Woman severely burned in e-cigarette explosion (it was a mech mod)

[f1vefour]

Making Fun of Someone who was Seriously Injured in an Accident is a Good Way to Rack Up Bad Karma Points.

Just Say'n.

I wasn't making light of a real accident or person.

I was making an example of what is reported and what likely really happened. Report shows it was fault of ecigarette, when the truth is the person was doing something they shouldn't have.

I guess fiction is lost on some people.

 

[zoiDman]

...

I was making an example of what is reported and what likely really happened. Report shows it was fault of ecigarette, when the truth is the person was doing something they shouldn't have.

...

"what likely really happened"

"when the truth is the person was doing something they shouldn't have."

Hmmm?

I guess Reality sometimes is what we Make It. Or what we would Like it To Be.

 

[f1vefour]

"what likely really happened"

"when the truth is the person was doing something they shouldn't have."

Hmmm?

I guess Reality sometimes is what we Make It. Or what we would Like it To Be.

What are you talking about.

First you try to make me seem like a bad person when it's you who misunderstood my post, where does the bad karma lie here.

Next to chop up a post and make another irrelevant statement, for what reason?

Read any of my previous posts and find any instance of my insensitivity, come back and quote that. Else I will kindly ask you to find someone else to rile today, I'm not in the mood.

I am not insensitive, I was not talking about an actual accident.

Reports of ecigarette accidents are always the fault of the device and never the user. This is what I was making light of.

 

[zoiDman]

What I'm saying is that with the Amount of Actual Facts in Most News Articles, No One can say what Really Happened. Or what the Truth is.

Could be the mod
Could be User Error
Could be Re-Wrapped TrustFire that was sold as a Sony VTC4
Could be a Lot of Things

And I just don't see how things like this are Productive.


"Report

Man's ecig explodes in face, man stated as soon as the button was depressed on the ecigarette he heard a loud explosion as shards of metal tore through his face.

Truth

Man's ecig explodes in face, he was overheard saying "cloudz bruh, I'm super subohm'n dashiat outta dis" just before the accident occurred."

 

[f1vefour]

It wasn't meant to be productive, it was a stab at the media. Not a stab at the fictitious cloudz idiot that hurt himself.

I can somewhat see how you could misunderstand my post, because I said "Truth". I guess it should have read "Portrayed simulated nonfactual statement".

 

[LaraC]

This picture of fire extinguishers and e-cigs headed the "In the News March 7th" post of the always interesting, ongoing "Nothing About Us Without Us" topic.

In the News March 7th

The picture got me thinking...

While no one wants anyone to be injured or burned by a battery incident, I wonder if a comparison thought about regular cigarette house fires ever crosses the minds of scare-mongering "E-cig Explodes" journalists? Smoking related house fires that cause actual deaths (including deaths of non-smoking members of the family) and truly critical burn injuries.

Or ever fleetingly crosses the minds of FDA tobacco regulators, Congressional legislators, or state and local lawmakers, who seize upon the tiniest imagined risks, and the most miniscule percentages of those unlikely risks ... in twisted attempts to justify their unreasonable animosity toward electronic cigarettes?

While regulators and junk-producing "scientists" are working around the clock to dissuade smokers from switching from burning cigarettes to vaping, do any of them ever have a "harm reduction" thought -- even just a passing thought -- about the number of people killed/injured every year in house fires caused by lit cigarettes?

On page 2 of:
https://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/statistics/v13i6.pdf

"While smoking-related fires only accounted for 2 percent
of all residential building fires, they were one of the leading
causes of fire deaths, accounting for 14 percent of fire
deaths in residential buildings. The fatality rate per 1,000
fires was more than 7 times greater in smoking-related fires
than in nonsmoking-related residential building fires. The
injury rate per 1,000 fires was more than 3 times greater in
smoking-related fires than in nonsmoking-related residential
building fires. In addition, 13 percent of all smoking related
fires in residential buildings occurred in bedrooms
when smoking materials ignited mattresses and bedding."

Among e-cig users there have been a few injuries/burns from battery and user issues, but those burns and injuries don't even begin to compare with being burned to death in a house fire caused by a lit cigarette.

 

[DC2]

While regulators and junk-producing "scientists" are working around the clock to dissuade smokers from switching from burning cigarettes to vaping, do any of them ever have a "harm reduction" thought -- even just a passing thought -- about the number of people killed/injured every year in house fires caused by lit cigarettes?

You do realize that they don't care if smokers die, right?

 

[Kent C]

You do realize that they don't care if smokers die, right?

They're conflicted because of taxes and MSA.... and the money that goes to them as a result.

 

[skoony]

You do realize that they don't care if smokers die, right?

The hospitals love dying smokers. It's the big payday at the end of the road.
Big Medicine from one end to the other is a bigger stakeholder than BT and BP
put together.

Regards
Mike

 

[WharfRat1976]

The hospitals love dying smokers. It's the big payday at the end of the road.
Big Medicine from one end to the other is a bigger stakeholder than BT and BP
put together.

Regards
Mike

LOL. Great post Mike.

Big Medicine from cradle to grave with BT and BP tying it together.

That's hilarious.

 

[Kent C]

The hospitals love dying smokers. It's the big payday at the end of the road.
Big Medicine from one end to the other is a bigger stakeholder than BT and BP
put together.

Regards
Mike

This has been proven to be false. There was a thread on this a while back with numbers from many of the THR people as well as Cato Institute. In the long term hospitals benefit more from non-smokers, since smokers die off early - true they gain some from that but long term... not so much.

"The researchers found that from age 20 to 56, obese people racked up the most expensive health costs. But because both the smokers and the obese people died sooner than the healthy group, it cost less to treat them in the long run.

On average, healthy people lived 84 years. Smokers lived about 77 years and obese people lived about 80 years. Smokers and obese people tended to have more heart disease than the healthy people.

Cancer incidence, except for lung cancer, was the same in all three groups. Obese people had the most diabetes, and healthy people had the most strokes. Ultimately, the thin and healthy group cost the most, about $417,000, from age 20 on.

The cost of care for obese people was $371,000, and for smokers, about $326,000."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/health/05iht-obese.1.9748884.html?_r=0
---

The New England Journal of Medicine

"Conclusions
If people stopped smoking, there would be a savings in health care costs, but only in the short term. Eventually, smoking cessation would lead to increased health care costs."

MMS: Error

 

[skoony]

@Kent C You are correct about the long term costs when totaled. A lot of that money
goes to pharmaceuticals I believe. At age 60 I am currently taking 5 prescription
medications daily.
"age category 45–64 (4.7 unique prescriptions)"
http://meps.ahrq.gov/mepsweb/data_files/publications/st245/stat245.pdf
I guess I am right on schedule. At least there's one thing normal in my life.
Regards
Mike