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

221–230 of 233 posts

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

#221

Post by icebraining »

jdietrich wrote: post #167
fuzz4lyfe wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> smoke machines will be banned Do people put smoke machines up to their mouths and inhale it many times a day over many years?

Theater technicians and performers often spend many hours per day for most of their career in close proximity to large smoke machines - essentially huge mains-powered e-cigarettes that use nicotine-free vape juice by the quart.

> often spend many hours per day for most of their career

Assuming you mean running smoke machines, no they don't. Smoke machines are occasionally used, but not in most plays, let alone for hours. And even if the were, most actors rehearse for weeks or months between plays, and nobody is using a smoke machine on rehearsals, except maybe in the last few.

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

#222

Post by icebraining »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #112
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…

Taxes. Vaping is really hard to tax unlike cigarettes. State and local governments are addicted to cigarette tax revenue, but that has been evaporating quickly, so outlawing vaping and not cigarettes is really profitable to them, even if causing more harm overall.

Why would vaping be hard to tax?

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

#223

Post by Clubber »

caymanjim wrote: post #162
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…

I've been a long-time smoker, and at least for me, nicotine alone does absolutely nothing to alleviate cravings. Gum, patches, lozenges, vaping, etc. do zero to alleviate my craving for a cigarette. I'm not discounting that nicotine is addictive (I'm in no position to say), but there's got to be something else in tobacco that is part of the addiction.

The only thing that got me to quit smoking is the Juul. I tried everything else, but with the Juul, I just quit without having to consciously discipline myself 20 times a day. The gum was close though, but it took too long to kill the craving, so I'd end up chewing it constantly for it to work.

I've been smoking for a little over 20 years (since a teenager). Good luck.

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

#224

Post by mikelyons »

wyre wrote: post #152
mikelyons wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nicotine is also, itself, a known carcinogen.

May I ask for a source on that? AFAIK the reason why cigarettes cause disease is because of the tar and all of the other byproducts of the Burning tobacco and that nicotine by itself is not the cause. I can't find a source of the top of my head but I smoked cigarettes for 4 years and enjoyed reading on them.

Ah, thanks HN community for correcting me!

> At present, it is not possible to draw a conclusion whether nicotine itself may act as a complete carcinogen.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4553893/

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

#225

Post by mikelyons »

graeme wrote: post #135
mikelyons wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's an information imbalance so definitive claims can't be made about cannabis smoking in the way that they can be made about Tobacco smoking.

Imsuspect marijuana smoking is just as harmful. The bulk of the trouble from tobacco is from the smoke. And if you look at the health effects of air pollution, they’re very similar to smoking: respiratory infections, heart disease, COPD, stroke and lung cancer Inhaling any burning thing is quite bad for the human organism. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_pollution#Health_effects

Having smoked both, tobacco seems more irritating.

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

#226

Post by thesmok »

twa927 wrote: post #92
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…

I ride a bicycle daily and vape e-cigs. If anything I notice an increased performance immediately after vaping, I feel like I'm less tired and have more energy. Overall this is an interesting topic because contrary to popular opinion many athletes use nicotine and find that it increases their performance: Nicotine [...] use is widespread amongst professional team/strength sports (e.g. American football, ice hockey, w…

I cycle daily and vape. I feel when I vape more, my performance on a bicycle deteriorates very noticeably. My effective lung volume is noticeably lower.

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

#227

Post by aphextim »

pcj-github wrote: post #143
robbiep wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Yeah he is in rough shape, to be honest we (doctors/wife/family) expected him to go when he was 75-76 or so. He has been hanging on that is for sure. I figure if I can extend his 1 year, to be even say 1 year and 6 months, it would be worth it.

He has been on/off oxygen in the past and he's at that stage where he is waiting to kick the can, and is a very lucky man who has a wife of 66 years, who still takes care of him everyday.

I can guarantee if his wife passed, he would go the next day and that he is holding on because he knows how much she loves him.

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

#228

Post by ogwh »

MayeulC wrote: post #149

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.…

I started with a myBlu and ended up going through 6 different devices before finding one that doesn't suck. There is a huge quality problem in the market at the moment. The device I settled on, and which I've had zero problems with, is the "Smok Nord AIO 19". It's about 25GBP. Note that I had also bought a "Smok Novo" and DID have problems with that, it leaked everywhere, so even within the same brand quality varies dramatically.

The reviews on YouTube aren't useful because they don't usually use a device long enough for problems to become apparent. I've been using the Nord AIO 19 for several weeks now and swear by it. And it's not to be confused with the regular Nord... Which looks like the Novo and also has leaking problems.

If you're in the UK, Totally Wicked are a company that, while expensive, can be trusted. They only sell quality devices, but they're all rebranded versions of other manufacturers. They've recently struck a deal with WHSmith who will also be selling their kits (that's how trustworthy they are).

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

#229

Post by Balgair »

mikelyons wrote: post #224
wyre wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

May I ask for a source on that? AFAIK the reason why cigarettes cause disease is because of the tar and all of the other byproducts of the Burning tobacco and that nicotine by itself is not the cause. I can't find a source of the top of my head but I smoked cigarettes for 4 years and enjoyed reading on them.

Ah, thanks HN community for correcting me! > At present, it is not possible to draw a conclusion whether nicotine itself may act as a complete carcinogen. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4553893/

In case anyone on HN reads this as saying that nicotine is safe to use, the end of that article is fairly clear:

> Although more studies on health effects of nicotine in humans are required, based on in vitro and in vivo effects of nicotine, patients should be advised not to use nicotine products during cancer treatment unless it is temporarily needed to stop tobacco smoking.

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

#230

Post by maratc »

icebraining wrote: post #222
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taxes. Vaping is really hard to tax unlike cigarettes. State and local governments are addicted to cigarette tax revenue, but that has been evaporating quickly, so outlawing vaping and not cigarettes is really profitable to them, even if causing more harm overall.

Why would vaping be hard to tax?

Mixing propylene glycol, glycerine, nicotine, and flavors can be easily done at home. Pretty hard to limit the distribution of any of the parts the way tobacco distribution is limited.
Post reply on HN