- Status
Well, if nicotine is banned in Australia, then I guess finding it would be a headline. Why, I don't know but news is news. In relation to the other items found,there was this paragraph buried at the bottom.
"Prof Larcombe said most were benign food additives but their safety, when heated between 200 to 250 degrees and inhaled, was unknown"
So yeah, PG is also antifreeze. Sounds terrible until you hear it's used in the food industry all the time. As for overheating PG/VG juice, the production of organic breakdown products like formaldehyde is well known. Which is why we don't overheat our juice of possible. Even then it rarely exceeds safety standards and are lower than typically found in a cigarette.
"Prof Larcombe said most were benign food additives but their safety, when heated between 200 to 250 degrees and inhaled, was unknown"
So yeah, PG is also antifreeze. Sounds terrible until you hear it's used in the food industry all the time. As for overheating PG/VG juice, the production of organic breakdown products like formaldehyde is well known. Which is why we don't overheat our juice of possible. Even then it rarely exceeds safety standards and are lower than typically found in a cigarette.
I make my own juice, so rest assured, I do not use poo as an ingredient.
Oh and what is even the point of getting started with vaping in Australia if you can't even get nic liquid?
People buy zero nic then add their own. I believe it also varies by province (is it province or state in AU?)
Every time i see the phrase “study shows” I smell BS. A single study is not how science is supposed to work. There are generally multiple studies used to corroborate or refute each other. A single study generally means the results are crap, so I went into this with my radar turned on. There are two people talking in the article. The researcher and the scienc writer. ALL of the inflammatory claims in the headline are made by the science writer and NONE of them are directly supported by the scientist, with the exception of the presence of nicotine.
More yellow journalism at it’s best.
More yellow journalism at it’s best.
That is because it takes about as much effort to be a "journalist" these days as it does to be a "photographer". The internet has become littered with both and very ... very few of them know how to do it correctly.
Customs let it through. So we just import.
My state has a potential $15000.00 fine for possession. But it has never been enforced
I didn't read the linked article, but typically these "studies" have click bait headlines and after reading the study results you find there are only "trace" amounts of potentially harmful chemicals in e-liquid or vapor.
After 30+ years of smoking, I'm not so concerned about vaping trace amounts of potentially harmful chemicals. Nobody is saying vaping is safe, just safer than smoking. Vaping is harm reduction.
After 30+ years of smoking, I'm not so concerned about vaping trace amounts of potentially harmful chemicals. Nobody is saying vaping is safe, just safer than smoking. Vaping is harm reduction.
My problem (as always) with this so called "studies", is the general public takes it as gospel truth. This is published on New Zealands biggest news station...!
We as educated vapers generally knows facts from fiction, but the public are the ones being swept up. Its so unnecessary and does so much harm to vaping...
We as educated vapers generally knows facts from fiction, but the public are the ones being swept up. Its so unnecessary and does so much harm to vaping...
According to NZ and Australian law you're allowed to import 3 months worth of personal use into the country...but its not really enforced AFAIK...
Not sure of Aussie lately, but NZ is still like that.
Not sure of Aussie lately, but NZ is still like that.
Noted is the lack of identification where the stated 'e liquids' were manufactured or sourced.
I have paid good money for p and poohjuices. They must have gone where I bought my first factory loads from.
Like stats & anything you read, it's malleable to whatever 'truth' fits your POV as an author.
Who actually commissioned the study? Who funded it? Where did the $ come from? Political or industrial affiliations?
Who's up for the challenge of banning public toilet door handles?
I have paid good money for p and poohjuices. They must have gone where I bought my first factory loads from.
Like stats & anything you read, it's malleable to whatever 'truth' fits your POV as an author.
Who actually commissioned the study? Who funded it? Where did the $ come from? Political or industrial affiliations?
Who's up for the challenge of banning public toilet door handles?
Last edited:
Well if the study was from the US I would put money on it being from Stanton Glantz. Maybe he has an Australian cousin "Crocodile Glantz"? Either way it's the same shoddy work, and data manipulation.
Not totally sure the research is bad. It’s the ridiculous and almost non topical spin that the “writer” put on it that is the major problem. The issue is basically that the research does not show what the author claims it does.
We have enough taxpayer funded, educated egomaniacs here so, luckily, we don't have to import them.
One never knows, the general public may get some valuable insights in THR and switch those that give a hoot about their health.
One never knows, the general public may get some valuable insights in THR and switch those that give a hoot about their health.
- Status
