Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Acute Effects of Electronic Cigarette Aerosol Inhalation on Vascular Function

pubs.rsna.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 233 posts

Re: Acute Effects of Electronic Cigarette Aerosol Inhalation on Vascular Function

#141

Post by walshemj »

p1necone wrote: post #131
Medicalidiot wrote: post #39

The number one controllable risk factor for stroke and heart attack is smoking. By far. Not diet, not exercise, smoking. A significant part of that is because nicotine will constrict blood vessels leading to hypertension[1], this leads to destruction of the surface of an artery, leading to atherosclerosis formation. One day the atherosclerotic plaque ruptures and then you see me. We once thought that atherosclerosis…

Does that mean that caffeine is a risk too? Doesn't it have similar effects to nicotine? (I drink a loooooot of coffee).

Its bad for blood pressure - I switched to decaf for that reason.

Re: Acute Effects of Electronic Cigarette Aerosol Inhalation on Vascular Function

#142

Post by dmix »

mrfusion wrote: post #139
abstractbarista wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is definitely a point which needs more exploring. Seems to me most damage from smoking is all the crap in smoking. The chemical nicotine - by itself - transiently raises BP, feels nice, and that's about it. It's also only a part of the addictiveness of smoking. Probably a small part, as everyone I know who has consumed nicotine in any form has no trouble without it if they vape, but often shows discomfort/restle…

Is there any research on what other chemicals might be addictive?

There's research that the heat alone in some forms of abuse of smoking things can cause lung issues.

The difference I've found with vaping is both a) I use a very cool setting so it's not nearly as hot as a cigarette (which you can't control the temperature of) and b) I used far less nicotine, starting from 24mg->3mg in the course of a year.

I can easily stop vaping for days at a time now without having a strong pang of nicotine dependency which I used to have.

Re: Acute Effects of Electronic Cigarette Aerosol Inhalation on Vascular Function

#143

Post by pcj-github »

robbiep wrote: post #118
aphextim wrote: post #66

I would be curious to compare this to smoking an actual cigarette to see if there is any difference. Inhaling any vapor/smoke that isn't meant for your lungs is going to cause damage and it would be neat to see a comparison between the two. Anecdotal story time: My grandfather who is currently 81, has been smoking since he was 12. He grew up in a very small town, and had 6 people in his graduating class other than hi…

If your 02 is 68%, or even 75%, you’re likely about to be put in a coffin. Patients with severe COPD/emphysema might have arterial oxygen levels in the mid to high 80s without supplemental oxygen

Yeah, the mortality rate of people in this condition (resting O2 levels in the 60-70%) is probably at least 50% 1-year mortality (half will die in the next year).

Which is not exactly the population this paper is trying to shed light on, but thanks for sharing his experience.

Re: Acute Effects of Electronic Cigarette Aerosol Inhalation on Vascular Function

#144

Post by bobwaycott »

ceejayoz wrote: post #126
bobwaycott wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It also seems clear that e-cig manufacturers are hoping to hook young non-smokers to expand their market. This is mentioned a lot, but I find it questionable. I’ve never seen an ad that made me feel like Joe Camel or the Marlboro Man did when I was a kid. My teenagers haven’t ever thought vaping was cool based on ads or plenty of people doing it. This sounds too much like a general truism of capitalist enterprise—a…

Do you think Juul’s school curriculum - which they paid schools to accept - was genuinely well-intentioned? https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/25/health/juul-teens-vaping.... > In April 2017, a Juul representative visited the Dwight School in New York City to meet with students — with no teachers present — and told them the company’s e-cigarettes were “totally safe.”

Do you really think I would argue that is well-intentioned—no matter what company it is? Did my comment really leave the impression I’d give that a thumbs up? Companies shouldn’t be permitted to do that, regardless of their product—so fine them exorbitantly, and let’s do the same to the morons who accepted such a proposal while we’re at it. What I’m pointing out is this is standard behavior for corporations, and nobody does a thing to go after them or their profits when they behave badly—instead, people use this for lame think-of-the-children arguments against the products, calling for public bans, suggesting we force adults to get prescriptions for an e-cig, when what we ought to do is aggressively go after the bad corporate behavior—or make it illegal to manufacture and sell things if we don’t like them. But in the case of e-cigs, let’s start with cigarettes first, or admit we aren’t going to ever do that, move onto more productive conversations, and stop acting like e-cigs and actual tobacco products are at all equivalent—aside from the very narrow category of nicotine-delivery device.

Re: Acute Effects of Electronic Cigarette Aerosol Inhalation on Vascular Function

#145

Post by posterboy »

noobiemcfoob wrote: post #138
dumbfoundded wrote: post #27

If you believe E-Cigs are harmless, there's an easy experiment you can do for yourself. Go on a run, time yourself. The next day, vape for 30 min and then go on the same run. This is what got me to personally switch away from E-Cigs. Vaping would add an additional 30-sec to 1-min per mile on my runs. I try to only use patches or gum now. Still not great but it's a lot better if you're trying to stay in shape. That be…

Are most people in the type of shape that 30 seconds per mile variance day to day is surprising? I don't time myself, but I'd be surprised if any two of my sprints aren't this different normally.

Any dedicated smoker will subconciously try to run even faster, lest they be convinced of having made a mistake, sunken cost and all.

Re: Acute Effects of Electronic Cigarette Aerosol Inhalation on Vascular Function

#146

Post by epmaybe »

magashna wrote: post #54

One of the frustrating things about ecig studies is that they always use the worst quality hardware and puff really hard on them. The "Epuffer" looks like one of those "cig-a-like" which are notoriously worse than the much more expensive hobbyist mech mods. The cig-a-likes usually don't get enough juice to the heating element so when you're puffing a lot (16 consecutive 3s pulls) you end up burning the wick.

Out of curiosity, are most people that use ecigs going for the expensive mods, or are they going for the more popular brands that are closer in quality to the epuffer?

Re: Acute Effects of Electronic Cigarette Aerosol Inhalation on Vascular Function

#147

Post by mturmon »

ozzmotik wrote: post #134
ozzmotik wrote: post #69

sorry if this comment is against the spirit of the community (i don't think it is, but I have been blocked from posting in the past oblivious to the fact that I wasn't contributing anything meaningful), but that being said... am I the only one who isn't surprised that someone managed to find that if you introduce something into the body that isn't generally there, that there is obviously going to be an acute response…

sometimes i really wish that people would actually tell me why they downvote what I have to say, rather than just silently doing so and condemning me to the bottom of the comments. i can't really really do the revision part of performance, feedback, revision without any actual feedback of substance to inform me as to what it is that I did wrong in the first place.

Downvotes usually equilibrate "correctly" over time. Best response to downvotes is to re-read and see if anything said was wrong or inflammatory, and if not, just wait it out.

In general, I'd say that using proper capitalization and avoiding walls of text - stripping down to your actual point - would help your comments.

Re: Acute Effects of Electronic Cigarette Aerosol Inhalation on Vascular Function

#148

Post by grawprog »

lowdose wrote: post #57
Duhck wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the supporting evidence for your concern that "attacks on vaping are for the purpose of driving smokers back to cigarettes" Philip Morris (now known as Altria) put $13bn into Juul to do the exact opposite. The margins on vaping are higher, the current perception of vaping is that it's better than smoking, and it's way easier to get kids addicted to vaping than cigarettes. I see too much evidence to the contrar…

Juul's creators increased the nicotine because they felt other vapes on the market couldn't compare to the sensations delivered by regular cigarettes. The nicotine salts in Juul pods are a type of nicotine that supposedly feels more like a cigarette when inhaled, as opposed to other vapes that use freebase nicotine. Philip Morris strategy to create confusion is obviously working. Don't buy from big tobacco if your go…

Personally, I couldn't stand the freebase nicotine juice. A hit off some 10mg juice made me feel like I'd just taken a fat haul on a cigar. My mouth started watering, I started twitching a bit and felt like was going to puke, then immediately i started craving a smoke. The nicotine salts don't feel that way, even with the 36mg. It actually takes the cravings away without really giving me that nicotine rush.

In a month I cut down my smoking by over half and I smoke less and less as time goes on. I find the flavours bother me though and is the main reason i haven't quit entirely. I actually enjoy the taste of cigarettes, I haven't found any ejuice I actually like the taste of it all reminds me of candy, even the ones that are supposed to taste like tobacco.

Re: Acute Effects of Electronic Cigarette Aerosol Inhalation on Vascular Function

#149

Post by MayeulC »

Are there good comprehensive guides out there regarding vaping?

My mother has been a smoker for a long time, and she bought a "myblu" on a whim. However, she is concrned about the need to buy small recharges, as it is obviously not environment-friendly. Moreover, she had issues with the battery (I think it's not charging anymore, or maybe charged but not producing vapor) after a couple months of extremely light use. As she finds the product unreliable (battery capacity, etc), she always have cigarette "backups".

I do not know anything about the mechanical parts used, nor the chemicals (for DIY liquid), or even the various vapes on the market.

Are there good, reputable and independent review sites or wikis on this topic? Preferably not with toxic kitchen recipes. I think a good vape could accept either standard or homemade products, with a standardized battery, and as much replaceable parts as possible.

Re: Acute Effects of Electronic Cigarette Aerosol Inhalation on Vascular Function

#150

Post by pcj-github »

Increases my conviction that vaping products should only be available by prescription, which any primary care physician would be more than happy to prescribe for a smoker hoping to quit.

As for the ~40% of 7th and 8th graders that are vaping at my kids middle school, well, that number would hopefully decrease.

Post reply on HN