to beat around the bush on this stuff... Like the government that is trying to ban this stuff.. We should be telling it straight up. Yes, it contain nicotine which was used as an insecticide and could be poisonous large quantity and high purity. Then we could also use other common household items that share the same characteristics.

I not sure if I buy into all the public negativity. Every one that I have spoken to about my switch to vaping from smoking cigarettes has been 100% on board. They may say yeah it is still smoke, but honestly? so what.

there are many common and innocuous items found in product that are harmful in there state of intended usage. To pick out those items and say "see, look at what is in your vapor" is a tactic of anti-vaping propaganda, often funded by big tobacco.