Electronic Cigarettes May Not Help Smokers Quit
A small study done by The Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education at The University of California, San Francisco, suggests that e-cigarettes don't actually help people to quit smoking." Of the 949 smokers in the study, only 88 used e-cigarettes, causing the study's researchers to "admit that their findings should be viewed with some caution."World Science reports "They also found that e-cigarette use was more commmon among women, younger adults and people with less education." Last year, the US Centers for Disease Control reported e-cigarette use more than doubled among U.S. middle and high school students from 2011-2012. The lack of solid research, potential youth market, and abundance of caution have had anti-tobacco activists and researchers pushing for a ban on advertising of e-cigarettes.
NPR has a recently story about vaping, or using e-cigarettes, indoors and in the workplace.
If you smoke, have you been able to cut back your smoking or quit thanks to electronic cigarettes? If you do not smoke, does it bother you that others use e-cigarettes indoors?
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.