E cigarettes

General Udon Thani topics only!
Jello
udonmap.com
Posts: 1450
Joined: February 15, 2010, 1:34 pm

E cigarettes

Post by Jello » June 2, 2014, 1:28 am

Macca wrote:[there does seem to be a growing anti e ciggies momentum gathering. So all can not be well in the vapour world.
Definitely. But the anti's fail to come up with evidence that shows e-cig's are more harmful than smoking. This makes me wonder if the anti movement isn't more about money rather than public health.
Macca wrote:Also consider many of those purchased in Thailand will be fake most likely produced in China.
The fake cigarettes from China often have very harmful chemicals in the filters, so what will they be using for the liquids?
Agree. I've been buying from the US, but even at that, since it's not regulated you can't be sure.

I may be proven wrong, but everything I've seen leads me to believe it's the lesser of two evils.


UFF DA!

Jello
udonmap.com
Posts: 1450
Joined: February 15, 2010, 1:34 pm

E cigarettes

Post by Jello » June 2, 2014, 1:43 am

By the way Macca, congratulation's on quitting smoking! =D>
UFF DA!

User avatar
pomps
udonmap.com
Posts: 1674
Joined: May 18, 2014, 6:38 pm

E cigarettes

Post by pomps » June 2, 2014, 6:57 am

Have airlines updated their announcements on aeroplanes to include no e cigarette smoking even in the toilets :-k

Do they trigger smoke alarms in houses quicker than a normal cigarette :-k

Are they allowed through x ray machines at airports :-k

Maybe tempted away from the cheap Thai cigarettes 8)

Not wanting to get hooked on those hookahs at Platinum for sure 8)

bumper
udonmap.com
Posts: 8875
Joined: July 16, 2008, 1:54 pm
Location: London

E cigarettes

Post by bumper » June 2, 2014, 7:02 am

Congratulations, in two ways surviving the heart attack and stopping some don't even after the heart attack. It's a hell of an addiction. One that I would not wish on anyone. stay well.
I reserve the right to be wrong, mispell words type badly. leave words out of sentences because my mind works faster then my fingers. To be an OLD GIT I've earned it

bumper
udonmap.com
Posts: 8875
Joined: July 16, 2008, 1:54 pm
Location: London

E cigarettes

Post by bumper » June 2, 2014, 7:42 am

Just a couple of thoughts, these days they would have us out munching grass with cattle, till they found out something has been sprayed on the grass. There is not much these days that you can consume without there being a problem of some kind.

Are E cigarettes good for you of course not.

Here is one to ponder

Morphine addiction cure heroine

Heroine addiction cure Methadone

So isn't the lessor of the evil?

E cigarettes maybe the ls lessor of the evil :-"
I reserve the right to be wrong, mispell words type badly. leave words out of sentences because my mind works faster then my fingers. To be an OLD GIT I've earned it

Jello
udonmap.com
Posts: 1450
Joined: February 15, 2010, 1:34 pm

E cigarettes

Post by Jello » June 2, 2014, 9:48 pm

pomps wrote:Have airlines updated their announcements on aeroplanes to include no e cigarette smoking even in the toilets :-k

Do they trigger smoke alarms in houses quicker than a normal cigarette :-k

Are they allowed through x ray machines at airports :-k

Maybe tempted away from the cheap Thai cigarettes 8)

Not wanting to get hooked on those hookahs at Platinum for sure 8)
The FAA has no law banning e-cig's, so their legal. But almost every Airline has a no
e-cig use policy. I've taken e-cigs through x-ray security in Japan, Korea, Thailand and the US.
They would be a problem in UAE, Brazil, Singapore and Cambodia as they have all banned e-cig's.

As for smoke detectors it depends on the type of sensor, most now are designed with a laser sensor that will detect any substance which is denser than air. The particles in vapour will set them off.

UFF DA!

Jello
udonmap.com
Posts: 1450
Joined: February 15, 2010, 1:34 pm

E cigarettes

Post by Jello » June 4, 2014, 1:22 am

Macca wrote:The general consensus was they are equally addictive, harmful and users often increase the usage over time rather than decrease.
Cant find anything to back that up. I think some medical professionals don't actually look into it and fall back on the attitude that "it looks like smoking, so it must be smoking and therefore bad".

I'm not saying its healthy. Its harm reduction.

Some Doctors speak about e-cig's in these videos:



UFF DA!

Jello
udonmap.com
Posts: 1450
Joined: February 15, 2010, 1:34 pm

E cigarettes

Post by Jello » June 4, 2014, 2:22 am

Nicotine Facts
Seperating nicotine from smoking:


Nicotine Effects
A variety of ingredients in tobacco smoke cause cancer, heart disease, and lung disease. Nicotine is not one of them.

Nicotine is believed to be addictive because people have a great deal of difficulty giving up smoking. But there are major differences between nicotine and drugs such as alcohol, heroin, cocaine, and methamphetamines that people use to "get high. For one thing, nicotine does not cause intoxication. It does not impair judgement, motor skills, or the ability to get along with others. In fact, it improves these abilities.

Nicotine Benefits
Nicotine is being considered as a therapeutic agent to treat such conditions as attention deficit disorder, Alzheimer's Disease, Parkinson's Disease, Tourette syndrome, sleep apnea, obesity, ulcerative colitis, and inflammatory skin disorders. [1]
Nicotine has the following benefits:
Relieves depression [2]
Reduces anxiety [3]
Improves ability to concentrate and long term memory [4]
Protects against developing high blood pressure [5, 6]
Protects against weight gain [7]
Protects against developing Parkinson's Disease [8]
Nicotine Abstinence
Theoretically, the healthiest thing a smoker can do is to totally give up using nicotine in any form. But does reality conform to the theory?
The official list of nicotine withdrawal symptoms in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-IV) includes depressed mood, sleep disturbance, irritability, anxiety, difficulty concentrating, restlessness, decreased heart rate, and increased appetite or weight gain. These symptoms are supposed to peak within a day or so and disappear altogether after a couple of weeks. However, researchers have found that in some groups of quitters, symptoms do not dissipate and can, in fact, worsen as time goes on. [9]
The problems with concentration, memory, and mood make it difficult to fulfill responsibilities of daily living. How many employers are willing to overlook impaired job performance for weeks or months at a time? What effect does prolonged irritability that sometimes escalates into anger have on relationships with family, coworkers, and friends?
For many would-be abstainers, the Catch 22 is that some improvements in physical health???for example, better lung function???must be paid for with possibly permanent declines in cognitive and emotional health. Is it any wonder that so many relapse to smoking within a few days of quitting?
For those who do manage long-term nicotine abstinence, the picture is not 100% better in terms of physical health. For years the medical community claimed that smokers only gained 5 pounds after quitting. More recent studies reveal that the average weight gain is closer to 5 kilograms (11 pounds), accompanied by an average increase in waist circumference of 3.88 cm. [10] In 13 percent of women and 10 percent of men, weight gain exceeds 28 lb. The weight gained with smoking cessation is very resistant to weight loss interventions. [11]
Smokers who become nicotine abstinent develop hypertension at a higher rate than continuing smokers and those who are at risk for diabetes develop that disease 26% more often than continuing smokers. [12]
Conclusion
Those at risk of long-term cognitive and/or mood impairments, hypertension, and diabetes, should be allowed to pursue smoking cessation through permanent replacement of adequate amounts of nicotine using a reduced-harm smoking alternative. In view of the fact that alternatives that are reduced-harm to a smoker are totally without harm to general society, there is no compelling reason to deny reduced-harm alternatives to anyone who wants to take advantage of the beneficial effects of nicotine.
http://www.casaa.org/Nicotine_Effects.html
O & A
All about Nicotine (and Addiction)
[5.0] You keep talking about providing a less harmful source of nicotine. But isn't nicotine itself very bad for you? - No, it's not.
The effects of nicotine itself are similar to that other popular drug, caffeine. See our (nicotine reading list.) There is no evidence that nicotine causes any substantial risk for cancer, and the research shows that the risk for cardiovascular disease is minimal. The confusion about nicotine comes from anti-smoking activists talking about nicotine and smoking as if they were the same. While it is true that people smoke mostly because of nicotine; nicotine users die mostly because of the smoke.
Neither nicotine nor coffee are completely benign (in particular, both cause a short-term increase in your blood pressure and pulse rate when you use them, which could affect your health). A lot of evidence shows that coffee drinking causes very little health risk. Studying nicotine is a bit harder, because most nicotine users smoke, and the smoking is quite bad for you. But there is some good evidence: If nicotine were very bad for you then smokeless tobacco, which provides nicotine, would be very bad for you. As we've shown elsewhere, that is not the case.
Though nicotine is relatively safe for most individuals, it may have a negative effect on fetal development and as such should be avoided during pregnancy.
[5.1] But isn't nicotine addictive?
That question is a bit tricky to answer, since there is not actually a scientifically accepted definition of addiction. We know that some people try hard to give up nicotine and keep going back to it, which probably meets most people's definition of addiction. Indeed, that is a large part of why we think harm reduction is such an important idea. If everyone who used nicotine could just take it or leave it, then some anti-tobacco advocates' goal of getting everyone to just quit would not be so absurd.
Many people can take or leave it, so nicotine is clearly not a strong draw for some people. Many tobacco users have not had too much trouble quitting, and many others use it sometimes, but not regularly. Some of the researchers who produced this website use ST sometimes; we feel it is our professional responsibility to be familiar with the products we write and talk about but feel no urge to use it more often. It seems that some people get substantial benefits that keep them using nicotine, while others do not.
Some advocates seem to think that addiction is a terrible disease in itself (despite them not even having a good definition for it). If you are addicted to something, these people think you should give it up, even if it is doing you more good than harm. They apparently would have you suffer the pain of quitting, and possibly ongoing unpleasantness of wanting something you cannot have just because you are "addicted". We think this is absurd, and even downright cruel. We agree that when someone is obsessed with something and neglects the rest of their life, or is compelled to do something that hurts them, then helping them quit is a worthy goal. But when someone has a habit that is not hurting them much, then why should we make their lives miserable and insist that they give it up. Of course, smoking does hurt people a lot, but nicotine does not have to.
It is sad and frustrating that some people are so obsessed with ending addiction to nicotine, rather than reducing the heath impact of using nicotine, that they tell all tobacco users that they must quit entirely, and if they do not quit, they might as well smoke and die from it. In addition to insisting that people endure the unpleasantness of quitting, this has terrible health consequences. Since many people who try to quit smoking fail, this attitude dooms millions of people to die unnecessarily from their nicotine habit.
[5.2] Does nicotine have any benefits? - Yes, it does.
For quite a few people, nicotine provides the benefits that some people get from caffeine or Ritalin: it helps them focus and be more productive, overcoming attention-deficit-type problems. For some people, nicotine provides relief from stress, anxiety, or panic. For people suffering from some severe mental illnesses, nicotine seems to provide great relief, which probably explains why a very large fraction of psychiatric patients smoke.
Nicotine is also suspected as the reason for the lower incidence of Parkinson's Disease among smokers. And for those who have it, nicotine appears to reduce the associated symptoms. Unfortunately, because nicotine is so stigmatized, there is less information about it than we might want, so we do not have good scientific evidence on all of its possible benefits.
At the risk of being politically incorrect, we will state the obvious: Benefits are a good thing. Many people recognize that they get immediate psychological benefits from nicotine (anything from being able to focus in school to not feeling severe distress) and, not surprisingly, keep using it. Think about this: Most everyone in Western society tries nicotine sometime during their childhood or adolescence, but relatively few of them adopt it as a habit. Doesn't it make sense that those who kept using felt substantial benefits from it, while those who did not take it up did not?
One of us had a friend in graduate school who had forced himself to quit smoking because of the health risks. He believed that if anyone found a way to provide nicotine without large health risks, then everyone in school would use it. He thought that if they wanted to stay competitive, they would need the increased clear thinking and productivity that he experienced with nicotine. He did not know that there was, in fact, a way to get nicotine without a huge health risk (none of us did). More interestingly, he did not realize that most of us did not get the same benefit from nicotine that he did. He assumed everyone was like him. Tobacco policy seems to be made by people who have not experienced any benefits from tobacco, and assume that everyone is like them.
People who get the most benefit from smoking are the ones who are likely to keep smoking (be "addicted") despite high taxes, non-smoking buildings, and all the messages telling them to quit. So, by making smoking more and more unpleasant, while also trying to hide the fact that there are much safer sources of nicotine, anti-tobacco advocates are just hurting people who get relief from psychological difficulties by using nicotine. Laws against smoking in public places are often praised by anti-smoking advocates for making it easier for smokers to quit. But when you start pretending that smoking has no benefits, it becomes clear that making quitting "easier" really means making smokers' lives so unpleasant that the costs exceed the benefits, even when the benefits were high.
We can't know whether the benefits of using nicotine outweigh the costs of buying it, the effort that goes into using it, and the possible very small health costs, for any particular person. This is a decision that people must make for themselves, and should do so based on mature judgment, a full understanding of the true costs, and knowledge of their own personal benefits.
Advocates should keep in mind that some nicotine users are getting benefits that make them willing to accept the huge costs from smoking. The obvious humane response to this is to try to lower these costs, by providing a substitute for smoking. The opposite strategy, continually increasing the costs until they exceed the benefits, making people so miserable that they quit, is puritanical and cruel.
[5.3] But isn't nicotine...?
But isn't nicotine used as an insecticide? But isn't pure nicotine highly toxic? But isn't the nicotine in a pack of cigarettes a lethal dose? Yes, yes, and yes. But so what?
A lot of anti-nicotine advocates try to scare people by saying things that while scientifically accurate, are just designed to confuse. Tobacco plants produce nicotine as a natural insecticide, and this can be concentrated for use as an artificial insecticide. This should not come as a shock. Mmany of the chemicals in plants that we like are part of the plants' defense mechanisms. Pretty much every plant we eat or do anything else with contains natural insecticides. It just happens that this chemical, which sometimes poisons insects, also provides an effect that some people like.
It is also true that a drop of pure nicotine can be deadly, and that if you concentrated the nicotine from a pack of cigarettes (or a can of snuff, or a box of pharmaceutical nicotine products) and put it into your body all at once, it would likely be fatal. But, again, so what? Nicotine users are never exposed to pure nicotine and never take in that much all at once. If you took your typical day's worth of food and stuffed it in your mouth all at once, that would probably kill you too, even though it would be harmless if you took the usual time. This may seem like a silly analogy but it is no more silly than saying that a huge dose of nicotine, delivered all at once, would be deadly. Neither one says anything about the safety of normal use.
Keep in mind the saying from toxicology: "The dose makes the poison." Enough of anything, delivered fast enough, is deadly (including food or water). For many medicines you have on your shelf, ingesting the entire bottle at once would be deadly.
In any case, it is best to go back to the scientific evidence. Long term users of nicotine who do not smoke (ST users) suffer few ill effects from their habits, as we describe above. If nicotine were deadly, we would expect to see a lot of these people die prematurely. We do not see that.
[5.4] Does smokeless tobacco act as a "gateway", causing people to start smoking?
There is no real evidence that anyone who otherwise would not have smoked starts because of ST use. But to the extent that people do switch, the best thing we could do is make sure they have the facts. This is a case where the anti-tobacco literature actually encourages some people to smoke.
Some anti-smokeless-tobacco advocates have realized that they have no legitimate scientific basis for arguing that there are major health impacts associated with smokeless tobacco use. But instead of seeing that as a reason to devote their attention to more dangerous exposures, they just decided to search for other arguments. One such is the "gateway" hypothesis, that using ST leads people to later start smoking.
True or not, this claim is irrelevant to harm reduction, which is aimed at people who already smoke. It makes sense that many people who like to use one tobacco product will like to use another, in particular because they like nicotine. Many people do use one product and then switch to another. This does not mean that if the first product had not existed, they never would never have tried the second. Quite likely they would have tried the second product in the first place. The gateway argument assumes that some people never would have tried cigarettes were it not for ST, which seems improbable in a culture where cigarettes are so common.
In any case, if the gateway claim were true, we would have to eliminate smokeless tobacco entirely to keep it from happening, which would be a terrible option, leaving tobacco users without a good reduced-harm alternative.
Most important, if there is a gateway effect, the harm reduction message is actually the best way to deal with it. The dominant misinformation, that ST is about as unhealthy as smoking, tells ST users, "you might as well smoke". This irresponsible message translates to something along the lines of "if you use nicotine, and you like cigarettes more than ST, then go ahead and smoke". Many people try both products and settle on cigarettes. If people are going to use one product or the other, we'd rather they settle on the safer one, on ST.
Anti-tobacco advocates tend to treat tobacco users as if they are complete idiots, helpless children who cannot make a rational decision and need to be manipulated. We think otherwise. We think that many tobacco users will choose a product that is over 99% less harmful, as soon as someone can break through the propaganda and let them see their true options. Then "the gateway" will be an exit from, rather than an entrance to, smoking.
http://tobaccoharmreduction.org/faq/nicotine.htm
UFF DA!

User avatar
Macca
udonmap.com
Posts: 1057
Joined: May 30, 2011, 12:31 pm

E cigarettes

Post by Macca » June 4, 2014, 3:14 am

Jello wrote:
Macca wrote:The general consensus was they are equally addictive, harmful and users often increase the usage over time rather than decrease.
Cant find anything to back that up. I think some medical professionals don't actually look into it and fall back on the attitude that "it looks like smoking, so it must be smoking and therefore bad".

I'm not saying its healthy. Its harm reduction.

Some Doctors speak about e-cig's in these videos:
Cant find anything to back that up. I think some medical professionals don't actually look into it and fall back on the attitude that "it looks like smoking, so it must be smoking and therefore bad".

Perhaps the comments made by the various NHS members were just a reflection of the society we live in today.
Rather than say what they believe the best approach is to be defensive and therefore removed from future potential litigations.

My understanding was the NHS had planned to introduced e cigs in 2016 in the same way they currently provide patches, this plan has now been scrapped.

User avatar
pomps
udonmap.com
Posts: 1674
Joined: May 18, 2014, 6:38 pm

E cigarettes

Post by pomps » June 4, 2014, 11:21 pm

Jello wrote:
pomps wrote:Have airlines updated their announcements on aeroplanes to include no e cigarette smoking even in the toilets :-k

Do they trigger smoke alarms in houses quicker than a normal cigarette :-k

Are they allowed through x ray machines at airports :-k

Maybe tempted away from the cheap Thai cigarettes 8)

Not wanting to get hooked on those hookahs at Platinum for sure 8)
The FAA has no law banning e-cig's, so their legal. But almost every Airline has a no
e-cig use policy. I've taken e-cigs through x-ray security in Japan, Korea, Thailand and the US.
They would be a problem in UAE, Brazil, Singapore and Cambodia as they have all banned e-cig's.

As for smoke detectors it depends on the type of sensor, most now are designed with a laser sensor that will detect any substance which is denser than air. The particles in vapour will set them off.

Thanks for the updates/links 8) so some countries are being restrictive. no E cigs but buy the local cigs to support local businesses 8)

Jello
udonmap.com
Posts: 1450
Joined: February 15, 2010, 1:34 pm

E cigarettes

Post by Jello » June 6, 2014, 2:07 am

Doctors who support e-cigarette use.




UFF DA!

User avatar
jackspratt
udonmap.com
Posts: 16079
Joined: July 2, 2006, 5:29 pm

E cigarettes

Post by jackspratt » November 27, 2014, 8:28 pm

I suspect this debate has got a fair way to go.

In the meantime, those who take enjoy their e-cigs may wish to consider this as they vape away:
Tokyo (AFP) - E-cigarettes contain up to 10 times the level of cancer-causing agents in regular tobacco, Japanese scientists said Thursday, the latest blow to an invention once heralded as less harmful than smoking.

The electronic devices -- increasingly popular around the world, particularly among young people -- function by heating flavoured liquid, which often contains nicotine, into a vapour that is inhaled, much like traditional cigarettes but without the smoke.

Researchers commissioned by Japan's Health Ministry found carcinogens such as formaldehyde and acetaldehyde in vapour produced by several types of e-cigarette liquid, a health ministry official told AFP.

Formaldehyde -- a substance found in building materials and embalming fluids -- was present at much higher levels than carcinogens found in the smoke from regular cigarettes, the official said..........

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/world ... -research/
:shock:

Jello
udonmap.com
Posts: 1450
Joined: February 15, 2010, 1:34 pm

E cigarettes

Post by Jello » November 27, 2014, 9:55 pm

Amazing what passes for "journalism". :confused:
If your interested, here's a link to the actual Japanese research report. Completely misrepresented in the above news article. :
http://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/11/11/11192/htm

The conclusion of the report:
5. Conclusions Studies have shown that e-cigarettes emit toxic carbonyl compounds, generated from thermal decomposition. These substances can have adverse health effects; however, in most cases, the levels are lower than those in tobacco cigarette smoke. It is important to expand the research in this field, to better understand the source of carbonyls emitted from e-cigarettes and find ways to reduce them. - See more at: http://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/11/11/111 ... CgsEm.dpuf
A response from Dr Farsalinos can be found here:
http://www.ecigarette-research.com/web/ ... 188-frm-jp
UFF DA!

User avatar
Laan Yaa Mo
udonmap.com
Posts: 9185
Joined: February 7, 2007, 9:12 am
Location: ขอนแก่น

E cigarettes

Post by Laan Yaa Mo » November 27, 2014, 11:22 pm

It seems the best strategy would be not to indulge.
You only pass through this life once, you don't come back for an encore.

User avatar
fatbob
udonmap.com
Posts: 2266
Joined: July 14, 2009, 7:19 pm

E cigarettes

Post by fatbob » November 28, 2014, 7:07 am

Laan Yaa Mo wrote: by Laan Yaa Mo » November 27, 2014, 11:22 pm

It seems the best strategy would be not to indulge.

I know five people that used E-cigarettes to completely give up cigarettes, they used the E's for three to five months only, short term pain for long term gain!

User avatar
Macca
udonmap.com
Posts: 1057
Joined: May 30, 2011, 12:31 pm

E cigarettes

Post by Macca » November 28, 2014, 12:50 pm

coxo wrote:
Laan Yaa Mo wrote: by Laan Yaa Mo » November 27, 2014, 11:22 pm

It seems the best strategy would be not to indulge.

I know five people that used E-cigarettes to completely give up cigarettes, they used the E's for three to five months only, short term pain for long term gain!
They have proved to be a great assistance to a few friends who managed to finally stop smoking.
However, on the other side of the coin I know of 3 separate cases where kids have started on e-cigs before moving on to the real thing.
If they're going to produce so many wonderful flavours for the e-cigs then there is always the risk of attracting the wrong market.

kruklanki
udonmap.com
Posts: 32
Joined: February 21, 2013, 3:25 pm

E cigarettes

Post by kruklanki » December 12, 2014, 7:47 pm

I blow E cig vapour into the two smoke alarms in my house and it doesn't set either of them off. Probably because there's no smoke in it because there's no combustion - nothing is alight.
E cig juice contains vegetable glycerin and/or propylene glycol, both of which have been approved by the FDA, plus flavoring.
However, although these substances appear in beer, soft drinks, ice cream and a lot more foodstuffs they've been approved by the FDA for human consumption taken orally. They weren't approved with vaporizing in mind so who knows what they turn into when heated and vaporised? Jury's still out as far as I know. The one Japanese study hasn't been released yet, only commented on.

Jello
udonmap.com
Posts: 1450
Joined: February 15, 2010, 1:34 pm

E cigarettes

Post by Jello » January 8, 2015, 10:17 pm

Professor Peter Hajek, Director of Queen Mary University of London's Tobacco Dependence Research Unit, talks about his research on e-cigarettes.

I like his comments after the 1:00 mark where he describes e-cigarettes as a "disruptive technology", explaining why there are opponents to e-cigarettes.

UFF DA!

User avatar
rickfarang
udonmap.com
Posts: 2394
Joined: January 1, 2006, 6:01 am
Location: Udon Thani

E cigarettes

Post by rickfarang » January 9, 2015, 1:11 am

Just a couple of thoughts: If you move to e-cigarettets that might be your bridge to nicotine gum, which of course could be your bridge to freedom. Not that I've tried that route.

Jello
udonmap.com
Posts: 1450
Joined: February 15, 2010, 1:34 pm

E cigarettes

Post by Jello » January 9, 2015, 2:14 pm

rickfarang wrote:Just a couple of thoughts: If you move to e-cigarettets that might be your bridge to nicotine gum, which of course could be your bridge to freedom. Not that I've tried that route.
Wouldn't hurt to try! If your still smoking tobacco cigarettes and want to quit anything's worth trying.
I started with 24mg nicotine level in my e-cig and am now down to 6mg.
8)
UFF DA!

Post Reply

Return to “General Udon Thani Forum”