what?

Status
Not open for further replies.

tarheeldan

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Feb 2, 2010
632
1
39
Dover, NH
This was nice to see:
Dr. John M. Hester
posted 2/23/10 @ 3:12 PM PST

Ms Gacutan-Galang and some of these posters should do their homework before condeming a device that has the potential to save millions of lives. First, how could any health care professional state that a vapor containing harmless glycerine and a small amount of nicotine be "more harmful" than the 4000+ carcinogens in a cigarette?
And, no dear poster, nicotine does not cause cancer. Quote: The currently available literature indicates that nicotine, on its own, does not promote the development of cancer in healthy tissue and has no mutagenic properties. Even the FDA doesn't have an issue with the nicotine in e-cigs.
And, yes, every manufacture knows the exact concentration of nicotine/mg of their products and I would not purchase a product that did not have this labeled properly.
Do you homework, folks. This is the best invention for the health of mankind in the past 50 years!
 

Our House

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 29, 2009
402
25
NJ, USA
"they contain nicotine, which is the chemical that makes cigarettes addictive"

"They went from a pack to half-a-pack a day, but the problem with that is since it is not known how much nicotine is in each e-cig, they could potentially be smoking two packs worth of nicotine"

Okay...

"Students who have tried the e-cig have told Gacutan-Galang they didn't like it because after they would smoke the e-cig and would still crave an actual cigarette"

:confused: Contradict much?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread