Where are the studies??

[Sassyonemeis]

I was just reading another thread and a member stated that there are studies that show that we absorb AT BEST 40% of the nicotine in our e-juice. Where are these studies? Then there was all of the conflicting infomation on the amount of nicotine that is in and absorbed from analogs, where are these studies?

I think it would be helpful if when one is quoting such information that they include links to the studies they are referencing so that the reader may see the information for themselves and then make their own decisions based on what they understand from it.

So, where are these studies?? I for one would like to see them.

 

[AlmightyGod]

I think it would be nice if new members of ECF would read a little bit of the information in the sub-forums, and not expect to be spoon fed all of the information. There are tons of threads which link to studies. Many members have spent countless hours trying to inform the public. If someone is a member here, they have the responsibility to search out the information already provided & pass it along. Do not expect one thread to answer every question, and link to every study & news article.

Just sayin'.......

 

[Sassyonemeis]

I think it would be nice if the information was actually available, especially if quoting or referring to it. I have spent soooooooo many hours reading on this site and I honestly I think it a bit presumptuous to assume that I have not done any research here or elsewhere.

I am not EXPECTING anything, just saying that if you are going to refer to a study that is not readily available on the stickies, it might be nice to back up what you are saying with the study you are referring to. Otherwise, would it and should it not be taken with a grain of salt as opinion instead of validated information based on the study? When someone states that there is a study that shows an AT MOST 40% absorbtion rate when THEY are trying to prove something to another poster, then it is the responsibility of the claimant to provide their information, especially when it's not easily found on this site, otherwise they are just spouting words that are just as invalidated as the person they are trying to convince. It's just opinion at that point, and we know everyone has one.

 

[AlmightyGod]

I do agree that the site should be organized better.

I, too, don't like when others speak about things, about which, they don't have the facts. Whether it be pro or con vaping.

I apologize for my earlier rant.
Many people don't bother reading anything on the site, because it's easier to just ask the same question that's already been answered a hundred times that week.

Try the casaa site for more info.
It's a great resource.

 

[Sassyonemeis]

Apology accepted and yes I understand the frustration of answering the same questions hundreds of times a week.

I'd still like to see the study where this at most 40% absorbtion was shown. The fact is, I have had smokers (that I am trying to share the e-cig experience with) ask me this very question and have been unable to find a study that states this. I am also curious for my own reasons since I am a vaper. It would be nice to know what's really going into my body which is why I advocate further indepth clinical studies of e-cigs.

 

[Sassyonemeis]

bump cuz I'd really like to see these studies!