Why can't they just leave us alone?
- Thread starter AngelsBreath
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
-
- Tags
- vamo
- Status
Ah, Kristen is here. I can take the rest of the day off. No way I can argue the points on nicotine any better than she can.
Kristen, keep on being you!
Kristen, keep on being you!
What is the definition of "suspected carcinogen" you are using? Are you a scientist?
Cancer and mortality among users and nonusers of snus - Roosaar - 2008 - International Journal of Cancer - Wiley Online Library
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140673607615335/fulltext
http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/early/2009/10/20/0008-5472.CAN-09-1084.full.pdf
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ijc.27587/full
Last edited:
Did you read these?
"Cancer and mortality among users and nonusers of snus - Roosaar - 2008" showed that never smokers who used snus had about the same incidence of cancer as never smokers who didn't use snus. A 1.1 rate for any cancer and 1.6 for smoke-related cancer is not considered significant. They don't even really start calling it a true risk until it's 2.0 or more.
"Snus and the risk of cancer of the mouth, lung, and pancreas" is a commentary by Brad Rodu, a proponent of tobacco harm reduction who agrees that snus doesn't raise the risk of cancer, who was basically criticizing the authors for their questionable "science."
"Presence of the Carcinogen N′-Nitrosonornicotine in the Urine of Some Users of Oral Nicotine Replacement Therapy Products" is a review of 2 studies with 34 subjects, 13 of whom had elevated levels of a biomarker of a tobacco-specific nitrosamine (NNN), indicating there was some exposure. The mere presence of a carcinogen in a product does not make a product "carcinogenic," as seen with snus, which also contains NNN and products like processed meats and bacon, which also contain nitrosamines. Tobacco-specific nitrosamines are found in tobacco, therefore, nicotine extracted from tobacco may also have traces of those TSNAs (ie. impurities) but that doesn't make the nicotine itself carcingoenic.
I'm not a scientist, but I stayed at a Holiday Inn once.
(I'm also pretty close to and have learned a lot from a respected epidemiologist and tobacco harm reduction expert, Dr. Carl Phillips, who serves with me on the board of directors of CASAA.)
Last edited:
Love your post!! I can relate to every bit of it. Any other group would be yelling 'discrimination'. I have no problem with other people's choices - its their right so long as they take the responsibility too, but as a smoker I felt like a leper!! It is o.k. to weigh a tonne, swill down coffee, alcohol, shoot ......, practise unsafe sex, but for goodness sake, whatever u do - 'Do Not Smoke'!! Good grief I used to do ward rounds with doctors and pick up their cig butts from the bedside table!!
I now vape where and when I want to. I usually join the smokers because they are a more interesting group than the 'whiter than white' others. Cheers and vape on,
I now vape where and when I want to. I usually join the smokers because they are a more interesting group than the 'whiter than white' others. Cheers and vape on,
Not in detail, no. As I said, I'm not qualified to judge them, but it certainly looks like they found increase in incidence of cancer among snus users.
That's what they want you to think (except that you had Brad Rodu's commentary interpreted backwards.) It's like the claim e-cigarettes contain "anti freeze." The presence of a non-toxic amount of a chemical that could be toxic in much greater doses does not make the product itself toxic. They leave out that you'd have to DRINK a few thousand cartridges in one sitting to reach a toxic level.
One of the major faults of these studies that show a tiny increase in incidence is that most don't account for previous smoking or other factors and all of them rely on self-reporting for behavior. Honestly, anything under a 2.0 isn't considered a significant increase in risk when it comes to other health research. It only seems to be in tobacco control that researchers being paid to find risks would claim a 1.6 is "significant."
The above included ever smokers in the numbers. Go down and look at the snus users that never smoked.
The 97% is a guess. Dr. Phillips puts the number at more than 99%, which gets you into such low numbers that it is nearly impossible to conclusively say it "causes" any of those cancers.
Based on accepting that those studies that show increased cancer risk are true, which we don't. It also specifically says "nicotine MIGHT play a role." That means "inconclusive."
Last edited:
I'm not taking a position really, beyond "would like to know the truth". Think of me as playing devil's advocate.
All I'm interpreting from Rodu is that he thinks that data shows snus is "97% less harmful than smoking with respect to cancers of the oral cavity, lung, and pancreas." I.e. that it isn't harmless with respect to said cancers.
I'm not claiming that snus is "harmful", for any given definition of harmful. I claimed nicotine is a "suspected carcinogen", and you suggested that lack of epidemiological data linking snus and cancer disproves that. I'm not convinced it does.
All I'm interpreting from Rodu is that he thinks that data shows snus is "97% less harmful than smoking with respect to cancers of the oral cavity, lung, and pancreas." I.e. that it isn't harmless with respect to said cancers.
I'm not claiming that snus is "harmful", for any given definition of harmful. I claimed nicotine is a "suspected carcinogen", and you suggested that lack of epidemiological data linking snus and cancer disproves that. I'm not convinced it does.
Last edited:
lol Agreed. I've seen Kristin around quite a bit in my short time here. Her documentation and presentation is superb...you'd make one heck of a lawyer, if you so chose.
Last edited:
Unfortunately, you're making conclusions based on seeing about 1/16tb of the facts. Its not your fault really. Its what most people do, because it takes a lot of time to dig to the truth. Its what the ANTZ count on. I was under the same impressions 3 1/2 years ago and its taken a lot of effort to learn what is real and what is smoke and mirrors. I'm still learning something new from Dr. Phillips and other experts every day. Its something that doesn't happen over night and you have to see it for yourself, with guidance from experts to show you what you don't know. I cant just point you to a few links and prove the case. All I can tell you is that everything I ever thought I knew about smoking, tobacco, nicotine and addiction turned out to be at least 80% lies. Knowing it took me at least a year of being immersed in THR to come to that conclusion, I know I wont be able to convince you in even 100 posts on this thread. Its a process you have to go through and have to want and be able to put in the time and effort to learn for yourself. I highly recommend Dr. Phillips blog, antiTHRlies.com. There are also great blogs listed on our blog at blog.CASAA.org. I warn you, though. Stepping into this rabbit hole can change your life.
lol Agreed. I've seen Kristen around quite a bit in my short time here. Her documentation and presentation is superb...you'd make one heck of a lawyer, if you so chose.
You guys make me blush, lol! I probably come in a distant 3rd behind Elaine & Carl, though. And we have 3 lawyers on the board already - I tell them its a wonder we get anything done!!
I think of myself as more of a liaison and student teacher. I just try to put all of the brilliant things the experts say into simpler terms and analogies that dummies like me can comprehend! Kind of like the older sister coming home from school and teaching her younger brother what she learned. I'm no expert but I want to share all of the things that I've discovered! 
You forget, everyone else is perfect, only we smokers/vapers are mere mortals and flawed people...
Easiest way to avoid dealing with their problems is to make someone else's life hwll over theirs.:banghead:
Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2
I am so glad to know that there are so many on here that feel the same as I do and I so appreciate everyone's comments and for those who have taken part in this thread. I guess I just get to the point of 'fed up' with all the BS that's being spread out there about us and wanted to just scream for a bit!
The thing that gets me is that demonizing and ostracizing smokers has been a goal of the ANTZ for the past 30 years. That's why it bothers them so much that there is something that looks like smoking that won't kill us or bystanders. They lose their ammunition of "health reasons" and just look like they are being pushy. It's why they are trying so hard to find and blow out of proportion the "possible dangers" of vaping and using "save the children from addiction" angle. For this reason, we need to educate ourselves about the TRUTH about tobacco, nicotine and second-hand smoke. Do people really believe the ANTZ just started lying when it comes to e-cigarettes? No, they've been well-practiced because they've been telling lies for so long about tobacco and nicotine. So, we need to stop repeating those lies about tobacco and nicotine or else we are validating the lies being told about e-cigarettes. Meaning, if we repeat the lies ANTZ tell about those, we are giving ANTZ credibility and then it makes it harder to argue against them when they lie about e-cigs. If we parrot misinformation about nicotine being "as addictive as hero-n" then we keep a stigma on nicotine that affects us as vapers. The truth is, no one knows if nicotine outside of cigarettes is all that addicting. In fact, there is evidence to show that it is NOT addicting on it's own.
They have us so shamed about being smokers, that most of us feel the need to make excuses and justify being nicotine users. Do we have to justify being caffeine users? My goal, personally, is to have vaping and other smoke-free tobacco use as socially acceptable as caffeine use. Whenever I start to make excuses for being a vaper, I ask myself, "If this was a discussion about my caffeine use, how would I feel and what would I say?" Don't ever feel any more of being ashamed of being a nicotine user than you are of being a caffeine user - or any other thing that we don't "have" to consume but we enjoy, want or need!
They are just a bunch of sheep (ANTZ) who follow a bunch of wolves (government) and all I hear from them is baa baa baa. It's so nice to have found this place. You and so many others on here are so studied on these issues and I for one am happy that you are here and fighting for our rights to vape. Thank you to all of you who have put so much time and effort into studying and understanding these issues, you are a God send to us who just want to be free to enjoy our vaping.
- Status
Similar threads
