No. The media can stop dissing them at the behest of their corporate masters. That's all that's going on.
Safer to Puff, E-Cigarettes Can’t Shake Their Reputation as a Menace
201–210 of 269 posts
Re: Safer to Puff, E-Cigarettes Can’t Shake Their Reputation as a Menace
#202Earlier quoted context omitted.
Teens already experiment with smoking actual cigarettes, all vaping does is provide them with an alternative to experiment with that is far safer and less addicting than tobacco.
It also provides a cotton candy flavored gateway into an addictive habit.
Do you also favor coffee demonization commercials being started? Anti-cola campaigns? etc?
Re: Safer to Puff, E-Cigarettes Can’t Shake Their Reputation as a Menace
#203Earlier quoted context omitted.
The mark up for juice at most vape stores is obscene, yet still manages to be cheaper than regular cigarettes. $15 for 30 mL at my local store, that lasts me on average 15 days. So it's still roughly half the price for a half pack a day smoker and 1/4 of the price for a pack a day smoker (assuming a very generous $5 a pack). If you mix your own juice you're approaching savings that are better on an order of magnitude…
I highly recommend Vapejoose, they have 120ml bottles for $23.99, sometimes $20, and they offer free shipping over $50. Three 120ml bottles last me close to an entire month. Local stores around here are also a rip-off (near Austin, Texas).
Thanks for the rec - I also hail from Austin so we are venting about the same obscenties :)
Re: Safer to Puff, E-Cigarettes Can’t Shake Their Reputation as a Menace
#204Earlier quoted context omitted.
This, IMO, is a good reason to legalize and regulate all drugs, including hard drugs like heroin and meth. The user having the tools to regulate the potency and amount of the drug in order to use this taper-down strategy is not available via the black market.
I think along the same lines as you, but I'm not so sure about users being able to successfully self-taper with legalization. Lots of people with oxycodone or similar perscriptions find it almost impossible to meaningfully self taper. Not to say that there aren't some people with that level of self control, but not all. I don't think it would be much different with heroin or meth.
It varies with the type of drug, definitely. Most people can’t just kick opiates once addicted; often they end up just abusing methadone instead of heroin or pills. But I think addicts don’t generally want to be addicts.
In this case, legalisation and regulation of a different drug—kratom—could help users self-rehabilitate. Kratom is to opiates much as e-cigs are to cigarettes—some of the effects, but far milder, more manageable, and easier to quit. The DEA announced their intent to schedule it, but (thankfully) has since backpedaled a bit due to public objection.
Re: Safer to Puff, E-Cigarettes Can’t Shake Their Reputation as a Menace
#205Earlier quoted context omitted.
>>I realize this often isn't the case, but the pursuit of taxing specific behaviors is supposed to only be used to fund things caused by that behavior: That is only for the press release.. It is never actually that way. Almost all taxation applied to a general fund, meaning all taxes are simply put in a large pool, then various programs are funded from that pool. There are almost never any actual legal rules that req…
> all taxes are simply put in a large pool > I never support using taxation for social control Yes, money is fungible, and so gas tax, alcohol tax, and cigarette taxes collected may not be applied to covering the costs of that activity. Even putting it in a specific fund doesn't completely fix the problem, it only establishes a minimum support for that fund's target. Make gas tax specifically fund road surface repair…
>> Or do you suggest that government should not be involved in social control?
Bingo... I do not believe the government has any ethical role in tell me how I should live my life, or punishing me if I choose to have a life style the government disapproves of.
Re: Safer to Puff, E-Cigarettes Can’t Shake Their Reputation as a Menace
#206Earlier quoted context omitted.
Okay, so... Extremely simplified (slightly incorrect) but good rule of thumb for you at the end. What happens when you hotwire a battery (a wire between positive and negative)? Current flows, discharging the battery but also often melting or exploding the battery. Normally current flow is the whole reason for a battery, but why is hotwiring bad as opposed to tossing a LED+resistor in the circuit? In a circuit, heat a…
> You can engineer circuits around this problem in a variety of ways, but the cavemun solution is just to give the battery time to discharge the heat by transferring the charge to an intermediate element Of course, most people use regulated mods which do just that. As someone who vapes, I wouldn't be opposed to banning the sale of mechanical mods (i.e. mods which are literally just a battery, a button and a resistanc…
Mechanical mods are only dangerous if you're using a volatile power supply - e.g. a lithium cell. NiMH (what's used in the mechanical MFLB) doesn't do this, those tend to burst/leak rather than go up in an incendiary ball.
Re: Safer to Puff, E-Cigarettes Can’t Shake Their Reputation as a Menace
#207As long as people keep playing the sub-ohm game, thus keeping the majority of heat dissipation in the battery (I've seen 5 milli-Ohm coils, imagine where the heat's going when an 18650 has a typical resistance of 100 milli-ohms fresh) then yes, these things will be a menace. Just the other day a sub-ohmer at the mental health facility I was re-wiring had his battery explode on him. POPFIZZLE! It was just sitting on t…
This is indeed a problem if people are using mechanical mods. But with a sufficient battery pack and proper voltage/current regulation, and batteries from reputable manufacturers (Sony, Samsung, LG, etc.), it's not even a concern. Also, the mechanical mod crowd is a rather small part of the e-cig community overall. Vocal, but small.
Wasn't a mechanical mod. It was a Kangertech, with all the bells and whistles including controllable voltage and current on the box.
Re: Safer to Puff, E-Cigarettes Can’t Shake Their Reputation as a Menace
#208Earlier quoted context omitted.
>>I realize this often isn't the case, but the pursuit of taxing specific behaviors is supposed to only be used to fund things caused by that behavior: That is only for the press release.. It is never actually that way. Almost all taxation applied to a general fund, meaning all taxes are simply put in a large pool, then various programs are funded from that pool. There are almost never any actual legal rules that req…
I have no problem with taxes on harmful products like tobacco and alcohol since they are a harm to society and a burden on society.
That is a slippery slope, if you want to talk about products or activities that "harm society"
Further then you have to define what "harm" it is doing.
I also suspect part of that "harm" you talk about is Costs associated with healthcare that is paid for by the taxpayer, meaning you likely support government run socialized health services. I do not.
Re: Safer to Puff, E-Cigarettes Can’t Shake Their Reputation as a Menace
#209Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think along the same lines as you, but I'm not so sure about users being able to successfully self-taper with legalization. Lots of people with oxycodone or similar perscriptions find it almost impossible to meaningfully self taper. Not to say that there aren't some people with that level of self control, but not all. I don't think it would be much different with heroin or meth.
It varies with the type of drug, definitely. Most people can’t just kick opiates once addicted; often they end up just abusing methadone instead of heroin or pills. But I think addicts don’t generally want to be addicts. In this case, legalisation and regulation of a different drug—kratom—could help users self-rehabilitate. Kratom is to opiates much as e-cigs are to cigarettes—some of the effects, but far milder, mor…
Yeah, Kratom definitely has a lot of potential to do a lot of good for opiate addicts. I disagree with the analogy to e-cigs though. With e-cigs you can put a much stronger concentration of nicotine in each hit depending on the liquid used. It's still exactly the same chemical, ie. nicotine, binding to the exact same receptors in the same way. With Kratom, you are binding to the same receptors as opiates, but it's a different chemical which binds/antagonizes the receptors differently than other opiates. It's this difference which makes tapering Kratom easier than other opiates. This difference does not apply to cigs and e-cigs.
Re: Safer to Puff, E-Cigarettes Can’t Shake Their Reputation as a Menace
#210Earlier quoted context omitted.
I bought one for my mother because her health seemed lowering. She didn't like it and didn't want to spend time searching for the right device and/or liquid. She had an infarctus (not myocard it seems though) last month, obviously cardio told her no more cigarettes. She was worried about nicotine addiction, I mentioned e-cig, I got angry eyes, borderline saying it was worth than cigs. I understand their concerns abou…
From my personal experience with friends/family men are much more likely to make the switch. All the male smokers I have urged to try quit normal cigs shortly after. All the women use it only sometimes but continue smoking or just flat out rejected it. Not sure why this is. I am suspecting it is too technical/nerdy for most of them dealing with charging batteries, refilling liquid, assembling tanks etc. No meaning to…
I noticed this as well.... Ive Never seen a female vape unless they were behind the counter at the Cape shop. Maybe some female oriented Cape advertising? Worked for malboro