Electronic Cigarettes: New Route to Smoking Addiction for Adolescents

[onehandle]

Source: Science Daily

Nov. 26, 2013 — E-cigarettes have been widely promoted as a way for people to quit smoking conventional cigarettes. Now, in the first study of its kind, UC San Francisco researchers are reporting that, at the point in time they studied, youth using e-cigarettes were more likely to be trying to quit, but also were less likely to have stopped smoking and were smoking more, not less.

"We are witnessing the beginning of a new phase of the nicotine epidemic and a new route to nicotine addiction for kids," according to senior author Stanton A. Glantz, PhD, UCSF professor of medicine and director of the Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education at UCSF.

E-cigarettes are battery-powered devices that look like cigarettes and deliver an aerosol of nicotine and other chemicals. Promoted as safer alternatives to cigarettes and smoking cessation aids, e-cigarettes are rapidly gaining popularity among adults and youth in the United States and around the world. The devices are largely unregulated, with no effective controls on marketing them to minors.

In the UCSF study, the researchers assessed e-cigarette use among youth in Korea, where the devices are marketed much the way they are in the U.S. The study analyzed smoking among some 75,000 Korean youth. The study appears online in the current issue of the Journal of Adolescent Health. "Our paper raises serious concern about the effects of the Wild West marketing of e-cigarettes on youth," said Glantz.

Read more: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/11/131126092706.htm

---

Hook 'em while they're young. No wonder big tobacco is starting to invest in e-cigarettes. No Joe Camel advertising restrictions.

New big tobacco, same as the old big tobacco.

[OhioChick]

1. Why did you delete this thread about ecigs and start a new one here within minutes?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024095132

Just curious.

[onehandle]

3. Someone sent me a better story that worked for LBN. nt

[Capt. Obvious]

7. A better link?

These are two completely different stories.

[ChromeFoundry]

6. That one was not generating enough outrage...

so ... deletes the OP so no one can offer different views on the topic.

[OregonBlue]

16. I agree with you. Most of the posts on the former thread were not anti-ecig so we must try again.

[awoke_in_2003]

2. And a great way...

for people that have smoked for 30 years to finally kick the habit

[frazzled]

4. Adolescents are barred from buying them

You can't even visit a website that sells them without stating you are over 18 (though I'm aware they don't check that).

But this kind of study is worth about as much as saying adolescent drinking (which is rampant and extremely dangerous--moreso than nictotine addiction, imo) leads to alcoholism. It does. And kids aren't supposed to be getting alcohol.

On the other hand, e-cigarettes have helped innumerable adults to get off tobacco with extreme success rates.

[onehandle]

10. No they aren't. Laws are being considered in local governments, but there is no federal restriction.

That's the problem.
______

FDA should clamp down on e-cigarettes

Since there are no federal regulations against the product, prohibiting the sale of e-cigarettes to minors is not a federal mandate. While some states have banned selling e-cigarettes to minors, others have not followed suit.

While e-cigarettes do not contain tobacco, some still contain nicotine and the possibility of addiction for users at a young age.

Electronic cigarettes, unlike most traditional cigarettes, carry nicotine cartridges that attract users with flavors including chocolate or strawberry.

E-cigarettes also lack regulation. This means that the product could contain a slight or drastic difference in how much nicotine is actually in the cartridge.

http://www.dailytitan.com/2013/11/fda-should-clamp-down-on-e-cigarettes

[frazzled]

15. You can't buy them at Walgreen's or 7/11 without showing ID

Kids can get their hands on alcohol, drugs, and ... yes ... e-cigarettes.

Of the three, I guess if one of my kids were going to go bad, I'd definitely choose the e-cigarettes.

[azurnoir]

22. You can't buy them at local tobacco shops in my area without ID

and there are specific laws on the books in Minnesota too

[Comrade Grumpy]

31. Yeah, just what we need, another federal law. We don't have enough of those.

We do have state legislatures, you know.

[onehandle]

32. Dang You Revenuers! Git Off Mah Property!

States Rights! States Rights! States Rights!

[Comrade Grumpy]

34. Yeah, because federal alcohol prohibition and federal drug prohibition worked so well.

Oddly enough, the Obama administration seems to adhere to some version of states' rights when it comes to marijuana legalization and medical marijuana.

Also, I think it could be argued that our federal system is a bit out of whack when the Supreme Court rules that a California medical marijuana patient can't grow her own medicine because it would affect interstate commerce.

There used to be a saying: Don't make a federal case out of it.

[JimDandy]

33. So you're promoting state's rights over federal legislation?

[Comrade Grumpy]

35. As someone who has toiled in the fields of drug law reform, yeah.

It seems like the Obama administration is kind of doing that states' rights thing, too, when it comes to marijuana legalization and medical marijuana.

I understand that states' rights is historically tied to Southern racists, but there is a broader question of federalism and the balance between state and federal power here.

"It is one of the happy incidents of the federal system," Justice Louis D. Brandeis wrote in 1932, "that a single courageous state may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country."

[christx30]

18. And it doesn't matter what the laws say.

The reality of the situation is that teens are getting them. No, they're not supposed to, but they are. My brother started smoking at 14. He thought it was cool. And today at 36, he's still smoking. Kids are going to do what they want, law be damned. So more effort and laws need to be put in place to make cigarettes, alcohol, and e-cigarettes harder to get for teens.

[Scairp]

48. Kids are gonna smoke

Whether it's one of these "ecigs" or the real deal they will smoke, just like they have always smoked, and most kids start by swiping their parents smokes. My friends did. Of course when I was becoming a teenager and started smoking it wasn't illegal for kids to buy cigarettes. But it was never for me, it was completely a peer pressure thing and I never smoked after age 17. Unfortunately, my step-sister continues to smoke and I worry all the time she is going to have a stroke or a heart attack, or worst of all, a spot is found on her lung. The dark thought of losing her to the vile tobacco simply consumes me at times, and I always hope she will quit. I don't even bother to say anything anymore, unless it's a gentle mention of the different methods available to allow smokers to quit and there would be no need to go cold turkey. I'm still waiting and it's been 30 years. I would pray if I believed in that but I don't, so all I can do is cross my fingers she's going to be one of those people who smoke and still lives to be 95.

[pnwmom]

54. If e-cigs are increasing adolescent smoking rates, that's bad.

No matter what benefits they offer to adult nicotine addicts.

It's pretty clear with all their candy flavors that they're marketing this to youth, not just to adults trying to break their nicotine habits.

[TheKentuckian]

57. How would vaping increase smoking rates?

Adults buy the flavors, I mostly use fruit flavors, myself. It is best to divorce from smoking to eventually get away from the tobacco flavors, in my opinion.

[pnwmom]

58. Is that a serious question? Marketing anything can increase use.

The rate of cigarette smoking was dropping among young people. Now, according to the study, more are taking up e-cigs instead, another nicotine delivery system.

[TheKentuckian]

62. Vaping isn't smoking because there is no combustion and no smoke. Why would you prefer teens smoke?

Harm reduction is at play, same as adults.

[pnwmom]

64. I prefer teens not get addicted to nicotine in whatever delivery system,

whether tobacco cigarettes or e-cigs.

Why would you prefer teens get addicted to nicotine?

Teens till now were gradually reducing their consumption of nicotine products. Now they're increasing it again, thanks (or no thanks) to e-cigs.

[Tyhanna]

72. what you dont understand

we don't want them to get addicted to anything, but they will, kids will smoke no matter what we do, that's just how it is.

They like to do the things we don't what them to do and its up to the parents to make that difference not regulations and laws that will help all those millions of smokers out there get away from smoking.

Kids start smoking every day and look how many laws and regulations are in place. Just like the drink alcohol and have sex. Wouldn't it be better to have something that is 99% safer than smoking a cigarette out there for them if they so decide to smoke, so they don't get the mental addiction to the cigarette that last a life time.

I know this is really hard for you to understand. But kids will be kids and try to do adult things. They have all threw time.

[pnwmom]

78. Kids were consuming less nicotine. Now, thanks to e-cigs,

they're starting again to consume more.

Apparently this research is too difficult for you to understand.

[jayfish]

82. That's not what the US research says.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobsullum/2013/11/20/cdc-belatedly-reveals-that-smoking-by-teenagers-dropped-while-vaping-rose/
http://healthland.time.com/2012/08/09/teens-and-tobacco-use-why-declines-in-middle-and-high-school-students-stalled/

[pnwmom]

85. So we should just be hoping that study is right, and not the other one? n/t

[jayfish]

103. No, I tend To Trust Studies From The Culture In Which I Live. Like This One,,,

http://www.webmd.com/smoking-cessation/news/20131029/e-cigarettes-may-not-be-gateway-to-smoking-study

Researchers surveyed 1,300 college students about their tobacco and nicotine use. The average age of study participants was 19.

"We asked what the first tobacco product they ever tried was and what their current tobacco use looked like," said researcher Theodore Wagener, an assistant professor of general and community pediatrics at the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, in Oklahoma City.

Overall, 43 students said their first nicotine product was an e-cigarette. Of that group, only one person said they went on to smoke regular cigarettes. And the vast majority who started with e-cigarettes said they weren't currently using any nicotine or tobacco.

"It didn't seem as though it really proved to be a gateway to anything," said Wagener, who presented his findings at a meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research, in National Harbor, Md.

[brett_jv]

87. No, and in fact, you're apparently the one for whom 'the research' is too difficult to understand ..

Last edited Wed Nov 27, 2013, 06:28 PM - Edit history (1)

The simple observation that 'more' young people are using e-cigs DOES NOT MEAN that number of young people using nicotine, NOR that the 'amount' of nicotine they use, in NET, must be going up.

It's really quite a simple concept ... most vapers are either ex-smokers, or people who's nicotine use started with tobacco, and now use both. But even using both doesn't be definition mean they're using 'more nicotine' ... that's only true if they still smoke the same amount, but vape additionally on top of that. I don't know ANYONE like that, and I know DOZENS of vapers. The VAST majority of them are EX-SMOKERS. Period.

As such, you can't simply look at a number like 'more kids are vaping now vs. last year' and conclude with ANY certainty that 'more nicotine is being consumed by kids now vs. last year', nor that 'more kids are using nicotine vs. last year'.

I'm quite sure the number of users of 'small cigars' among youths has also been going up concurrently over the same time, but does this NECESSARILY mean 'kids are using nicotine', in and of itself? Of course not.

IMHO, this whole article (and even the research behind it) is nothing but a hit piece, conducted by researchers who have skin in the game when it comes to alarming the public to a 'new nicotine menace'. It also would not surprise me if Big Tobacco actually had a hand in it's production. The DON'T WANT PEOPLE VAPING, trust me ... vaping is their COMPETITION, not their 'product'.

AFA the flavor thing goes ... I'm a 47 y.o. person ... I keep at least three different flavors around, which one I vape depends on what I'm in the mood for. I primarily vape a peppermint flavor (a menthol equivalent, basically), but I also keep tanks around full of a Melon flavor, and another full of a Cinnamon 'Hot Tamale' flavor. Sometimes I vape 'Code Red Mountain Dew' flavor as well.

Like I said above, I buy from local entrepreneurs that create the juices based on DEMAND and the tastes of their customers (all of whom must show proof of being >18 yo). Thus, the idea that these 'sweet' flavors exist as some kind of conspiracy by Big Tobacco to 'hook kids' is friggin' HOGWASH. Adults like to be able to choose their flavors just like a younger person would. Given that 'tobacco' flavor e-juice really tastes NOTHING like an actual cigarette, AND that tobacco is really not especially an pleasant taste anyway, it's no wonder that people of ALL ages, given the opportunity, will choose a 'flavor' for their e-juice ... that is something they personally enjoy.

Also, unlike is the case w/fruity-flavored 'little cigars', when it comes to e-juice, the flavors available are not a 'cover-up' of something nasty like the taste of tobacco.

Posts like yours show a profound misunderstanding of what's ACTUALLY going on. Vaping is an ANTI-Big-Tobacco MOVEMENT, and nobody involved wants kids to pick up a nicotine addiction ... but if a kid already has one, they're probably about 1000x better off vaping than smoking, and eventually the science will be produced to show it. Mark my words.

[Tyhanna]

67. with that thinking....

With that thinking then kids should be using nicotine gum, lozenges because they come in fun flavors. Also how about all those alcohols that come in fun flavors to? Alcohol flavored chocolate (we know how much children love chocolate) Are these also marketed to the youth or are the youth trying to do adult only things, like they have been doing for years and years?
Its very clear to me that NRTs are marketed as a smoking cessation product to smokers. And its very clear to me that flavored alcohol is marketed to drinking age adults. So just because it has flavors doesn't mean its marketed to youth. That is a very weak argument.

The flavors play a huge part in braking the mental addiction to "the cigarette".

We are not trying to brake our nicotine habit... we are braking the life long mental addiction to the cigarette. Two different things. Nicotine is just a minor part of that addiction once you no longer are mentally addicted to the cigarette. It takes months and months to detox all the chemicals out of your body from the cigarette, one of the biggies is the MAOI that is in cigarettes.

At 11 months smoke free from using the e-cigarette I no longer crave the cigarette, and the physical addiction level to the nicotine is no worse than caffeine.

Look how many things are flavored and geared to the youth that has caffeine in it. There are more bad side effects from caffeine than nicotine.

[pnwmom]

71. OF COURSE those sweet alcohol drinks are marketed to young people.

And so are those alcohol drinks that combine alcohol and caffeine. Have you ever been on a college campus?

And nicotine is highly addictive -- more so than caffeine.

http://www.alcoholpolicymd.com/press_room/Press_releases/girlie_drinks_release.htm

CHICAGO – The American Medical Association (AMA) released the results of two nationwide polls today that reveal the extent of underage consumption and marketing exposure to “alcopops” or so-called “girlie drinks.” The AMA expressed concern that hard-liquor brands are using these sweet-flavored malt beverages as “gateway” beverages to attract less-experienced drinkers.

“We're alarmed and concerned with these findings,” said J. Edward Hill, president-elect of the AMA. “The percentage of girls who drink is on the rise faster than boys, and the average age of their first drink is now 13. These troubling trends make the aggressive marketing of so-called alcopops even more dangerous.”

The AMA said the poll results underscore the need for physicians to counsel young patients and parents of adolescent children on alcohol use, health risks and advocate for policies that protect underage youth from the marketing tactics of the alcohol industry. The polls were funded as part of the AMA's partnership with The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

SNIP

[Tyhanna]

74. They are for adults not children...

children are doing adult things. There are laws in place for alcohol, just like there are laws in place for tobacco but they still do it, whose fault is that? Shouldn't adults be able to have these things if they want them? When are we going to hold children accountable for what they do instead of punishing the adults?

[pnwmom]

76. They are directly targeting young people.

http://health.usnews.com/health-news/blogs/on-parenting/2010/11/23/four-loko-may-be-gone-but-dangerous-alcohol-drinks-remain

The FDA's ban on caffeinated alcohol has been a long time brewing, but an incident in October, when nine students at Central Washington University ended up at the hospital after drinking Four Loko, might have pushed the FDA to act. The drink had 12 percent alcohol in each 23.5-ounce can; by the ounce, that's three times the amount as in a typical beer, and the alcohol equivalent of four glasses of wine. The drink comes in flavors like lemonade and watermelon. So it's no wonder that someone could down several and find himself in serious trouble.

"We're seeing a disturbing trend, in which marketers are targeting these younger drinkers," says Daniel Z. Lieberman, professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at George Washington University, in Washington, D.C. "They're doing it with high sugar content. They're doing it with flavors that appeal to young drinkers—fruit punch, raspberry, peach—and they're doing it by making [the drinks] inexpensive."

This isn't the first time that a drink that seems designed for binge drinking has been marketed to young people. The alcohol industry has a long and ignoble history of marketing soda pop-like alcohol drinks that appeal to teens and tweens because they mask the taste of alcohol. Adding caffeine is just the latest wrinkle, inspired by the huge success of Red Bull and other caffeine-laden energy drinks.

Unfortunately, adding caffeine to alcohol doesn't cancel out the ill effects of drinking too much: A caffeinated drunk is just as stupid, and arguably more dangerous, as a drowsy drunk. Students who drank caffeine with alcohol could still react quickly, but they made just as many errors as regular drunks, according to a study from the University of Kentucky. Researchers at Wake Forest University in Winston-Salem, N.C., found that students who mixed caffeine and alcohol were more likely to get injured, get in a car with a drunk driver, or be involved in nonconsensual sex.

[Driving Drowsy as Bad as Driving Drunk]

The campaign against caffeinated alcohol was launched in 2007 by state attorneys general, who are in charge of enforcing state alcohol laws. "We're really concerned about all these products," Jessica Maurer, special assistant to Steve Rowe, Maine's attorney general, told me then. "We think they are potentially dangerous, particularly at a time when every state is seeing incredible binge drinking rates among our youth. Products that promise the ability to keep you up all night so you can party longer [send] absolutely the wrong message."

[brett_jv]

91. Ah, now I see the issue(s) ...

You mistake the 'what (some people, with apparent authority) SAY is the case' with 'what has been factually proven to be the case'.

Furthermore, you extrapolate what you THINK are the motivations of 'Big Booze' ... and PROJECT that ASSUMPTION ... onto the actions of small, local businesspeople who produce various flavors of nicotine-containing (and non-nicotine-containing) e-juices based on what their ADULT customers would like to vape.

And then you mistake what is actually a fallacy-laden syllogism ... for an 'accurate reflection of reality'.

Engaging in such reasoning is not uncommon. In fact, people who, say, consume a lot of Faux News ... pretty much do the same thing all day long

[pnwmom]

109. What I have noticed is that nicotine addicts are extremely adept

at rationalizing, even to the point of pretending that all the purveyors of e-cigs are "small, local businesspeople" with only their best interests at heart.

[Tyhanna]

114. Really ??

There are thousands and thousands small business that have popped up selling e-cigs, both online and B&M. And yes most of them have the person best interest at heart and want to help people stop smoking. Just because you know nothing about it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

[pnwmom]

115. You're working with outdated information. Big tobacco is taking over.

http://blogs.wsj.com/corporate-intelligence/2013/11/18/big-tobacco-begins-its-takeover-of-the-e-cigarette-market/

Lorillard Inc.LO -0.44%, the No. 3 U.S. tobacco player and maker of Newport cigarettes, acquired the blu e-cigarette brand last year and has spent heavily to boost blu’s distribution and marketing. Blu is now the clear national leader, ahead of other major e-cigarette brands such as NJOY, Logic, Fin and Mistic that aren’t owned by a major manufacturer of traditional cigarettes.

Now comes news from Colorado, where Reynolds American Inc.RAI -0.28%, the No. 2 U.S. tobacco player and maker of Camel cigarettes, launched its Vuse e-cigarette in stores in July.

The early returns? Vuse has built a 55.6% retail market share in the state over the last 16 weeks, leaving blu (25.5%) and NJOY (7.3%) in the dust, Reynolds said at an investor conference Monday, citing tobacco industry tracker Management Science Associates.

SNIP

[Tyhanna]

116. but thats not all there is....

There is a whole other market in e-cigs that don't look like cigarettes. And there is a huge market in e-juice and many other things. Those markets above are the market on the Look-a-likes.
People may start with look-a-likes but move on to better batteries and filling their own cartomizers.

There are a few advanced manufactures here in the US but most of them are in China, high end Advanced devises can cost upwards of 300.00 to 500.00. There is a manufacture in Korea also for mechanical mods.

So really you don't know what you are talking about. There is much more than you could ever know. You only know what you read in news sources.


www.myvaporstore.com

check it out there are thousands of places just like this.

[pnwmom]

117. And you think big tobacco will stay away from any product that might be profitable?

If the market shifts to non-cigarette-appearing nicotine dispensers, then Big Tobacco will follow.

Glad you're acknowledging that the big manufacturers are in Asia. They're not the little local businesses you were mentioning earlier.

[Tyhanna]

119. again

again you don't understand any of this, why do you try to argue any of it..

Local business making e-juice are here in the US.
Small business that are vendors that have the factories in China stamp their trademark on them.
We don't on the most part buy our stuff directly from China we go threw a vendor here in US hence small business.
Different models than what big tobacco make and sell.

These different models have been out for a while I don't see big tobacco making them at all.

I don't see you getting all upset about NRTs that is the same nicotine in them. And they have fun flavors.

[Tyhanna]

75. do you really believe...

adults don't like fun flavors when they grow up? If so then you better not be eating anything from a bakery, candy store, or flavored coffee.

I know for a fact nicotine is has the same addiction level as caffeine, I live it. I feel it. And unless you know up close and personal you wouldn't know. You just believe and know what is feed to you.

[pnwmom]

77. Research, as opposed to your personal experience,

shows that nicotine is more quickly and more highly addictive than caffeine.

[jayfish]

80. There Are No Research Results On The Addictive Properties Of Nicotine...

that are not derived from the combustion of tobacco. They should all be classified as smoking addiction studies, not nicotine addiction studies. Truth is, we know more about the addictive properties of caffeine than we do nicotine.

[pnwmom]

84. Nicotine is so highly addictive because of its chemical makeup,

entirely aside from its combustion in tobacco. It interferes with the brain's dopamine pathways.

http://whyquit.com/pr/041210.html

Smoking nicotine is extremely addictive. An alarming 26% of youth report signs of loss of control over continued smoking after just 3 to 4 cigarettes, rising to 44% after 5 to 9 cigarettes. There's growing consensus among addiction experts that nicotine dependency is as permanent as alcoholism, that it hijacks the same brain dopamine pathways as illegal drugs, and that successfully arresting nicotine dependency is as hard or harder than quitting heroin.

Dr. Volkow's 1999 brain imaging study showed smoked nicotine's amazingly quick arrival time, its stimulation of dopamine pathways, and how cigarette smoke diminishes MAO (a killjoy enzyme), making smoked nicotine possibly the most perfectly designed drug of addiction. Not only does nicotine stimulate dopamine release within ten seconds of a puff, suppression of MAO and normal dopamine clean-up allows it to linger far longer than a natural release, such as occurs when eating food or quenching thirst.

More recently, scientists have documented how nicotine physically alters the brain. Nicotine activates, saturates and desensitizes dopamine pathway receptors, which is followed by growth or activation of millions of extra receptors, a process known as up-regulation. One cigarette per day, then two, then three, the longer nicotine is smoked, the more receptors become saturated and desensitized, the more grown, and the more nicotine needed to satisfy resulting "want" for replenishment.

SNIP

Successful recovery isn't about strength or weakness. It's about a mental disorder where by chance and happenstance dopamine pathway receptors have eight times greater attraction to nicotine than the receptor's own neurotransmitter, where just one puff and up to 50% of those receptors become occupied by nicotine.

[brett_jv]

88. Lets just say, okay, it's highly addictive.

Where's the evidence that a nicotine addiction, aside from the cost of maintaining it ... is harmful to a person?

Opioids provide a rather perfect illustration of the concept here.

Let me start by saying that, regardless of whatever 'addictiveness' studies come out, I'm here to tell ya that kicking nicotine is absolute childs-play compared to kicking real 'dope' aka opioids, once you're addicted.

The ONLY reason that kicking cigs is even remotely as difficult as kicking dope as a practical matter is because the product is cheap, very readily-available, and far more socially accepted ... than opioids. If cigs were as tough to get as dope, and as expensive, and looked down upon in the same way ... the success rate for "getting clean, followed by life-long abstention" for nicotine addicts would be far higher than that for opioid addicts. There is NO WAY that, objectively, nicotine is 'more addictive' than opioids. Any study that purports that it is ... is hype. Believe me, I KNOW.

This said, I've done a great deal of research on the topic of opioid addiction, and the health effects thereof, and you know what? Research shows that aside from causing a lower sex-drive due to opioids messing with your endocrine system a little bit (while you're addicted, not permanently), along w/constipation ... opioids are basically harmless to your body. They cause no known disease (aside from addiction), cause no organ damage ... in short, as long as you don't overdose, or use dirty needles, or inject 'bad cut', you could consume pharma-grade opioids everyday the rest of your life and there's ZERO evidence that your lifespan would be shortened by even a single day.

I bring this up because ANY studies that exist out there concerning the 'addictiveness' and 'harm' from nicotine are entirely based on the 'smoking tobacco' method of administration, and tobacco smoke is CHOCK FULL of other chemicals aside from nicotine, some of which may also be addictive, and many are likely much 'worse for you' than the nicotine is. Burning tobacco also contains tar and all manner of carcinogens.

The fact is, there's no evidence out there that nicotine addiction (absent a TOBACCO habit) in and of itself involves any health concern, just like there isn't for caffeine addiction, nor for opioid addiction. It's entirely possible that vaping the rest of one's life is no worse for them than staying on a nicotine patch or sucking nicotine lozenges the rest of their life. There's no 'evidence' to the contrary, put it that way.

Addiction is 'bad' to be sure. Nobody wants to be dependent on a chemical. However, for people who ARE addicts ... the smart thing to look at is 'harm reduction'. Vaping involves a MASSIVE harm reduction at work, just like methadone (or Subs) does for people who are out there shooting 'street' dope with dirty needles. You go from a situation that WILL eventually kill you ... vs a scenario where there's ZERO 'known harm' ... it's then just an addiction to deal with. INFINITELY better from a public health perspective.

To work for, or worse yet, to lobby for, restrictions of 'harm reduction' techniques/technology, simply because you don't 'like' addiction, and wanna make a judgement call about something you just think is 'bad' and 'should be stopped'? I'm sorry, but to me ... that's evil.

[jayfish]

90. You Just Helped Prove My Point.

The story you linked is about "smoking nicotine". It's the first two words in your excerpt. That's why nicotine replacement therapy products like gum and the patch, strongly, recommend an accompanying cessation program. The nicotine, alone, isn't the problem.

[Mosby]

99. cigs have freebase nicotine

e-cigs and nicotine replacement therapies use the liquid form which is way less addictive. Once a smoker breaks the freebase habit it's relatively easy to stop using nicotine altogether.

Professor James Pankow, who led the study reported in the journal Chemical Research in Toxicology, said: "During smoking, only the freebase form can [evaporate] from a particle into the air in the respiratory tract. Gaseous nicotine is known to deposit super-quickly in the lungs. From there, it's transported rapidly to the brain.

"Since scientists have shown that a drug becomes more addictive when it is delivered to the brain more rapidly, freebase nicotine levels in cigarette smoke are thus at the heart of the controversy regarding the tobacco industry's use of additives such as ammonia and urea."

A 1997 study led by Professor Pankow linked ammonia additives in tobacco with increased freebase nicotine levels in cigarettes. Separate measurements were made of the first three puffs and about eight subsequent puffs. In many cases, the freebase content was higher in the first puffs. Marlboro, for instance, had a freebase nicotine level of 9.6 per cent in the first three puffs and 2.7 per cent in later puffs.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/freebase-nicotine--why-some-some-cigarettes-may-be-more-addictive-588248.html

The Secret of Marlboro's Success: Freebase Nicotine
http://www.prwatch.org/spin/2008/06/7479/secret-marlboros-success-freebase-nicotine

[Tyhanna]

93. read this

http://www.medicaldaily.com/study-says-smokers-are-not-addicted-nicotine-231158



my experience mirrors what professionals are finding out in research.

[Capt. Obvious]

5. Much healthier than candy cigarettes

Good.

[Tikki]

8. Someone said that the e cigarettes are about the nicotine delivery…I thought they had no nicotine..

honestly..WOW..I thought it was all just sweet smells and candy flavored kisses.

I just don't get it.

Tikki

[snooper2]

11. it's an option

[Tikki]

25. Wouldn't nicotine gum be less intrusive around others than e-cigarettes?

I have to believe some feel like they are making a statement with a projectile dangling from their lip..


Tikki

[snooper2]

28. you don't hang e-cigs off your lip LOL, you take a puff, stick it back in your pocket

Any good one is about as thick as four pencils LOL

[Tikki]

44. Well, I know you don't inhale..I've been schooled on that…so you puff like with a dandelion..

..that would still spread some of whatever you are puffing into the air…

Not a good idea around others that might not want to share that experience.


Tikki

[beevul]

60. Nicotine gum doesnt work. N/T

[Electric Monk]

65. Worked for me when I was quitting smoking. You're wrong again. nt

[Tyhanna]

68. Only for about no more than 20-30% of the population does it work.

let me ask you do you ever get a craving for a cigarette?

I don't now after 11 months with e-cigarettes.

I get no cravings, no trigger cravings at all. That feeling you get is totally gone 100%.

Its very liberating, and I can stand with smokers and not crave either.

[beevul]

123. Can we all safely assume that youd call a seat belt that works 20-30 percent of the time...

Cited the exception and misrepresented it as if it was the rule - that's what you did.


Can we all safely assume that youd call a seat belt that works 20-30 percent of the time "working"...because it "worked for you"?


I wasn't wrong about anything, because generally speaking (that is - for the majority of people that try it) nicotine gum does not work .

[Electric Monk]

124. Saying "nicotine gum does not work" is an absolute statement. I provided an exception, proving

that your absolute statement was wrong. All it takes is one exception to prove an absolute statement like that to be wrong.

[beevul]

125. Fine. I'm 70-80 percent right.

You are 70-80 percent wrong.

I'm sure nobody will notice.

[Electric Monk]

126. I never said it worked everytime. I said it worked for me. You continue to fail. nt

[Tyhanna]

131. interesting ..

its interesting you didn't answer my questions from above, I would really like to know if you still have cravings for the cigarette after using the gum to quit. And are you still using the gum?

[Electric Monk]

132. I still have some gum, and haven't used it in over a year, and I'm fine. Occasional cravings pass.nt

[Tyhanna]

133. not possible

99% are to heavy to hold dangling from your lip. They are not smoked like you would a cigarette. You take a vape and set it down.
With a cigarette you smoke it till its gone, with a ecig you vape it when you get a craving to drive threw the craving, in this it trains your brain away from the cigarette. Its so different really.

[unblock]

17. i prefer to think of it as a money delivery system for the tobacco companies.

talk about addicts, they've got it all.

the lying, the anger, the denial, claiming they've changed their ways when it's all just window dressing,....

[fbc]

45. it's actually the opposite

It helps existing smokers to buy products that are not made by big tobacco or to quit entirely.

[unblock]

52. where does the nicotine come from?

[politicat]

59. Laboratory nicotine is made from tomato or eggplant plants.

It's cheaper to use farm waste, and extraction from nightshades is no more expensive. Tobacco has been bred for qualities that pertain to the smoked or chewed experience (flavor, moisture) that are undesirable for lab work -- it costs more to refine out the polysaccharides associated with flavor. Eggplant and tomato plants have less nicotine per gram of plant material than tobacco plants, but they don't have any of the undesirable qualities.

[Tyhanna]

69. well.........

It comes from any of the many night shade plants.
Tobacco is just the easiest to extract it from. Nicotine is a by product of tobacco, it doesn't make it tobacco, just like its a by product of tomatoes, eggplant, potatoes, red peppers, but if you extract the nicotine from the it doesn't make it a potato, tomato, or eggplant.

[fbc]

122. Mostly China

Pure nicotine is extremely inexpensive and can be extracted from nicotine producing plants. Most of it is probably extracted from tobacco, but since it is so inexpensive, there isn't a lot of profit there.

Make no mistake, Big Tobacco can not offset lost profits from e-cigarettes, or from people who quit thanks to e-cigarettes, by selling pharmaceutical grade nicotine.

[Tyhanna]

63. hum addiction is a funny thing...

A person can be addicted to many things, sugar, caffeine, adrenalin, sex, gambling, and many many other things. I enjoy my nicotine from the e-cigarette. I can enjoy the effects of nicotine with out all the nasty health problems that burning tobacco causes. Just like a person can sit down and enjoy a glass of wine, glass of beer, or that 5:00 cocktail.

When people give up all other addictions out there I will consider giving up my nicotine.


For the first time in 40 years I do not crave "the cigarette". I have not craved a cigarette in over 6 months now. By that I mean my mental addiction to "the cigarette" is gone, that is the part of the addiction that makes you crave for the rest of your life normally, the e-cigarette has removed that. Yes I still have that physical addiction to nicotine but that is no worse than the addiction level of caffeine, I am smoke free now almost 11 months.

Nicotine has the same addiction level as caffeine when by its self with out the burning tobacco.

People have no problem giving their children caffeine, and it has worse and more side effects than nicotine.

Everyone is addicted to something.

[Amimnoch]

20. They come in different forms.

There are brands that have no nicotine at all.
The brands that also offer ones with nicotine usually have several different mg delivery cartridges.

Here in Canada, the ones that are nicotine free (just flavored and/or scented water vapor) can be bought over the counter by any age.

I don't know the legality (probably varies by province), but all the ones that I'd seen that have nicotine are controlled, and have to be 18 to purchase.

As a personal testimate, I'd tried to quit smoking using the nicotine patches.. other than a rash, they did nothing for me.
I tried to quite using the gum. Didn't help at all.
Using E-cigs did help me quit, and I've now been off for almost 2 years. I'd started out with the high dosage ones for about 9 days, then went to the mid dosage for a couple weeks, then went to he low dosage for a couple days (yeah I know, I probably shouldn't have bothered), then went to the no dosage cartridges for about a month.. then just stopped.

Because I do sometimes still get thre craving, even all this time later, I keep an E-cig in my pocket. Other than the occaisonal puff when i'm out drinking with friends (especially ones who do still smoke), it rarely gets used.. lol and a couple of times I went to use it, the battery was dead it had been so long since I last tried to use it.

[Tikki]

27. There are cigarette smokers like that, too.

Every so often…Still need to smoke outside of a business or away from public places.

So there is an element of the hand to mouth back and forth thing for some…not just the nicotine.


Tikki

[Amimnoch]

41. I don't think I could do that.

i've a feeling if I just took one puff off of one cigarette, I'd probably be back to 1.5 pack's a day within a week. I envy people that have quit, and can do the occaisonal 1 cigarette and quit again.

[Comrade Grumpy]

30. E-cigs are a much healthier alternative for tobacco smokers.

I think they are great as a smoking cessation device. Users still get the nicotine they are addicted to, but without all the nasty health consequences of inhaled smoke.

Not so great as nicotine initiation devices for teenagers.

I don't understand why they would have e-cigs without the nicotine. What's the point?

[Tikki]

39. I don't understand vaporing e cigarettes…why not feed a nicotine habit with gum or a lozenge?

That way no one would know a person was a nicotine addict.

Tikki

[Comrade Grumpy]

40. Because it is more than nicotine addiction; it is a set of behaviors.

It's the whole hand-to-mouth, oral activity thing. Vaping more effectively mimics the whole set of smoking behaviors than does chewing gum or sucking on a lozenge.

There was an earlier generation of smoking substitution/nicotine delivery devices that let you suck a tube, but no smoke came out! Smokers want that smoke, even if it's not really smoke, but just looks like it. And feels like it. They put something in those vapes to tickle your throat so it feels kind of like you're inhaling smoke, too.

I've tried the gum, I've tried the earlier generation devices. They didn't cut it. I'm still smoking, but now I'm using the vaporizer sometimes. I hope to eventually make the switch 100%.

[Amimnoch]

42. Exactly! I found the gum and patches useless.

E cigs helped ween me off of the nicotine addiction, but let me "feel" like I was still smoking. Made it much easier.

[Tikki]

107. That I understand..when I quit smoking 11 years ago…I put on weight right away…then I started losing

when I found handy crafts to work on.
That hand to mouth thing is definitely a part of smoking.


Tikki

[jayfish]

106. Why Not Feed A Caffeine Habit With NoDoze Or 5-hour Energy Instead of Coffee. -NT-

[Capt. Obvious]

9. Korea has a serious underage smoking problem!

Then there's this:

In the UCSF study, the researchers report that four out of five Korean adolescent e-cigarette users are "dual" smokers who use both tobacco and e-cigarettes.

They most likely started on the e-cig as their gateway drug.

[OregonBlue]

12. Most likely started on regular cigarettes and switched to ecigs since they are much, much cheaper.

[d_r]

14. or they smoked cigs and started e-cigs

there is no time element here to talk about causation.
It isn't surprising to me that a kid who likes nicotine will get it in different ways. There also are kids that smoke and dip. Which one is the gateway? It also is not surprising to me that kids who smoke more use more e-cigs. Its the whole correlation ne causation thing.

[Capt. Obvious]

19. But that would undermine the OP

Can't be right

[d_r]

23. oh, got it

[OregonBlue]

13. I believe all states have regulations regarding the sale of ecigs to minors that are identical to

regular cigarettes. Is there a state that does not?

[onehandle]

21. Only nine states.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_cigarette#State_regulation

[OregonBlue]

38. I did not know that. Since most ejuice contains nicotine, it should be regulated. Minors should not

be allowed to purchase nicotine products. That's very different in my mind from adults being able to purchase nicotine. I switched to an ecig years ago. I started with 30mg nicotine and I am now down to 6 mg. The next step is 0 mg. I will still vape even when I reach 0 because when I have quit smoking, I always need something to do with my hands, etc. For me at least, much of the addiction is the act of smoking as much as the nicotine. The ecig has been a blessing for me.

I can walk up hills, climb stairs, run, etc., things that 40 years of tobacco smoking had made much more difficult. My clothes don't smell. I had quit smoking in my home since I have my grandchildren living with me but I still had nasty ashtrays outside. It has really reduced my nicotine intake and my lungs are completely clear. I feel better and have more energy. I vape less and less each day. So, while some people may believe they are evil, for me at least they have been a lifesaver.

[dipsydoodle]

24. Not LBN

Article, which is simply a re-report, uses source material dated yesterday - 25th November in Journal of Adolescent Health.

[Capt. Obvious]

26. She'll have to start a 3rd anti e-cig thread

[AtheistCrusader]

29. Yeah, keep ignoring the harvard study to bang that drum.

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/centers-institutes/population-development/files/article.jphp.pdf

[ForgoTheConsequence]

36. What if it's an Apple iCig?

....

[OrwellwasRight]

110. Good one!

I guess everyone else is too serious about this argument.

[PATRICK]

37. Wild West Marketing and the FDA

or any other US regulatory agency. What has been going on a long time keeps coming up a incredible harm and fraud with a perfect correlation to dysfunctional oversight. A fatal combination of the old plodding, complex paperwork with hobbled follow through has allowed- off the top of my head- a dangerous child's Tylenol poisonous dosage problem to linger on an on and on, a potentially dangerous, unproven(by standards) DNA testing kit(now with a cease and desist order, if that really happens) after five years of raking in profits.

From every angle of how the FDA has been set up and fiddled with the reporting can always villainize the FDA, have to report how the companies TRY to comply. I don't here any enthusiasm for actually delving into anyone for accountability. Its all caveat emptor now I should think with people even more in danger presuming everyone is doing their job as advertised. Five years of fraud which people plan their whole lives upon. Decades of mislabeled dosages. Addiction in a new market product sold as a cure. Legally they can claim they were trying- minimally- to work with the system.

The horror show is much larger and more systemic than just a few products I fear. They hardly even have to game the system as they rush to market while the agencies plod behind understaffed and overwhelmed by their own paper. So systemic it provides adequate cover that this is a deliberate intended result? The bureaucratic problems predate what you might suspect, but it certainly hasn't appeared to get any better.

[Demit]

49. Fascinating.

[obama2terms]

43. A lot of kids are using e cigarettes these days

A good friend of mine teaches English in a high school, and she tells me she catches at least 3 kids everyday with these things, and last year there was no issue with them. Weird...

[brett_jv]

51. Bet any amount of money they started smoking before they started vaping ...

Probably some of them no longer smoke and only vape, or at least smoke much less since beginning vaping.

IOW, this could well be a very positive sign, what this friend is seeing.

Keep in mind ... aside from nicotine addiction, there's no known harm involved with vaping.

Also, I highly doubt that a single teacher is 'catching at least 3 NEW kids every single day with e-cigs'.

[obama2terms]

55. I think these are better than cigarettes too

They won't even allow 18 year old students to have them on campus which to me is ridiculous, punishing a student for something so minor. I worded that wrong. It's a huge school with over 2,000 students so teachers not just that one, do catch multiple kids each day with these things. I'm sure there are repeat "offenders" but quite a lot of students have these.

[jayfish]

73. Do They Test The E-liquid For Nicotine Content?

Last edited Wed Nov 27, 2013, 08:47 PM - Edit history (1)

If folks don't exhale visible vapor all over the place, I don't see this any differently than drinking a soda through a straw. Are they confiscating soft drinks because they contain caffeine? How about energy drinks? What is the justification for the confiscations?

[jberryhill]

79. Because you can't smell them

These aren't kids who started on ecigs.

These are kids who were already smoking and found a surreptitious way to do it in school.

[obama2terms]

118. Yeah

I'd bet money kids are puffing on them in class. My nephew just bought one today ironically and his just smells like vanilla. You would think someone sprayed a tiny bit of perfume in the room hahaha, you'd never know they were smoking. I wonder how this will effect smoking bans?

[Xithras]

46. What if I want to vape my medical marijuana? Or my legal marijuana in Colorado?

A vaporizer pen is just a machine that delivers water vapor with "something" inside of it. That something can be anything from caffeine (yes, they actually sell it for them), to nicotine to marijuana (using THC oil).

Pen vaporizers aren't just about "big tobacco".

[frustrated_lefty]

47. Then explain the CDC report?

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6245a2.htm?s_cid=mm6245a2_w

It basically shows that cigarette use is declining among adolescents while electronic cigarette use is growing.

It's convenient to portray the electronic cigarette as tobacco, but it simply isn't the case. If they're helping teens stop smoking or preventing them from starting, good. Moralizing puritans be damned.

[Tyhanna]

70. this will help explain

http://www.ecigadvanced.com/blog/cdc-director-doesnt-understand-his-own-organizations-e-cig-research/

[brett_jv]

50. What a bunch of bullcrap hype ... the article, and some of the responses here too, sadly ...

Last edited Tue Nov 26, 2013, 09:47 PM - Edit history (1)

1) Sure, they're 'gaining popularity' ... BUT IT'S AMONG EX-SMOKERS!!! I don't know a single person (nor have I ever even HEARD of a person) who wasn't previously (or still) a cigarette smoker ... who uses any type of e-cig. There's NO evidence that 'kids' are getting 'hooked' on nicotine via this supposed massive 'promotion' of 'e-cigs'. That's PIFFLE. I was led to them by seeing someone using a personal vaporizer in a bar, who I asked, who then turned me on to a local shop that sells the gear. I'd never seen an 'ad' for an e-cig in my life at that time. Since then I've seen magazine ads for the mainstream 'cigarette form factor' units, but that's all. And those cig-like things are a joke ... Nobody uses those things once they find out about refillable/rechargeable personal vaporizers.

2) Nobody officially promotes e-cigs as a 'safe alternative' to smoking, nor as a 'smoking cessation' device. I mean, other than people who actually use them and tell others about them based on their belief and own their experiences ... that being that once they switched, like 95% of the negative effects of tobacco smoking ... disappeared for them. Many even have stories about how amazed their doctors are with the lung recovery since quitting cigs and doing e-cigs only. The official line is that it's simply a smoking alternative. That's ALL they're marketed as.

3) I believe that most, if not all, states have regulations against selling these products to minors. There's NO reason to believe it's any 'less effective' than the regulations for tobacco. The store I buy from 'cards', I've seen 'em do it. However, nearly everyone I see in the shop is 30's and above. Any states that don't have regs against minors buying nicotine in this form ... they will soon, I'm sure of it. And I for 1 would support it wholeheartedly.

4) These products are 'promoted' SO MUCH less than deadly tobacco it's barely even worth talking about the effects of the 'marketing'.

5) The majority of money being made from vaping in the USA is being made by small businesses selling batteries and tanks from Asia, and locally-created e-juice. The store I buy from is owned/run by a bunch of just-over-college-age local entrepreneurs that make and market their own e-juice (it's like 4 ingredients ... nicotine, propylene glycol (used in pharmaceutical inhalers, like for asthma!), vegetable glycerin, and food-grade flavorings) and sell imported batteries and tanks. This is basically how nearly all serious vapers acquire their gear ... either from local shops, or online shops based in their own country or even state/city. This business is NOT in ANY WAY ... 'BIG TOBACCO' in action. This being said, the nicotine in these products is derived from tobacco (pharma-grade nicotine), so I'm sure that some tobacco growers of various 'sizes' are making money off e-cigs, its just through supplying raw materials.

6) Most importantly ... there's no evidence that e-cigs are even harmful to the person using them, let alone to 'bystanders' (nor is there really any logical reason to believe they'll ever be found to be even a tiny % as harmful as actual tobacco smoking to either party). Sure, if someone blew their vapor right into your face, you'd likely inhale a very tiny amount of nicotine, but there's no evidence the concentration/level that would enter your lungs would have ANY effect on you.

Lemme tell ya something ... there's four of us at my office here that were pack-a-day smokers, between the ages of 30 and 60. Between us, we'd smoked about 40 years (the 60 yo), 16 years (me), 10 years (the 30 yo) and 18 years (the 36 yo). All of us wanted to quit, tried to quit, but had been unable to.

Together, at my behest, back in early June, we went to the Vape shop I found about from that person at the bar, and we all bought the gear and juice, etc. Within 2 weeks, we'd ALL successfully quit smoking and now vape only. Well, TBH, one of us *very* occasionally smokes cigs (the one of us who goes to bars and really hangs out w/smokers regularly ... like maybe 15 cigs total in 6 months), none of us have bought a pack, and 3 of us have NOT smoked AT ALL.

So, you tell me ... what other smoking cessation aid have you heard of wherein it's statistically likely that if 4 people used it, ALL 4 would end up quitting, for (at least) 6 months? There's nothing else EVEN CLOSE.

Bottom-line, this technology is almost certainly saving lives ... personally I'm an ex-smoker, now vaper ... and I can't possibly tell you how much better I feel about it. It's better than smoking in EVERY imaginable way, I feel WAY healthier, have no breathing/coughing problems like I used to (two of like 20 benefits I could list for you) ... and that I'm NOT lining big tobacco's pocket is a big part of my enjoyment of it.

Big Tobacco (BT) does NOT LIKE the technology that most of us vapers use, I promise you that, and are not 'behind' the tech, nor the vaping movement (yes, vaping is legitimately a 'movement' at this point). They can try to sell their stupid e-cig things in the gas stations, but nobody will stick w/those, and BT will never make significant money off them. They are basically CUT OUT (unless they make pharma-grade nicotine from their tobacco) of the process, and MILLIONS will quit their deadly tobacco products and start vaping over the coming decades. Due to vaping, BT will SUFFER, not PROFIT, mark my words.

So please, when you come across these types of articles, try to keep what I (and various others here) are telling you. BT is trying to quash this technology UNLESS you buy their version of the tech.

Next wave of articles you can expect to see all kinds of nonsense hyping the dangers of 'foreign made vaporizer tanks and batteries' and 'witches-brew e-juices made from who knows what!!!11!!!' ... IOW glossy articles trying to convince you that if you're going to use e-cigs, you better use the big-name-brand 'cig-like' disposable (EXPENSIVE, BT-related) garbage units sold in gas stations, if you wanna be 'safe'.

[TheKentuckian]

56. Lil quibble, my supplier says the nicotine is extracted from eggplant and tomato leaves

As those are much cheaper than tobacco. They do use tobacco extract for some but not all tobacco flavors.

Terrific breakdown, by the way.

[brett_jv]

83. I've read an article that strongly suggests (i.e. unequivocally) that such suppliers ... are lying.

It argued that the agricultural value of tomatoes and eggplants vs. their nicotine concentration is far too high for anyone producing these crops to decide to use them as a source for nicotine rather than selling them as tomatoes and eggplants.

The math I saw in the article worked out where it'd be something like 20x more expensive to produce nicotine via tomatoes vs. tobacco (given that tomatoes are easily alternatively sold as foodstuffs), and that thus, there's 0% chance said product could 'compete' with nicotine derived from tobacco in the marketplace.

And hence, that the probability that such a claim about the nicotine source (in the e-juice you're buying) is actually true ... is next to nil.

Conveniently for the 'industry', however, the fact that nicotine can be derived from plants that are NOT tobacco ... lends credence to the concept that e-juice should not be regulated as a 'tobacco product', since tobacco is not technically 'required' to produce any component of the product.

FWIW, that's what I read.

[TheKentuckian]

134. The article is running on a faulty assumption since the fruit isn't what is used but the leaves and

The rest of the plant, which has little other commercial use so precious little expense making, some producers may be happy at haul it away which keeps them from dealing with refuse for them. Even if they compost, there is only so much they need.

A ton of this refuse could be equal to the nicotine in a pound of tobacco and still might be cheaper for a manufacturer depending on how processing works.

[Tyhanna]

135. I tend to believe..

I tend to believe what you are saying to be true.

Right now 99.9% of nicotine is coming from china, we send them the tobacco and they extract the nicotine, then its sent back to the US where its purified. J&J Global is the company that heads this. This would be the same nicotine that is used in NRTs, its also sold to wholesaler labs. The federal laws are very stringent on the labs and purity of nicotine. The nicotine gets tested all the time and the labs get inspected. There will be an extraction plant here in US pretty soon in one of the Carolinas.
Its just way to expensive to extract nicotine from vegetables right now. They hold much less nicotine than tobacco does, eggplant being the next in amount to tobacco.

One would have to use green tomatoes cause ripe tomatoes don't hold as much nicotine. And there are some federal laws having to do with nicotine and how its done and sold. Personally if they said they had vegetable based nicotine, Id run the other way.

So if a vendor is saying they are using nicotine from vegetables I would seriously question them about it.

[Politicalboi]

53. Pedal cars

We'll get them while they are young.

<a href="http://imgur.com/36yHTxv"><img src="" title="Hosted by imgur.com"/></a>

[jayfish]

61. I'll Tell You What.

Last edited Wed Nov 27, 2013, 08:25 PM - Edit history (1)

Hook 'em while they're young. No wonder big tobacco is starting to invest in e-cigarettes. No Joe Camel advertising restrictions.

As it stands right now, big tobacco cannot compete in this market. If you and people like you keep up this ignorant crusade against electronic cigarettes, however, the only players left in the game will be big-tobacco and big-pharma. Your efforts will not result in a ban. The best you can hope to achieve is regulation. Once said regulations are in place, BT and BP will be the only entities with the wherewithal to comply with them. After the white-box and mom & pop vendors are out of the way, BT will ratchet up prices until e-cigarettes stop selling and become unprofitable to produce. Then we'll be back to cigarettes, NRT that doesn't work, and prescription drugs that fuel suicide and violence. If you're fine with contributing to 6-million smoking related deaths per year then, by all means, keep up this crusade. If you're not fine with that then I beg you to lay-down your sword and shield and READ MORE! ...from all sources. I know you will dismiss these links out of hand but I'm posting them anyway.

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs339/en/
http://www.palgrave-journals.com/jphp/journal/v32/n1/full/jphp201041a.html
http://publichealth.drexel.edu/~/media/Files/publichealth/ms08.pdf
http://tinyurl.com/o393nca
http://ecigarette-research.com/web/

YOU ARE PLAYING INTO THE TOBACCO AND PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES HANDS!

[brett_jv]

92. [phone]

People are woe-fully misinformed and reactionary when it comes to topic.

In reality, Big Tobacco is trying to crush the vaping movement, which is ALL ABOUT helping people take charge in weaning themselves from BT's wildly profitable and poisonous products.

Listen to us, friends: The pressure to regulate these products comes FROM BIG TOBACCO (and misguided public officials), and you folks on here lobbying for 'more controls' and bemoaning the fact that more people (and ZOMG TEH KIDZZZ!!!!11!!!) are vaping ... ARE PLAYING RIGHT INTO THEIR HANDS.

And YES, it's true that the nicotine comes from tobacco (I consider the claims upthread that the nicotine in e-juice is coming from 'other nightshades' to be ... at best questionable ... but I'm open to 'proof' ... but BT makes WAY less money producing pharma-grade nicotine than it does selling cigs, cigars, cigarillos, etc, plus vaping is easier to eventually quit than actual tobacco products, since you're dealing with only one chemical (nicotine).

Lastly, not ALL tobacco growers producing tobacco for nicotine-creation purposes are 'part' of Big Tobacco.

[Tyhanna]

66. ANTZ abound....

Dr. Glantz is a huge #1 ANTZ, he will do anything he can to make all products having to do with tobacco go away including lie.
What hes not saying is how many people the e-cigarette (including teens) has helped to get off cigarettes, burning tobacco being the thing that cause all the health problems in people, not the nicotine.

Where I don't think teens should start up using e-cigarettes that have never smoked, those that do smoke need to quit or find a safer alternative to smoking if there going to do it. Teens have been smoking since cigarettes started hundreds and hundreds of years ago. I don't think that is going to change and even with all the regulation and laws teens are still smoking. Just like they drink alcohol and have sex. People should look at what caffeine does to children, people have no problem giving kids caffeine all the time.

With that being said they have found that nicotine with out the burning tobacco is not addictive to those that have never smoked. These were the people they used the patch for other medical problems.

The CDC study didn't show all the numbers, and didn't tell you that they never ask one of the most important questions having to do with addiction, "daily use" ( or at least they didn't show the numbers) and they didn't show how many of those teens were smokers already before using the e-cigarette.

"Dr. Thomas Frieden is the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Recently the organization released alarming numbers claiming the electronic cigarette trial among teens from 2011 to 2012 had doubled. This alone is a somewhat misleading statistic, but Frieden sat down with health news site Medscape for an interview and showed just how misleading he could make this figure......"
http://www.ecigadvanced.com/blog/cdc-director-doesnt-understand-his-own-organizations-e-cig-research/

Seems there is always two sides to a story, but most will not look at both sides and fall into what ever side they like.


What it comes down to is loss of money to all the organizations that make money from Smoking cessation. The government, states, cities, counties all make money from people that smoke. ALA, ACS and the many others all get money from Big Pharma to push NRTs programs. So they will do anything they can to keep the money coming in including lie when they need to. The deep dark sick secret is they really don't want cigarettes to go away 100% and they see the e-cigarettes could make this happen. They also see that because there is no harm from e-cigs they wont have the ability to tax them like they did cigarettes.

There are more companies out there that make and sell e-cigarettes and e-juice, and all the parts that have nothing to do with Big Tobacco companies. Right now there are only 3 e-cigs made by BT, where there are hundreds of companies selling different kinds of e-cigs.

There are estimated 4 million using e-cigs in the US, and 10 million in other countries right now. Not one person has died in the 10 years e-cigs have been used from direct use of them. That is 14 million people world wide getting healthier every day they don't smoke. I thought that is what everyone wanted. E-cigs are targeted to those that just cant stop smoking, that have tried everything and nothing has worked. OR for those that want a safer alternative to smoking.

[elehhhhna]

81. baloney

[Warpy]

86. Then again, getting hooked on candy flavored nicotine

will probably make them react with utter disgust to the real thing when they finally get a fake ID and can buy them.

Teenagers are going to try most things forbidden to them. Anything is better than having them get hooked on sucking concentrated smoke into their lungs.

The nicotine will still screw up their cardiovascular systems and age their skin. However, they won't be gumming up their lungs with tar and particulates.

[bitchkitty]

94. Carbon monoxide will screw up their system,

and the tar and particulates from drawing burning vegetable matter into their lungs. I believe that nicotine in small doses is relatively harmless. I could be wrong; it's just something I heard.

[Tyhanna]

96. nicotine doesn't....

nicotine doesn't do anything to the cardiovascular system or age skin..... Its the 4000+ toxins in burning tobacco that does that. Nicotine by its self doesn't cause any real problems to the body. They have been using it on people with other medical problems for a while now.

They have been using the nicotine as the scape goat for everything that burning tobacco does to you.

The old analogy that nicotine turns your fingers brown was not from the nicotine but from the tar. So many fallacies have been put with nicotine to demonize tobacco.

[Warpy]

98. Actually, it does, thanks to its dramatic effect on smooth muscle

and that is the muscle that lines your arteries. That's why smokers' hands get cold while they are smoking and for about 15 minutes after they stop. It's also why smokers have so many more heart attacks: a tiny clot that might just pass through is an artery blocker when that artery contracts due to nicotine. Skin ages prematurely because of the reduced blood supply.

Check out the pharmacology instead of folk "wisdom" some day.

[jayfish]

101. Does this pharmacology distinguish between nicotine from combusted...

tobacco and the other thousands of chemicals in a burned cigarette? Don't bother to answer because I already know the answer. Philip Morris and BT must love people like you love you! I'll bet they never imagined, in their wildest dreams, they would be able to use negative research against them to save their business. Keep up the good work! Oh, and your condescension is so sweet. You must be a scientist yourself, no?

[Warpy]

108. I see. You'd rather insult people than look it up.

Must be just peachy to be you.

[jayfish]

112. "Check out the pharmacology instead of folk "wisdom" some day."

Nope, not insulting AT ALL. I don't need to look it up because it doesn't exist.

[Tyhanna]

113. its not the nicotine that does that its the other chemicals in cigarettes

they are finding nicotine many help forming new blood vessels, they have research on going right now.


and as far as the skin its the burning tobacco that causes skin problems, since ive stopped smoking my skin is getting better and im not having the problem with the cold feet and hands like I use to.

[Warpy]

120. Do you honestly think medical science has missed studying pure nicotine?

Good gawd.

[jayfish]

121. By Golly, I Found Some. And The Results Don't Look Good For The ANTZ

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21617206

The combination of alterated gene expressions and strongly inhibited DNA synthesis was only detected in cells exposed to smoke extract. In the presence and absence of ethanol, pure nicotine and Snus extract induced abnormalities in the cytoplasm without any significant degree of cell death. With similar doses of nicotine and ethanol, the additional components in smoke extract had a dominant effect. The smoke extract induced vast cellular abnormalities and massive cell death.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8614291

The rats breathed in a chamber with nicotine at a concentration giving twice the plasma concentration found in heavy smokers. Nicotine was given for 20 h a day, five days a week during a two-year period. We could not find any increase in mortality, in atherosclerosis or frequency of tumors in these rats compared with controls.[/b Particularly, there was no microscopic or macroscopic lung tumors nor any increase in pulmonary neuroendocrine cells. Throughout the study, however, the body weight of the nicotine exposed rats was reduced as compared with controls. In conclusion, our study does not indicate any harmful effect of nicotine when given in its pure form by inhalation.

http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/20031012195753data_trunc_sys.shtml

"These findings don't mean people should smoke," warns neuroscientist Michael Kuhar of Emory University. "Any benefits from the nicotine in cigarettes or other tobacco products are far outweighed by the proven harm of using those products. But pure nicotine-like compounds as medications do show promise for treating human disorders."

http://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/opinions_layman/tobacco/en/l-2/4.htm

Nicotine has a range of actions in the body and the mechanisms of addiction are still poorly understood. Individual responses to nicotine vary widely. Addiction to nicotine is difficult to measure directly, and experimental studies usually involve set-ups in which animals can self-administer the drug. Such animal studies indicate that pure nicotine is only weakly addictive. There is little human data on pure nicotine use. However, dependence is strongly linked to the number of cigarettes smoked per day.

Moreover, data on human drug use indicate that the addictive potential of tobacco is very high. More than 30 per cent of those who have ever used tobacco become dependent, a higher figure than for other drugs of dependence such as heroin, cocaine or alcohol.

Even with that that data available on the positive or negative of pure nicotine is thin.

[brett_jv]

97. Not even sure it's proven that nicotine alone will do those things ...

Be curious though if you have links to studies showing the harm to the CV system from nicotine alone w/o the 'tobacco smoke' components?

But you bring up decent point ... This last go-round, I was a smoker for 13 years (after having quit for about 15 years ... following having smoked from ages 14-18). I really enjoyed smokes. Liked the taste and smell and everything (not the smell on my fingers though). I took up vaping early last June. I immediately dropped from 20 'analogs' to 5 in ONE DAY, after 13 years of a pack a day.

Over the next two weeks, I steadily dropped my cig consumption to 1 a day the last couple days. Since then, I vape only. However, I got stuck away from home (cancelled flight) on a trip a couple weeks back, and ran out of juice, so I had to bum a cigarette from someone at the hotel first thing in the AM ... my first analog in 6 months.

And I'm here to tell ya ... words cannot describe how ABSOLUTELY DISGUSTING that cigarette was to me. I had like 3 hits, and then went to the front desk to find out where the nearest gas station was. I then walked a mile to get myself one of the disposable 'e-cig' thingies to tide me over til I got home. I've had NO more tobacco, and only became MORE convinced that I'll never go back to smoking from the experience. That is, of course, unless they ban vaping entirely, or jack the cost up so that it costs 3x as much.

What does this suggest to us about how that person who got 'started' on e-cigs (still seen 0 evidence there is even a SINGLE such person IN THE WORLD, but lets say there were) would react to actually smoking a 'real' cig for the first time? I mean, I LIKED cigs before ... someone who's never had one EVER, but got started with vaping? I would bet you some would end up puking ... in any case, they'd almost certainly quickly put it down in disgust, and never have another.

I don't need 'studies' from these hacks who ask only the 'questions' that will 'prove' the conclusions they're predisposed to presenting to the public ... they ain't gonna convince me that what I see and hear and feel every day isn't true.

Aside from keeping minors from buying the nicotine, the 'government' just needs to keep their dirty hands OFF the vaping movement. It's going to save millions of lives, and will cost NONE.

[Tyhanna]

95. There is plenty of research out there right now n/t

[brett_jv]

100. I'd never say 'no' to 'more research' being produced ...

As long as it's scientifically and statistically sound research performed by people w/no ulterior motive other than discovering the true facts.

Although we know the basic components are all relatively harmless when used in the ways we've traditionally used them, the fact is, there's no long history of people using the vaping products and e-juices.

We might suppose there's no harm in inhaling a propylene glycol/glycerine aerosol that contains nicotine and food-grade flavorings, simply because we know that each is fairly safe when used alone, but there are such things as 'chemical reactions' when you mix up chemicals and heat them and turn them to an aerosol.

The more we know about just how safe vaping is (or is not), both for ourselves and the people we vape around, the more sound our decision-making regarding the subject can be.

[brett_jv]

102. CDC Withholding/Twisting Facts: Vaping is increasing, but Smoking is DECREASING in Youth ...

A must-read for anyone interested in the truth:

[link:http://reason.com/blog/2013/11/20/cdc-belatedly-reveals-that-smoking-by-te|
http://reason.com/blog/2013/11/20/cdc-belatedly-reveals-that-smoking-by-te]

CDC Belatedly Reveals That Smoking by Teenagers Dropped While Vaping Rose

Jacob Sullum|Nov. 20, 2013 2:41 pm

Last September the CDC noted with alarm that the percentage of teenagers who had tried electronic cigarettes doubled between 2011 and 2012. "Many teens who start with e-cigarettes may be condemned to struggling with a lifelong addiction to nicotine and conventional cigarettes," CDC Director Tom Frieden worried. In a Medscape interview a few weeks later, Frieden suggested that fear had already materialized, asserting that "many kids are starting out with e-cigarettes and then going on to smoke conventional cigarettes."

Yet the CDC's data, which came from the 2012 National Youth Tobacco Survey (NYTS), did not support that claim. In fact, nine out of 10 high school students who reported vaping in the previous month were already cigarette smokers, suggesting that the increase in e-cigarette consumption might signal successful harm reduction. Last week the CDC reported additional NYTS data that further undermine Frieden's claim, showing that smoking among teenagers fell as vaping rose.

And there's another new study out done among college students that show staggeringly little evidence of the 'gateway' hypothesis hyped by the ANTZ:

http://reason.com/blog/2013/10/30/study-suggest-e-cigarettes-are-not-a-gat

In a survey of 1,300 college students, a team led by Theodore Wagener, an assistant professor of general and community pediatrics at the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, found that only 43 (3.3 percent) said e-cigarettes were the first form of nicotine they'd tried. Of those 43, only one (1) person later started smoking conventional cigarettes. "It didn't seem as though it really proved to be a gateway to anything," said Wagener, who described his results at a meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research.

[jayfish]

104. More: E-Cigarettes May Not Be Gateway to Smoking: Study

http://www.webmd.com/smoking-cessation/news/20131029/e-cigarettes-may-not-be-gateway-to-smoking-study

Researchers surveyed 1,300 college students about their tobacco and nicotine use. The average age of study participants was 19.

"We asked what the first tobacco product they ever tried was and what their current tobacco use looked like," said researcher Theodore Wagener, an assistant professor of general and community pediatrics at the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, in Oklahoma City.

Overall, 43 students said their first nicotine product was an e-cigarette. Of that group, only one person said they went on to smoke regular cigarettes. And the vast majority who started with e-cigarettes said they weren't currently using any nicotine or tobacco.

"It didn't seem as though it really proved to be a gateway to anything," said Wagener, who presented his findings at a meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research, in National Harbor, Md.

[Trajan]

105. Society is under NO moral imperative to protect members from benign substances ...

Hot air, on the other hand, has no place in this glorious forum ...

[OrwellwasRight]

111. This demonizing of cigarette alternatives

a) takes attention away from real harms (you know, wars, unfair taxes, austerity, the war on the poor, etc.); and
b) empowers Big Tobacco.

I'm over it.

[Nika]

127. Nicotine will always be about greed and exploitation.

These drug delivery devices eventually will be used to service other drugs besides this highly addictive poison. They should be outlawed.

[jayfish]

128. Another Ignorant Comment From Someone Who Has No Idea of What They Are Talking About -NT-

[Nika]

129. No successful, cheap and easy drug delivery system has ever been overlooked

by people trying to make money on drug sales. If you think this will forever just be used to poison people with nicotine, it is you who needs to get a clue.

I indeed know what I am talking about. I have never been addicted to this toxin, but I see how marketable and attractive a product this is to way too many people. It will be used to do more than to service tobacco addicts. I have full faith this will become a reality.

I firmly believe this delivery system for drugs should be controlled, even if it's Pandora box has most definitely been opened. I know well this is no simple answer to this problem, but it will be easier to control this system now then it will be to do so once other, more profitable drugs become delivered to potential customers in the future.

[jayfish]

130. No, You Don't Know What You Are Talking About and Further More,...

this is starting to get old. You ANTZ people should either post some data or keep your uninformed opinion to yourselfs. I've posted study, after study, after study on this subject. ...reams of information. You know what I get in return? ...crickets. So, in words similar to another ignorant poster on the subject; check out the data instead of folk "wisdom" some day.

[Tyhanna]

136. hum how about..

How about all those NRTs that the Big Pharma are making. Same nicotine that is in e-cigarettes.

The only toxin is when you burn tobacco, then you get 4000+ different toxins.
Ecigs have none of these toxins and are 99% safer than smoking a cigarette.

In the small quantity's that we are using in our ecigs nicotine is not toxic. It doesn't cause cancer. Does not cause any heart or lung problems.


You should really do some reading. Then come back and know what your talking about.

Nicotine right now is being used for many different medical problems. Ulcerative colitis, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's.

There is research right now on nicotine and ADD, Bipolar and other syndromes that effect the brain.

They have found that nicotine adds new neurotransmitters to the brain.

They are finding that nicotine adds new blood vessels and is being researched right now.

They are finding that nicotine just like caffeine helps with focus, and memory, but nicotine does it better.

High school and collage students have been using the patches, gum and lozenges for years now to enhance memory and focus in school. They are finding that a person that never smoked and uses any of the NRTs don't get addicted to the nicotine.

Im going to burst your bubble right now....in the states that dry herb is legal they are using devices that are some what like the e-cigarette but are a bit different. They are legal in those states and are handed out. The dry herb oil crowd have been using this kind of devise for years and years, where its a bit different it still may look the same to an untrained eye.

I can link all kinds of studies, information if need be but I wont because im sure you wont look at them and I wont waste my time.

[Nika]

137. I know what I am talking about.

The only thing I will grant is I have a huge animosity toward tobacco use. I grew up in a time where my Mother -- now dead of cancer would chain smoke in a sealed air conditioned car torturing us kids. A big problem is E cigs do not stop people from smoking. Nicotine is addictive. That makes an E cig user without access at a moment someone who will light up to smoke tobacco, and an addict.

And I was also noting the deliver system in E cigs as an adaptable means for the delivery of other drugs. If it makes other drugs more accessible and easy to use, it will eventually be a means used to do so.

I have seen an argument where a smoker did not like the offer of a puff of vapor and continued to insist her boyfriend get a pack of smokes. And I have a fiend who was curious and got addicted to nicotine and now will smoke tobacco if they don't have access to their preferred way to do this addictive drug.

This is something that adds to the smoking problem, it does not help reduce it. It will also eventually be a twist to how other drugs are used.

[Tyhanna]

138. So...

So NRTs are ok? The nicotine inhaler, gum, lozenges, patches. Same nicotine as in e-cigarettes.

To bad your Mother didn't have something like an e-cigarette to get her away from smoking.

Everyone I talk to that use a e-cigarette ( that is a lot in the vaping community) no longer smoke because of the e-cigarette. Ive read hundreds and hundreds of stories from people that their out come is the same as mine, There are those that have been using e-cigs for 4-5 years and haven't smoked in that time at all.

Yes nicotine is addictive, so is caffeine and it has lots more side effects than nicotine does when its by its self. But by its self away from burning tobacco its not that addictive about the same as caffeine. Its all the chemicals in tobacco that makes the nicotine much more addictive when burned, like the MAOI that is in tobacco.

For every time someone doesn't light up a cigarette and uses a e-cigarette they are not taking in 4000+ toxins.

E-cigarettes don't do everything you still have to work threw the cravings for "the cigarette", the mental addiction is the worse part of the addiction. The physical addiction to nicotine is the minor part. E-cigarettes help the person retrain the brain away from cigarettes and it will remove that mental addiction totally in time.

Im 11 months smoke free December 2nd. I have no cravings or triggered cravings what so ever. That in its self is amazing. And im just one of thousands that have had the same experience.

You should be happy there is something out there that helps people that nothing else worked.

BTW an apple and tinfoil can be used to smoke drugs if the person really wants it. So do we ban apples and tinfoil?

[brett_jv]

139. Your logic/thinking here is flawed, in nearly every conceivable way ... IMHO ...

Last edited Tue Dec 3, 2013, 07:47 PM - Edit history (3)

You have one good point. The fact that 'it would better if there were NO nicotine addicts' is a good (albeit irrelevant, ultimately) one ... yeah, it WOULD be 'better' if there were no nicotine addicts.

HOWEVER, the fact is ... there ARE. Many millions of people, poisoning themselves with TOBACCO use. However, there are also growing numbers of such people who've UNsuccessfully tried quitting smoking through EVERY other possible means ... who are finally having success thru taking up Vaping. Myself, and 3 other such long-term smokers at my office, took it up 6 months ago (over 60 collective years of smoking between us) and ALL are now ex-smokers, and vaping only. Nothing else had worked for any of us, and believe me, we've all tried.

Now, we may eventually find that 'vaping' is not 'really not good for you', but it's nearly inconceivable to me that it will be eventually be proven to be even a tiny fraction of a % as damaging to a person ... as smoking tobacco. No study has ever come out that even remotely suggests that it is, that much I know for sure. So, we're talking about a harm reduction strategy here, and it's going to end up SAVING many, many more lives than it eventually COSTS in terms of the tiny, tiny fraction of people who start out on e-cigs, but end up dependent on tobacco the rest of their lives (and not able to return to vaping for some reason ...)

How can any reasonable, caring person be AGAINST that?

A perfect analogy here is the concept of a methadone clinic for opioid addicts. People get involved with one and they very often go from lives of utter desperation and crime, shooting up dope of unknown strength and purity, often using dirty needles ... to (in MANY cases) living productive lives, managing their addiction through a much less dangerous, legal alternative. It's called "Harm Reduction". And it is a GOOD THING. Pharmaceutical Opioid addiction ... will not, in and of itself, ever kill someone (assuming pure dope, i.e. not like Vicodin). And similarly, we don't have any reason (yet) to believe pure nicotine addiction will do so either.

Now, to address one of your apparent 'points', neither switching to methadone nor vaping PREVENTS someone from using their 'drug of choice' (i.e. heroin or cigarettes), but yet still, MANY people end up free from the 'life' they were previously leading, using *only* the 'legal' opioids they get from the clinic or doctor from then on. Should we get rid of methadone treatment because it doesn't *prevent* people from using their DoC? Your 'argument' would seem to suggest we should.

I shared my experience upthread about 'running out' of e-juice due to a flight cancellation, forcing me to have my first cig in 6 months. I'll reiterate ... I put the cigarette out in utter disgust after three drags, and walked a mile to find a vendor who sold a 'look-a-like', and that was weeks ago, I've not touched another real cigarette since. Does the *harm-reduction* involved in the fact that I had 3 puffs of tobacco in 6 months instead of the 1 PACK A DAY that I would have otherwise smoked ... completely escape you? I literally cannot stand cigarettes anymore, and want nothing to do with them & the vast majority of vapers I know feel the same way.

To address another 'point' of yours, using the same analogy ... there's many opioid addicts out there that would tell their fellow addict "No, I don't want your methadone, I want to shoot my HEROIN!". Methadone doesn't really get one high, not like shooting smack. In a similar vein, someone who's actively addicted to actual cigarettes will actually not find an e-cig completely 'satisfying'. It's simply 'not as good', just like methadone isn't as 'good' as heroin. It took me two weeks to 'wean' off real cigs and onto e-cigs alone, because vaping alone wouldn't give me full relief from w/d symptoms at first. Reason being, there's far more than one addictive chemical involved with cigarette smoking. Took some time to wean myself off of those other chems.

But ... does the fact that an 'active' junkie would prefer heroin to methadone logically indicate that we should get rid of methadone treatment? Because that's the 'point' you appear to be making with your bringing up the 'argument' between the woman and her boyfriend, you're just making it with re: tobacco vs. e-cigs instead. And once it's spelled out that way, how much 'sense' does it make, as an argument?

Bottom-line, is your attitude about Methadone treatment the same as it is about e-cigs? Should we TAKE AWAY these demonstrably life-saving treatment systems for addicts that are otherwise unable to 'quit' completely, close the clinics, and throw the addicts back onto the streets to fend for themselves? Shall we MAKE THEM QUIT ... OR DIE!!?!!

Because, logically, according to your thinking, 'addiction' to something is SO BAD that you think these must be bad, evil people, that got addicted in the first place, and therefore apparently it's best to PUNISH them, to let them die by forcing them back onto the drug form that will actually kill them. Is that your attitude about these programs? Because for all intents and purposes, e-cigs are a near perfect analogy with methadone.

By the way, don't think I have I mentioned anywhere on this thread yet ... My 'nicotine' bill since I quit smoking and started vaping has gone from $7/day ... MUCH of that pure profit for Big Tobacco ... to $1 (ONE) a day. I don't care if Phillip Morris is growing the tobacco used for every drop of nicotine I'm consuming, there is NO way they're making anywhere near as much $$$ off me as they were before.

I'm telling you right now, and mark my words ... unless Big Tobacco 'has their way' and gets massive 'tobacco-like' regulations and taxes put in place (thus likely making big, deep-pocketed businesses the only ones who will have the financial might to compete in the marketplace), eventually vaping (not with look-a-likes, but the kind that uses vaporizers and refillable cartomizers/e-juice) is going to put many of them right the hell out of business.

And another thing I guarantee will happen is that once some solid research really comes in, it will be conclusively discovered that Vaping is only a TINY fraction as dangerous as smoking tobacco, and Doctors (even the SG of the USA I'm betting) will begin universally recommending that their patients that are unable to quit outright ... Vape instead. You watch.

Lastly, your 'argument' about pen vaporizers being used for other drugs is silly and basically 'off-topic'. It's grasping at straws, really. Do these devices allow illegal drugs to be consumed that could otherwise NOT be consumed, due to a lack of an administration method? OF COURSE NOT. Apples, pens, aluminum foil, aluminum cans, plastic bottles, brass tubing, rubber tubing, straws, dollar bills, razor blades ... literally hundreds of products can be used in some sense to 'do drugs with'. Should we ban them all (or heavily regulate them), cause then nobody will do drugs anymore? Come on ... nobody, ever, in the history of the world ... didn't do a drug because they didn't have a pen vaporizer to do it with, or in fact a lack of ANYthing. Except maybe a syringe. So ... does your argument against pen vaporizers also extend to clean needle programs? Are you vehemently against those as well? Cause if not, then you're a hypocrite. Just sayin'