there has not as of yet been any evidence presented, just a press release, I think that is the main contention here, no evidence.
Vaping vs Smoking
- Thread starter Exchaner
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
there has not as of yet been any evidence presented, just a press release, I think that is the main contention here, no evidence.
A lot is known regarding nicotine and it's effects on the immune system. I think a lot forget other NRT came out before ecigarettes and studies were done on stand-alone (not in smoking) nicotine as a result.
To begin this review provides a synopsis summarizing the effects of nicotine on the immune system and its (nicotine) influences on various neurological diseases. 2009
Full
Nicotine and inflammatory neurological disorders
Not sure what you mean by press release but the evidence was presented at a science conference. Whether or not it is "published" in a credible scientific journal is another story. Quoting from the other thread:
"The results were presented Friday at the annual conference of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Washington."
You are free to choose the second approach for yourself. It is however not scientifically sound. The absence of an effect can never be proven.
As far as the article goes, I'll dismiss it since there is no access to the actual paper.
The question is, who were the test subjects? Group 1 must have obviously been smokers, but I question whether or not the vaping group consisted of people that were vapers but never smokers.
Doing comparative tests with people that smoked for 20 years and then vaped for 1-2 years would make for one poor study.
My personal experience in regards to immune system and illness have been entirely contrary to the studies claim. I have also seen studies where vapers reported they were ill far less than prior as smokers.
I thought you were referring to possible effects of non-nicotine liquids? So far researchers seem to think of vapor products as one thing. Or they might recognize that there are nicotine liquids and non nicotine liquids. Or that there are flavored liquids and unflavored liquids.
I would think that a full analysis would consist of analyzing VG, PG, Nicotine, and various flavoring compounds. Of course, there are millions of combinations. They could actually start with store bought liquids, nic and 0 nic, of the same "flavor." If they find some commercial "flavors" that have effects, the next step would be to analyze the flavoring compounds that make up that "flavor."
Or they could wait until the deeming takes away all of the options...
We can "discuss" this subject till there is enough evidence and there will always be 2 sides.
So, YES, smoking is not good. Took centuries to come to that conclusion.
Even if no one was telling me that it was bad, I can use my own logic and personal evidence.
Smoking made me cough, cough real bad when I first took it up. It made me nauseous, made my throat sore. That is your body telling you its not good for you. "I" decided to continue even though my body did not want to.
Does it really take science to knock one on the head to convince you with "cancer"?
Problem is we really dont know why some can/ have smoked for decades and die of toe cancer or falling.
We see that people who never smoked or lived with a smoker do get lung/ mouth/ throat cancer.
Its not proven that smoking WILL kill you, but it sure doesnt make you feel healthy. Sure we get used to it, but along some time, we notice the wheezing, permanent cough, breathless feeling, deep chest pains etc and we ignore it till it either kills us or not.
Vaping, hmm. Other than getting used to inhaling it, does not make me sick. I feel better and so on.
Its it going to harm some? Im sure, peanuts, shrimp, bee stings kill some people . Love kills, driving kills, we spray our environment with known toxins willingly, because we want to make more money from our crops.
We need to get places to make a living, so we ignore the smog. We know drinking can damage not only your own body, but others when we run over them, or beat them to death in a rage.
No two people with ever agree 100% on something no matter the subject , but we can agree that we might never know. And if we do ever find out what causes cancer, causes a cold, etc, we will probably be close to extinction.
So lets just stop this bickering and get back to harm reduction. Get facts and most of all use common sense. If the possibilities of harm from vaping is worrying you, then stop, but stop creating panic and doubt to those who are harming themselves less than smoking.
If you want to make sure you are safe, you'd have to live in a vacuum. Not too many want to live in a "lab" environment. So you live to be 100+ years old, with no contact because people can actually be allergic to other people. Most of all people kill more people with their bare hands than guns and cigarettes.
So, YES, smoking is not good. Took centuries to come to that conclusion.
Even if no one was telling me that it was bad, I can use my own logic and personal evidence.
Smoking made me cough, cough real bad when I first took it up. It made me nauseous, made my throat sore. That is your body telling you its not good for you. "I" decided to continue even though my body did not want to.
Does it really take science to knock one on the head to convince you with "cancer"?
Problem is we really dont know why some can/ have smoked for decades and die of toe cancer or falling.
We see that people who never smoked or lived with a smoker do get lung/ mouth/ throat cancer.
Its not proven that smoking WILL kill you, but it sure doesnt make you feel healthy. Sure we get used to it, but along some time, we notice the wheezing, permanent cough, breathless feeling, deep chest pains etc and we ignore it till it either kills us or not.
Vaping, hmm. Other than getting used to inhaling it, does not make me sick. I feel better and so on.
Its it going to harm some? Im sure, peanuts, shrimp, bee stings kill some people . Love kills, driving kills, we spray our environment with known toxins willingly, because we want to make more money from our crops.
We need to get places to make a living, so we ignore the smog. We know drinking can damage not only your own body, but others when we run over them, or beat them to death in a rage.
No two people with ever agree 100% on something no matter the subject , but we can agree that we might never know. And if we do ever find out what causes cancer, causes a cold, etc, we will probably be close to extinction.
So lets just stop this bickering and get back to harm reduction. Get facts and most of all use common sense. If the possibilities of harm from vaping is worrying you, then stop, but stop creating panic and doubt to those who are harming themselves less than smoking.
If you want to make sure you are safe, you'd have to live in a vacuum. Not too many want to live in a "lab" environment. So you live to be 100+ years old, with no contact because people can actually be allergic to other people. Most of all people kill more people with their bare hands than guns and cigarettes.
Sorry, yes, I agree on the effects of non-nicotine eliquids, it's an unknown where as it is known that nicotine is an immunosuppressant.
I believe in this latest they did differentiate between eliquids, with and without nicotine and flavors, although they are concentrating on eliquids containing cinnamon—cinnamaldehyde—as well as butter flavors ( as indicated in that press release that to me shows the slant of this particular research given we are aware of the potential issues with these flavors)
I am very interested in the non-nicotine and a good representation of flavor profiles research hopefully to come.
I think that's a valid thought.
I think the ingredients are what are going to be a big factor in safety and health in the long run.
Basically, theres Polypropylene glycol and vegetable glycerin and nicotine.
Nicotine alone in reasonable quantities is not more harmful than coffee, teas etc.
PG and VG are found to be harmless to a large percentage of the human population as it is found in almost everything.
Flavorings. Nat or synth as inhalents are "the unknown" factor in my mind.
We all know that just because something is natural, doesnt make it safe or harmless. What is safe to eat is changed chemically when heated, vaporized and inhaled.
I make my own and I know exactly whats in them. I buy in good faith flavorings from the Perf Apprentice and keep it real simple. Strawberry, pineapple, mints.
I normally only bought my NET tobacco and just recently started making my own. I know what in it. Pg, VG and tobacco leaves/ cigar. Is it safe to inhale dried leaves in vapor form or as a combustive smoke?
I wish to think that its not as bad on my body to taste it than smoke it.
There goes the same old tired argument .... we face many risks in our lives, so we might as well add another.
I do not consider it "bickering" to exchange ideas .... we are all after an elusive answer and these discussions help clarify things.
You keep saying "add" so I have to ask, are you a smoker, a vaper who formerly smoked, a vaper who did not formerly smoke, a non-smoker/vaper?
Just trying to get an idea of which direction your thoughts are coming from. The risk assessment definitely differs depending on your current/former habits.
I agree with you @Exchaner, what gets me is that its almost impossible to have a civil conversation without "stepping" on somebody's toes. I understand your questions and agree that questions need to be asked. We cant mindlessly just accept the "do this its better" or "do that because ITS better"
Some people get real defensive when they think that questions like this are redundant or trolling, because it threatens what they are enjoying.
As long at there are school yards and anonymous ways to make a comment , there will be some that cant come up with a valid reason so they resort to name calling, and beating their chests.
Im probably full of it, as I am known to, but I can be as polite and civil at it. Heaven knows I rarely "comment" or participate in these types of discussions because my dumb feelings get hurt all the time, but Im working on getting "thick skin"
Some people get real defensive when they think that questions like this are redundant or trolling, because it threatens what they are enjoying.
As long at there are school yards and anonymous ways to make a comment , there will be some that cant come up with a valid reason so they resort to name calling, and beating their chests.
Im probably full of it, as I am known to, but I can be as polite and civil at it. Heaven knows I rarely "comment" or participate in these types of discussions because my dumb feelings get hurt all the time, but Im working on getting "thick skin"
Glad you asked. Right now I am a "partial" vaper, meaning I still light up a few times a day although much less than before. I am inclined to believe vaping is the safer alternative, but coming from a scientific background, I always look for proof - regardless of my gut instincts. It seems I am only one of the few here interested in exchanging ideas, hence the "bickering" comment. Amazing when some people suggest I should just quit - as if I didn't know....
I think this discussion has been fairly benign and relevant to the topic at hand, like yourself I refuse to get into squabbles or argue semantics. I also think conversations like this need to take place to be aware of and discuss the latest research being done.
All too often research is being dismissed out of hand when is sheds a less than favorable light on vaping instead of being evaluated on it's scientific merit or lack of it. It is important going forward to be open minded and learn what we can about vaping, the good and the bad, it is the only way we as adults can make informed decisions.
Here is the definition of a weak mind: Someone who resorts to name calling when cornered intellectually.
Funny, when my sons were growing up, I told myself that when they asked questions Id try my best not to be like my parents.
I think I did a good job most of the time, but occasionally I caught myself doing the old
" just because" type of answers, but Id catch myself at it, and growl and tell them dammit, Just trust me, and I will come up with a good answer / reason when I find it. Id cross my hands, scowl, and point to somewhere for them to go and a few minutes later Id be spoiling them and tell them , I just dont know and we would discuss it later.
I think I did a good job most of the time, but occasionally I caught myself doing the old
" just because" type of answers, but Id catch myself at it, and growl and tell them dammit, Just trust me, and I will come up with a good answer / reason when I find it. Id cross my hands, scowl, and point to somewhere for them to go and a few minutes later Id be spoiling them and tell them , I just dont know and we would discuss it later.
Digesting the abstract: they swabbed in the nose, washed the nose out and collected the fluid, and additionally collected urine and blood to check for signs of inflammation and immune system distress. They have so far concluded--without much specificity as to how much or how long--that vaping affects immune genes in the nose.
They're moving into test-tube experiments of cinnamon-flavored e-liquids containing cinnamaldehyde, looking for cell damage. You can find discussion about cinnamaldehyde right here, from as far back as five years ago. This part won't break any new ground, really.
In evaluating smoking vs. vaping, it's reasonable to look at immune-suppressive effects. But when it comes to the overall dangers of smoking, immune-suppression is a rather minor one, and I'd say it's not enough to dissuade me from vaping, especially if it's in the nasal mucosa (and, as I expect, a temporary effect). Cell turnover is high in mucosal tissues.
In my opinion, this research and its results are rather trivial. Of much more concern is the context in which it's being early-presented. Dr. Jaspers shows up at the AAAS conference, and their website bills it with this headline:
"Alternative Tobacco Products May Be Just As Dangerous As Cigarettes"
I'm pretty sure we can all agree that this is exaggerated and alarmist, and not even close to being justified by the research results, such as they are. So now it hits Repeat Street, and Ms. Schwartz gets out the trumpet:
"New Study Shows How People Who Vape May Be Making Themselves Sick"
You don't need a tinfoil hat to detect an agenda here...just a thinking cap.
They're moving into test-tube experiments of cinnamon-flavored e-liquids containing cinnamaldehyde, looking for cell damage. You can find discussion about cinnamaldehyde right here, from as far back as five years ago. This part won't break any new ground, really.
In evaluating smoking vs. vaping, it's reasonable to look at immune-suppressive effects. But when it comes to the overall dangers of smoking, immune-suppression is a rather minor one, and I'd say it's not enough to dissuade me from vaping, especially if it's in the nasal mucosa (and, as I expect, a temporary effect). Cell turnover is high in mucosal tissues.
In my opinion, this research and its results are rather trivial. Of much more concern is the context in which it's being early-presented. Dr. Jaspers shows up at the AAAS conference, and their website bills it with this headline:
"Alternative Tobacco Products May Be Just As Dangerous As Cigarettes"
I'm pretty sure we can all agree that this is exaggerated and alarmist, and not even close to being justified by the research results, such as they are. So now it hits Repeat Street, and Ms. Schwartz gets out the trumpet:
"New Study Shows How People Who Vape May Be Making Themselves Sick"
You don't need a tinfoil hat to detect an agenda here...just a thinking cap.
Last edited:
You proly right, but than again, you mite be wrong!! I see such writing all the time .... It distracts people from considering your main message.....or corrects someone on grammar.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
