Comment T5 Re: I have quit

Story

Electronic Cigarettes May Not Help Smokers Quit

Preview

I have quit (Score: 5, Interesting)

by mrjohs@pipedot.org on 2014-03-25 09:24 (#SY)

I was a daily smoker for 15 years. When I got my first e-cigs two years ago, I was instantly able to cut consumption in half. This was with a cigarette-sized 510 device which basically is crap. As time went by better equipment became available, and after a year, with a much better cigar-sized device, I was able to quit totally. I now use an iTaste MVP 2.0 box-mod with EVOD and Protank clearomizers.

About a week ago I forgot my vapestuff at home and resorted to a 10-pack of ordinary cigarettes (yes, I am still an addict). Compared to the raspberry and vanilla flavors I am now accustomed to, the taste was just horrible. And it would not leave my mouth until the day after. Also, I had to go outside in the rain to do it. Next time I will have a nicotine gum, or something similar instead. The cigarettes were just horrible.

Modern vape equipment is not only much healthier than traditional tobacco, the user experience also far exceeds it.

I did not RT whole FA in detail, but it seems like they have just interviewed a bunch of random smokers, found that not very many of them use e-cigs, and concluded that e-cigs does not work as recession.

Re: I have quit (Score: 5, Informative)

by vanderhoth@pipedot.org on 2014-03-25 11:35 (#T1)

Modern vape equipment is not only much healthier than traditional tobacco

I'd rather not read that ever again. To say it's healthier is misleading. Although it's less harmful, there are no health benefits from vaping. Nicotine isn't good for you and lungs aren't designed to filter out propylene glycol (most common ingredient) along with a lot of other things that can be contained in a vapor, so you can't say vaping is healthier. My mom tried to use the "vaping is healthier" argument with me to convince me it was ok for her to do it in my house while she was visiting. I have a 2 year old, and I don't trust my mom, so of course I looked it up. The correct phrase is "Modern vape equipment is not as harmful as traditional tobacco products, but we still don't know how harmful it is".

I live in a province in Canada where fairly recently, within the last five years, smoking has pretty much been ban in every public space. As an ex-smoker, I often joke I could still smoke on the yellow line in the middle of the road if I wanted to take it back up, but honestly we're all a lot better off. It was much easier to quit smoking when I finally didn't have at least ten people crowed around me blowing smoke in my face everywhere I went. Looking back, the most horrible thing about smoking is you force those around you to smoke as well. I was probably one of those people blowing smoke in someone's face and was the reason they found quitting so hard. It was very inconsiderate. What's more inconsiderate is although smoking is pretty much ban here, people still light up in places they aren't allowed to. Like open bus shelters or standing next to doors. So to walk into or out of the hospital, stores, restaurants or other buildings you're basically forced to walk through a thick fog of cigarette smoke.

My mom, who was visiting from the states, was the first person I've known to use an e-cig. She tried to light up in several places she knew she wouldn't get away with. We went out for sushi and she tried it, after I went to the washroom, then got in an argument with the waitress in front of my wife and two year old over being asked not to do it in the restaurant. I came back from the washroom to see my mom practically making out with a very offended waitress while trying to blow vapor into her face. I had to apologize and pay the waitress off, more than dinner cost, to not call the cops. The point of the story is to me the "it's healthier" argument sounded like, "Oh this unknown substance isn't dangerous, here let me spit it all over your face so you can see it's alright. Gee, I hope you don't have any allergies..."

Vaping isn't popular here yet, but as a kid from the 80's I still remember what it was like to go to a restaurant or fly on a plane with people smoking. It's much nicer now with all the anti-sent and no smoking policies we have and I can actually breath the air without being assaulted by something someone else wants to force on the people around them. I'm not looking forward to walking into a room filled with people vaping, who don't know if it's harmful or not, puffing god knows what all over the place. As far as I'm concerned, if you're consuming nicotine (not inherently harmful on it's own, but highly addictive) or any other potentially dangerous substance (propylene glyco) and any amount of that is being puffed into the public space for others to inhale, then you're violating other peoples rights to not consume additive/dangerous substances.

I'm glad people are moving away from cigarettes and have no problem with vaping instead as long as you're not forcing people around you to unwillingly participate.

Re: I have quit (Score: 3, Insightful)

by mrjohs@pipedot.org on 2014-03-25 11:56 (#T3)

Yes, I probably meant "less harmful" rather than "healthier".

You point out that proylene glycol is "potentially dangerous". It is used in and approved for several food products, toothpaste and cosmetics. Not safe for inhaling? Well, it is used in smoke machines too, which have been around for decades and have not been proven harmful. The only difference between an e-cig and a smoke machine is the nicotine (not detectable in an 8m^3 room) and flavorings (does not stink like cigarettes).

There are even some indications that PG might be healthy (from a quick Google search): http://www.news-medical.net/news/20091104/Propylene-glycol-in-e-cigarettes-might-keep-us-healthy-says-researchers.aspx

Vegetable Glycerin is also widely used in e-cigs. It is hard to come across any candy or sweets which does not contain it. It is basically sugar.

I think your mom's behaviour is unpolite, to say the least. It is not a question of wether e-cigs are dangerous or not, but of manners. E-cigs are not subject to smoking laws, at least not in Norway, but you got to respect people around you.

Re: I have quit (Score: 5, Insightful)

by vanderhoth@pipedot.org on 2014-03-25 13:04 (#T5)

nicotine (not detectable in an 8m^3 room)

That could very well depend on the number of people vaping in the area. As I said any amount, detectable or not, is essentially forcing others in the area to participate.

My mom is a rude person, part of the reason I can't stand to be around her and why I moved back to Canada while she stayed in the states, but the point wasn't to say all smokers are rude people. The point was to say vaping is a new thing, people don't understand it yet and justifiably might not want to be exposed to it, but if people are vaping in public spaces they're exposing people to it whether they want to be or not. I feel the same way about perfume. I can't tell you the number of times I've had to get off a bus or leave a room early because someone (not exclusively women) bathed in some cheap ode 'a la toilette and is stinking up the space so bad the people around them are passing out from lack of oxygen.

As far as the article you cited, I do appreciate that, I have to take it with a grain of salt, for a couple of reasons. 1) How many studies did the tobacco industry fund to prove cigarettes were safe? They made a lot of very ridiculous claims that we now know were false. 2) I tried to traced the article back to the study, in the process I found out that Dr. Robertson the author retired in 1951, that's a long time ago, the study was published in 1947 . I'm not saying the study was invalid, but we know a lot more now than we did then and have a lot more standard practices and regulations in place than we did back then involving studies.

Maybe assertion two invalidates my assertion one because the study is so old that it couldn't have been funded by "the vaping industry", but it doesn't mean "the vaping industry" couldn't be using a faulty study to prop up or exaggerate their claims, as the tobacco industry has in the past.

We know proylene glycol is safe for *ingestion*. Water is safe for *ingestion* too, but get too much in your lungs and you drown. I don't want to make the claim one way or the other that proylene glycol, or other ingredients, are harmful or not, I just want to point out if someone doesn't want themselves to be exposed to it, then we should be respecting that. I'm in my thirties and only once have ever been in the presents of a smoke machine, my mother the chain smoker aside (BA DA CHING!!). They're great for theatrical effect, but I certainly wouldn't want one in the cubical on either side of me going all day at work, as it use to be with cigarettes if you're old enough to remember when they were still allowed on airplanes and in restaurants. I remember when I was eight and it was common to walk into a restaurant so full of blue smoke you couldn't even see where you were going, and sitting on the ten hour flight from Nova Scotia to England beside a smoker, who burned me with ashes, when I was nine.

As a side note, did you know toothpaste is actually not safe for ingestion? Florid is good for helping to strengthen the enamel on teeth, but is actually toxic in a large enough dose.

Moderation

Time Reason Points Voter
2014-03-25 22:15 Insightful +1 boioioing@pipedot.org
2014-03-25 18:14 Interesting +1 fishybell@pipedot.org
2014-03-25 16:43 Insightful +1 kerrany@pipedot.org
2014-03-25 18:54 Interesting +1 songofthepogo@pipedot.org
2014-03-25 17:24 Informative +1 vanderhoth@pipedot.org

Junk Status

Not marked as junk