Submit

@ ejuicestoreus While it's true that vaping is still being studied it's great to hear opinions from experts as well as the call for more studies and sensible regulation. Reply · Delete Comment

Fr Jack Kearney @ jkearney In the addiction treatment world vaping is considered an evidence-based tool for smoking cessation, and there is research to back this up. It is not safe, just 99 times safer than smoking. While total abstinence is clearly the best way it is not the only way, and harm reduction through vaping is saving millions of lives. Why not "live and let live" and "whatever works"? Reply · Delete Comment

@ john_wall_2 Propylene glycol is an oil. A heating element vaporizes the vape liquid and a person inhales it. When it cools in the bronchial tubes and the recesses of the lungs, the glycol vapor condenses to again a liquid oil, coating all body surfaces that it contacts. Who needs oil coating the bronchi and alveoli (especially the alveoli, that have to maximize their ability to pass oxygen from lung to bloodstream. It does not take a scientist to interpret the obvious...that the oil will inhibit that critical biological process. Vaping should be limited to use under prescription to ween a person from tobacco. Recreational use for any other reason (e.g. great taste, huh?) should not be allowed, and that group of people should stick to ice cream or gum. Unfortunately, big business will continue to market vaping as a great thing for everybody.



John

Safety Engineer Reply (4) · · Delete Anonymous @john_wall_2: brilliant point "Should a prescription be required for a snickers, coke, trip to McD's" it would make more sense to have limits on these !!! % of obesity and heart problems would decrease for sure!! Reply · Delete @ tfunk I agree. Anything entering the lungs that is foreign can potentially cause harm. Hands down. Reply · Delete Anonymous That statement has been proven to be false. PG is an alcohol, not an oil, it does not "condense" in the lungs, it does not coat "all body surfaces that it contacts". It has also been used in smoke machines at concerts, parties, stage shows and movie sets for over 50 years with no links to any adverse affects. Reply · Delete Vape Magoo @ vapemagoo Ah @john_wall_2, ice cream can be a factor in diabetes causing blindness, amputations and death. I am much more concerned about the dangers of my diet than vaping. Should a prescription be required for a snickers, coke, trip to McD's…. WiFi isn't exactly without the sin of harm, not only to the users, but everyone, user or not. Men are at risk when cell phones are in their front pockets or lap top sitting, of all places, on their lap. Reply · Delete Comment

@ sheshrlok I have been using e-cigs for about a yr now. I am 58 y.o. female who is retired from the Postal Service due to M.S.

I have found I cough rarely and attribute it to my sinus infections rather than the e-cigs! I feel much clearer through the lung passages and find I don't depend upon my asthma medication for a few weeks of time.Have got it on hand just in case it's needed. Reply (1) · Delete Anonymous Im with you... No e-cigs for me, but I use a vape. When I smoked, Id wake up in the morning, coughing, and hurting so bad to breathe, breathing SHALLOW. (would use the inhaler so I could have a sig... SAD!!!!) it was BAD!!!! But the vape doesn't act that way, or cause the breathing issues that smoking did... (I have MS also.... diagnosed in 2008.... turned 50 in June) Reply · Delete Comment

Richy Rich @ richyrich561 One thing that we must keep in mind is that the person who concocted these difficult regulations, Dr. Margaret Hamburg, has made an obscene amount of money from Johnson & Johnson stock. That's the same J&J that makes 'The Patch/ Gum/ Spray'. So every vape customer is another sale lost to products that she personally benefits from.



Wouldn't it be nice if we could trust the FDA to do what's right for America and just overlook the obvious conflict of interest? It would. But it can't be done. She has been charged with racketeering for hiding the dangers of other J&J drugs unrelated to the vaping industry. Yes, she made hundreds of millions of dollars while head of the FDA and many Americans DIED as a result.



Even though she is no longer head of the FDA, she is the person who invented these impossible regulations in an effort to do away with her competition, even if it means that more Americans smoke cigarettes, which are undoubtedly more dangerous than vaping. She has already proven that she's willing to sacrifice American lives to make a profit. That's why she's facing racketeering charges.



Unfortunately her replacement, Dr Robert Califf, also has financial ties with J&J, so even though she's gone the attack on vaping for personal gain will continue. When it comes to the FDA, it seems that conflict of interest is just a luxury of the job! I know this sounds like something that would be happening in Mexico, not the United States but search it up for yourself if you don't believe me. I didn't believe it until I independently verified it. I saw the actual charges that were filed, which are easy to find on the web.



The saddest part is that this could have been an opportunity to make vaping safer, if it were being done by people who didn't have financial ties with makers of The Patch! But alas, once someone LIES to you, how apt are you to trust them again? As consumers we have absolutely no way of knowing if we're looking at real concern for our health or just another lie by the FDA. Perhaps the only way to find out if vaping is really bad for our health is to look to an independent source of research besides the biased FDA.



Just like their denial that cannabis does have medical usefulness, the FDA has shown a history of coming between Americans and medical benefits of various natural medical products since they're main goal is to make sure that pharmaceutical companies make MONEY. Somewhere below their #1 priority is what's best for the health of Americans. The only thing we know for certain when it comes to the FDA is that they're willing to sell out our health to make money. Reply · Delete Comment

Brian Carter @ benhardy456 Dr. Jackler seems quite fond of spreading chemophobia instead of telling the whole truth about e-cigarettes. He, and many others like him, routinely toss out a list of scary sounding toxins and carcinogens. And that's were they stop. What they don't tell you (what any responsible scientist who wants to communicate the truth will tell you) is that the amounts of these chemicals found in e-cigarettes are far below levels known to cause harm. As further evidence that Dr. Jackler should not be taken seriously as an interlocutor, he continues to push the thoroughly discredited myth of an association of "popcorn lung" with vaping. http://www.snopes.com/vaping-causes-popcorn-lung/ Perhaps Dr. Jackler should review the ethics code of his profession, which states "A physician shall uphold the standards of professionalism, be honest in all professional interactions..." Reply (1) · Delete Vape Magoo @ vapemagoo Ethics? In this day and age? Money and control, forget the age of Aquarius, we're in the age of the Psychopaths. Reply · Delete Comment

Fr Jack Kearney @ frintervention There is plenty of science that shows vaping to be a relatively safe, very effective, evidence-based tool for smoking cessation. In the addiction treatment world we long ago learned of the importance of harm reduction; time for public health to move into the real world.. Reply · Delete Comment

Robert innes @ brainyfurball Why do you, in the introduction, begin by highlighting two claims which have been thoroughly debunked? I was looking forward to reading what appeared was going to be an interesting debate on the topic, however, the citing of a study which has yet to be published, if it ever does see the light of day, and a set of stats which have no resemblance to reality: let me explain...



In order to make the claim that e cigarette use is rising and that cigarette smoking is also rising all you have to do is...



Call e-cigarettes tobacco products: Count the numbers using e-cigarettes and publish: Count the numbers using tobacco products and publish. Hey presto! E cigarette use is rising and, because e-cigarette use is counted in again, so us tobacco product (cigarette smoking) use.



A simple exercise in conflation.



If you cannot make those distinctions in your research you should not be writing. Reply · Delete Comment

Elaine Keller @ ekeller One more study, published recently, shows that switching is better than continuing to smoke: https://www.roswellpark.org/media/news/study-smokers-who-switch-e-cigarettes-exposed-same-levels-nicotine-lower-carcinogen Reply · Delete Comment