You make several legitimate points. Nicotine is, like many other additctive substances, something that affects the health of a body. It should be avoided by children and pregnant women, just like sugar, caffeine, alcohol, THC, amphetamines, opioids and lots of other fun stuff. Separated from the cancerous effects of smoking tobacco tho, it’s not clear where nicotine lies in that spectrum of harmful substances. And there’s some debate on how addictive it is too - for some, it seems to be highly addictive, others (like myself) have a harder time quitting coffee. It does seem to make people feel good, though after time like anything, the answer to the question “do you use it to feel good, or not feel bad?” is usually “Yes.” As long as it’s not harming anyone else (triggering your allergy, for instance) I see little harm in vaping, though I think more research needs to be done into its effects since the long term effects of vaping “liquid” aren’t really known.
Man, Boingboing is now making health claims… interesting.
I think the science is pretty clear…
from what I have learned, addictive response to nicotine or other substances varies tremendously from person to person, and is a heritable trait. As far as the harmful effects, I agree that more research is in order, especially when separating the effects of tobacco when smoking and from non smoking use. There is long term data from populations where non-smoking use is more common, like women in India, but other factors can influence that data.
I think the bottom line is that non-smoking tobacco use is less hazardous than smoking, but the remaining question is not whether non-smoking nicotine use is safe or not, but instead how unhealthy it is.
If you vape for stimulation, why not try modafinil?
Sounds like fun, though modafinil is Schedule IV while nicotine is not even under the CSA.
I do not think that healthy gun use is supprted by data. You really want to discuss rights that way??
Max, you don’t have to find data to justify a puritain mindset. It doesn’t need to be justified.
Pregnant women are massively sensitive to a lot of things. neuroadaptation happens with alkaloids, yes. What;s the negative health outcome there? Not for you, for public health sufficient that it’s worth having a strong opinion on what OTHER PEOPLE do in this case?
Other people like it, but you can’t see a benefit to it, therefore its worth arguing against, even if you cant show actual harm? Even to the individual?
You might concede that there are nicotine delivery systems which do not carry the health risks of smoking cigarettes, and just tolerate that some of us like nicotine delivered that way.
If I were to guess I’d say you find the neuroadaptation to nicotine a negative? Why hide that behind a bunch of malarkey about pregnant women and false-equivalences with tobacco? You have aperfectly strong opinion before you disrespect the audience with awful argument technique.
I respect your opinion, your method of expressing it can be pretty self aggrandizing.
That’s not the point. IANAL, but the FDA regulates health claims like this. It’s why my company is very very careful about not calling our lip balms “skin protectants.” We know what they do and how they work and anyone can make them, and it’s really hard to hurt someone with them, but when you’re a company doing business, there are rules about this kind of thing. My guess (again IANAL) is you cannot say vaping is a healthy alternative to smoking, because vapes aren’t an approved smoking cessation product.
But…
- BoingBoing is not an FDA regulated company
- If the science is good, we don’t need to wait around for a government agency
Also, let’s make it clear what we’re talking about here (which again seems to be obfuscated by the fact that nobody wants to say marijuana); these are vaporizers of marijuana and marijuana oils. They heat instead of burn, releasing THC and other compounds without releasing as many of the proven carcinogens that result from burning marijuana. These are not smoking cessation devices.
When it comes to smoking cessation, though, I think the science is pretty clear on that too; vaporizers may not be “healthy” but they are healthier than smoking cigarettes. If they’re truly used for cessation, they save lives. Even if they’re used for replacement, they’re probably better than continuing to smoke. If they’re taken up as a new habit, however, they are almost certainly less healthy than never putting anything but air in your lungs at all.
The FDA decides that. Not BoingBoing.
How do you know the science is good? Take me through that, epistemically.
That sounds time consuming. I will say that there are lots of articles on the dangers of smoking, both weed and tobacco, and that there are at least a few studies that show that there are fewer harmful compounds generated by the lower temperature vaping vs the higher temperature burning. The most toxic compounds in smoke are generated by the heat of burning, which reaches up to 900 degrees. Vaping, by contrast, runs 35-400 degrees, which minimizes the creation of toxic compounds.
Wacky tobaccy?
Here’s a ‘vaporizer’ that just right for these times. Health and budget-wise. Just send to the WH. C’mon aliens!
my ecig does not heat. Its got a weird vibratory tech that I don’t quite understand, but there is no exposed heat source.
The ones in the post totally do have a heat source, and for THC oils you need that heat to vaporize it.
My vape box (different from ecig) couldn’t possibly do oils, but it uses heat to evaporate without combusting, the materials (I can legally possess) to put in it.
they are almost certainly less healthy than never putting anything but air in your lungs at all.
Citation please. I’m a toxicologist and I want you to seek evidence for this ‘gut’ feeling you’re describing.
Your gut and science are not the same thing and you normally know that.
Avoid it for you, sure.
Regulate something that’s pretty much harmless fun at the risk to your own harmless funs.
But dumped into a hot engine, it can produce added thrust. Look up the venerable KC-135(A) model with the old J57 Pratt/Whitney engine. Loud, so very very loud, but the jet had, IIRC, a 600 gallon tank for water-injection alone.
HOWEVER: the KC-135A model did not have a vaporizer, but it did have ashtrays.
EDIT: if you wanted to read a good story about engineering/flight heavy A/Cs: http://code7700.com/kc135_v1.html
That sounds time consuming, y’know because of the limitless number of substances in the universe, and that whole trying to prove a negative thing. But I think it’s pretty obvious that nicotine, for instance (which seems to be your focus) has physiological effects, especially cardio-pulmonary. And at high levels it’s a known toxin. In general not ingesting something potentially harmful is better for you than ingesting it. Effects may be negligible at smaller doses, but it’s still more than just plain air.
You’re giving me facts, not explaining to me how the public, as a rule, should be able to ascertain the quality of those facts. You seem to think ( correct me if I’m wrong) that I need convincing on the science. Whether or not I’m personally convinced is irrelevant. I’m making the point that demonstrations of potential health impacts is not the kind of information that the public can or should be expected to be reliably independently informed about.
You think so, but your time would be well informed better informing yourself. Those impacts are from smoke, not nicotine.
Yes. that’s exactly how most drugs work. Bravo.
I’m not arguing that nicotine isn’t a drug. Xanthenes in chocolate are alkaloid drugs as well. Effective at similar doses. Similar effects.
Do they ALL need to be regulated?
Smoking was regulated because of the effects of SMOKING, not the effects of nicotine.
that is your opinion, and I respect it while encouraging you to expand your understanding. What if it is potentially beneficial, just not to you? What service are you doing, to whom, by supporting avoidance for others, if you’re not sure you’re totally correct? What happened to rights? If I seem to take this personally, name something you enjoy that other people think is unsafe, and then pretend I am supporting the use of authority to stand between you and that thing you enjoy, which isn’t actually harmful.
Easy, Acer. I’m not suggesting regulation or taking away anyone’s rights. You make a good point about potential beneficial effects, but I think you’re off base about the known effects of nicotine. Go have a smoke break and come back when you’re a little more chill.
they are almost certainly less healthy than never putting anything but air in your lungs at all.
you said there that “they” are certainly less healthy than
I asked what ‘they’ are, not what else you could put in your lungs, and I got this:
I’m not sure if you’re intentionally being a bit inflammatory there, but I’d appreciate some good faith on your end, and surprised to not see it from you.
Thats where it went awry, I think you misunderstood.
I frankly cant tell if it was intentional.
Maybe you misunderstand how extraction from the tobacco plant of the nicotine leaves all the stuff that might burn to produce those compounds (Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons) behind. Nicotine in tobacco is dissolved in the tar, and is removed from the tar. Nicotine in a vape is dissolved in a carrier. Like PEG, in minute quantities.
The tar is left behind, and is not in the ecig. A different solvent is used, so those compounds would not be formed even if the vape got to 900 degrees.
I think you’re not well informed, and not looking to be, and it surprises me.
Was there a smoker in your family? Heart disease? Cancer? Emphysema? Is this close to you, personally in some way? Because your comparisons are inapt so far. (and you seem to think I am the one of the two of us taking this personally?)
I’d like to offer you some information, do you have any questions you can strip the snark off of? Be glad to offer information, but again, not if you’ve made up your mind already. Not if you’re going to argue it in bad faith and with dripping sarcasm. k friend? Not interested in that
If you are really in the market to purchase then I suggest you checkout. http://www.vapecritic.com
Good thorough reviews which goes beyond the obvious details. He gets into subtle usage differences. He’s saved me a few times from purchases that I would of regretted.
I’m not affiliated in anyway.
ETA: If you are interested in what new products are in the pipeline or what to find out what real users think of a device you are considering, then checkout: http://www.fuckcombustion.com. Great user forums for individual devices. Also a section for devices not yet released. Manufacturers post details and ask for feedback.
