Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
wiki:vaping [2018/04/04 14:40]
phillip
wiki:vaping [2018/11/20 17:31] (current)
phillip
Line 1: Line 1:
 +**Vaping V Cigarettes**
  
 +Why have I created this article ? Well I've been vaping since November 2015 after smoking cigarettes for 32-33 years. I've got slightly cheesed off with the way vaping has been received, so wanted to share some details here of my experience.
 +
 +Both my parents smoked, my father had a triple heart bypass and then had a massive heart attack in 2000. My mom thankfully gave up. I had bronchitis as a child and it stayed with me for many years, made worse from smoking cigarettes.
 +
 +Since giving up cigarettes my bronchitis has gone, my sense of smell has returned, my sex drive has gone through the roof, my breathing is massively improved and at nearly 51 years old I feel fantastic.
 +
 +First lets look at the ingredients of both products.
 +
 +**Cigarette Ingredients**
 +
 +Cigarette smoke contains over 4,000 chemicals, including 43 known cancer-causing (carcinogenic) compounds and 400 other toxins. These cigarette ingredients include nicotine, tar, and carbon monoxide, formaldehyde,​ ammonia, hydrogen cyanide, arsenic, and DDT.
 +
 +**Vapour Juice Ingredients**
 +
 +__Water, Vegetable glycerin, Propylene glycol, Food Grade Flavouring__
 +
 +Many "vape juice" flavours include good old H20. A reservoir for liquid and a heating element are the basic components of e-cigarette devices. A wicking material such as cotton pulls the liquid towards a metal coil, where heat turns it into droplets that are tiny enough to inhale.
 +
 +__Vegetable glycerin__
 +
 +You've probably consumed this sugar alcohol in food as a low-glycemic sweetener, a preservative,​ or a texture enhancer that boosts thickness. (It's also an ingredient in moisturisers.). This is also a natural by-product of cooking vegetables
 +
 +__Propylene glycol__
 +
 +It is a derivative of propylene oxide, which, in turn, is a derivative of propylene, and is used as an ingredient in many household products and cosmetics. ​
 +
 +It is also used widely in medicine, such as in asthma inhalers.
 +
 +__Food Grade Flavouring__
 +
 +The names of e-cig flavours are amazing: Unicorn Milk; Krispy Krack Doughnut; Pony on Acid! Manufacturers usually don't reveal ingredients on the grounds that they'​re "trade secrets"​. Many assert that their flavourings are food-grade and safe.
 +
 +__Nicotine__
 +
 +In its inhaled particulate form, nicotine itself is pretty safe – unless you're a child or a gestating foetus in a vaper.
 +
 +
 +And why is it that non smokers dont have a problem with secondhand smoke, but go nuts over vapour smoke ? Is smoking so ingrained in humans minds that they dont care about breathing secondhand smoke ?
 +
 +All I know is that vaping has been a  great help to getting my health back together. Its a tool for getting me off this stuff.
 +
 +
 +**And now for the boring stuff.**
 +
 +But firstly a nice article by Mike Brown on the cost behind vaping. Take a look at https://​lendedu.com/​blog/​money-behind-vaping/​ this shows that people who go to vaping from smoking save money.
 +
 +I've had non smokers claiming that the ingredients from vape juice cause a form of lung cancer, but they say this from reading reports with no solid foundation. Maybe vape juice does cause side effects, but I really wish people would keep quiet, do the research, and then come out with proper results from proper studies.
 +
 +All I know is that as an ex smoker of 32 years, vaping has not only saved me a LOT of money, it has improved my health.
 +
 +I quickly want to do some basic maths here, so bear with me. 
 +
 +https://​www.thesun.co.uk/​news/​6037310/​cigarette-price-increase-a-pack-cost-uk/​
 +
 +The average cost of a pack of cigarettes in the UK soared to over a tenner last year.
 +
 +Following the budget in 2017 Philip Hammond whacked on an extra 49p to a 20 deck putting the average price at £10.40.
 +
 +That meant a 20-a-day smoker keeping up their habit saw themselves an extra £178.85 out of pocket over the course of a year.
 +
 +Soooooooo. If you smoke a packet a day, and lets round it down to ten pounds here. Thats 70 pounds per week, 52 weeks per year equals 3,640 pounds per year, or if you go by the 10.40gbp its 3,785.60 pounds per year.
 +
 +Now lets look at the cost of vaping, as I really want to be fair.
 +
 +Vaping device 60 GBP (ish) depending on what you get. Will come with two coils (normally) and a spare glass. A 50 ml bottle of juice with nic shot is 22 pounds. So as a setup you are looking at 82 pounds for a mid range decent, non fancy machine. Yes thats 12 pounds more than buying your weekly supply of fags. But depending on how much you vape then the juice will last you well over a week. I will buy a 50 ml bottle of juice, a small bottle of menthol for total of 27 pounds, which is equal to three days cigarettes, and the juice will last me nearly two weeks. So from 140 pounds for two weeks supply of cigarettes down to 27 pounds for two weeks of juice. Yes I need to buy coils between 3 and four weeks. Thats two coils for approx 9 pounds.
 +
 +Ive found that the longer I go without fags, the better my health is. The longer I stay on vaping then the need for less vaping comes into play. Im no longer dependent on the need to smoke a fag or vape. So then for me the cost of even vaping goes down, meaning I save even more money.
 +
 +I still have a slight craving for a cigarette. But I just say to myself "Been vaping since november 2015. Thats over three years now. Do you really want to be a pratt and go have a fag ?". So I then have good motivation to NOT go back to smoking.
 +
 +Take my advice. Dont be a non smoker who starts vaping as a "I wanna look cool" thing. Vaping is supposed to be an aid for giving up smoking.
 +
 +And now for the real boring stuff.
 +
 +https://​www.theguardian.com/​science/​2018/​jan/​29/​vaping-may-raise-cancer-and-heart-disease-risk-study-suggests
 +
 +Vaping may raise cancer and heart disease risk, study suggests Nicotine in e-cigarettes may convert into DNA-damaging chemicals, mouse trial indicates, but critics say results are irrelevant to humans
 +
 +
 +Vaping may raise the risk of certain cancers and heart disease, according to a team of scientists who studied the effects of e-cigarette smoke on healthy mice and human cells.
 +
 +Researchers found evidence that nicotine inhaled from e-cigarettes could be converted into chemicals that damage DNA in the heart, lungs and bladder, and dampen down the body’s genetic repair mechanisms.
 +
 +Moon-shong Tang, professor of environmental medicine at New York University, said the DNA changes were similar to those linked to secondhand smoke, but added that more work was needed to see whether vaping really did increase cancer rates.
 +
 +The researchers have now launched long-term experiments to look at the development of tumours in mice exposed to vapour from e-cigarettes,​ but Tang does not expect to have answers any time soon. “The results may take years to come in because cancer is such a slow process,” he said.
 +
 +While some researchers said the work was important, others all but dismissed it as irrelevant to humans. The mice were exposed to high levels of e-cigarette smoke and the effects may be very different in people who inhale nicotine from vaping, critics caution.
 +
 +“This study shows nothing at all about the dangers of vaping,” said Peter Hajek, director of the Tobacco Dependence Research Unit at Queen Mary University of London. “It doesn’t show that vaping causes cancer.”
 +
 +“This is one in a long line of false alarms which may be putting people off the switch from smoking to vaping which would undoubtedly be of great benefit to them,” he added. “The best current estimate is that vaping poses, at worst, some 5% of risks of smoking.”
 +
 +Tobacco smoke contains thousands of chemicals and at least 70 are known either to cause or drive cancer in the body. The vapour from e-cigarettes contains far fewer toxic chemicals, with most of the smoke containing only nicotine, the addictive substance that gives users their hit.
 +
 +Tang exposed mice to e-cigarette smoke for three hours a day, five days a week for three months. The amount of nicotine in the vapour was 10 milligrams per millilitre, making it as concentrated as the e-cigarette smoke that humans inhale. This amounted to what Hajek called “extremely large doses of nicotine.”
 +
 +At the end of the three months, Tang found DNA damage in the hearts, lungs and bladders of mice exposed to the vapours that was not evident in a control group of animals that breathed filtered air. Natural DNA repair mechanisms were also suppressed in the mice exposed to the smoke.
 +
 +Tang went on to look at human lung and bladder cells and found that exposing the cells to nicotine and its breakdown products made the cells turn into tumour tissue more easily. Details of the study are reported in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
 +
 +Last week a major US report into the health effects of e-cigarettes found that vaping might be useful to help people quit smoking. The report found vaping was likely to be less harmful than conventional cigarettes.
 +
 +Jasmine Just at Cancer Research UK said: “The evidence so far shows that e-cigarettes are far less harmful than smoking. Research like this is important, but this lab study only looked at the effects of e-cigarette smoke on cells and on mice, which means it’s not possible to draw any conclusions from this about how e-cigarettes might affect people in real life.
 +
 +“Up to two-thirds of long term smokers will die because of their addiction, but e-cigarettes don’t contain tobacco. Instead they contain nicotine, which is what keeps people addicted, but is not responsible for the major health harms from smoking.
 +
 +“Research in people has shown that those who make a complete switch from smoking tobacco to e-cigarettes can significantly reduce their exposure to key harmful chemicals in tobacco smoke.”
 +
 +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 +
 +https://​www.nhs.uk/​news/​heart-and-lungs/​long-term-vaping-far-safer-than-smoking-says-landmark-study/​
 +
 +
 +Long-term vaping 'far safer than smoking'​ says '​landmark'​ study
 +
 +Tuesday February 7 2017
 +
 +"​Vaping has been endorsed by health experts after the first long-term study of its effects in ex-smokers,"​ ITV News reports.
 +
 +E-cigarettes contain nicotine but not many of the harmful substances produced by smoking tobacco, such as tar or carbon monoxide. However, there has been debate about exactly how safe their long-term use is.
 +
 +The study, involving 181 smokers or ex-smokers, has been described as "​landmark"​ as it is thought to be the first (or at least one of the first) looking at long-term vaping outcomes in "real world" users. Previous studies of this kind have mainly relied on laboratory equipment, or animal research, to estimate the long-term effects of e-cigarettes.
 +
 +The volunteers completed questionnaires and provided breath, saliva and urine samples. The researchers found significantly lower levels of toxic chemicals and cancer-causing substances (carcinogens) in the samples of those of former smokers who had been using e-cigarettes or nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) compared to current smokers.
 +
 +Another noted result is that current smokers who may be trying to reduce their risk of harm by switching between e-cigarettes and normal cigarettes may be saving money, but doing little for their health. "​Combination users" still had very high levels of toxins and carcinogens
 +
 +This study provides evidence that e-cigarettes and NRT can reduce harm to smokers by reducing exposure to toxic chemicals. The evidence would also seem to support Public Health England’s 2015 report that “E-cigarettes are 95% less harmful than tobacco”.
 +Where did the story come from?
 +
 +The study was carried out by researchers from a number of institutions,​ including University College London, and the Roswell Park Cancer Institute and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (both in the US). Funding was provided by Cancer Research UK. The study was published in the peer-reviewed journal: Annals of Internal Medicine.
 +
 +There has been much discussion over the benefits of vaping over conventional smoking methods and this is the first long-term study assessing these effects. ​
 +
 +In general the findings have been reported accurately in the UK media; however none of the limitations,​ as described by the researchers themselves, have been mentioned.
 +
 +The Daily Mirror included a quote from professor Kevin Fenton, national director of health and wellbeing at Public Health England, who added: "This study provides further evidence that switching to e-cigarettes can significantly reduce harm to smokers, with greatly reduced exposure to carcinogens and toxins."​
 +What kind of research was this?
 +
 +This was a cross-sectional study that drew comparisons on exposure to nicotine and other tobacco-related toxins and carcinogens in the following groups:
 +
 +    current cigarette smokers who only smoked cigarettes
 +    current cigarette smokers who also used e-cigarettes
 +    current cigarette smokers who also use other forms of nicotine replacement therapies (NRT), such as skin patches or gum
 +    former smokers who were now using only e-cigarettes
 +    former smokers who were now using only NRT
 +
 +Limitations to this study design include the possibility of recall bias as participants provide information about their smoking habits through a 
 +
 +questionnaire. There is also the possibility of residual confounding from other unmeasured factors so findings may not be entirely accurate.
 +What did the research involve?
 +
 +The researchers recruited participants from Greater London by placing advertisements in newspapers and online, posters in pharmacies and though marketing companies.
 +
 +To be able to join the study participants had to be either:
 +
 +    a current smoker, who has smoked an average of five or more cigarettes per day for at least six months
 +    a former smoker, who has stopped using tobacco products for at least six months
 +
 +Researchers aimed to assess the effects of long-term use of non-combustible nicotine delivery – that is NRT or e-cigarettes – for a minimum of six months. ​
 +
 +They compared:
 +
 +    current smokers of cigarettes only
 +    combination smokers – cigarette smokers also using an e-cigarette or NRT
 +    former smokers using e-cigarettes-only or NRT-only
 +
 +Participants were asked to visit a laboratory after not eating, drinking, or using combustible cigarettes or other nicotine products for an hour before their visit. During the appointment the participants filled in a questionnaire including questions on sociodemographic and smoking characteristics.
 +
 +Breath, saliva, and urine samples were taken, which were assessed for levels of nicotine and other carcinogenic or toxic chemicals.
 +
 +This included tobacco specific nitrosamines (TSNAs), which are one of the most important carcinogens in tobacco formed from nicotine. They also looked at a class of toxins called volatile organic compounds (VOCs) such as acrylamide and cyanide-releasing acrylonitrile. ​
 +
 +Analyses were adjusted for smoking history, sociodemographic variables, physical health and subjective wellbeing.
 +What were the basic results?
 +
 +A total of 181 participants were included in the study.
 +
 +Significantly lower levels of cancer causing chemicals, TSNAs and VOCs were found in samples from former smokers using e-cigarettes only or NRT only, compared with current smokers. Their levels were lower than both those who smoked cigarettes only, or smokers using either e-cigarette or NRT alongside ​
 +
 +cigarettes.
 +
 +Former smokers using e-cigarettes only had significantly lower levels of the toxic chemical NNAL (a by-product of exposure to TSNAs) than all other groups. ​
 +
 +This was equivalent to a 97% reduction compared with the levels of cigarette-only users.
 +
 +Current smokers of combustible cigarettes only, and current smokers also using NRT or e–cigarettes,​ had similar levels of the tobacco-related toxins and carcinogens.
 +
 +Looking at nicotine, levels in urine samples were broadly similar across groups. There was though some variation in salvia levels, with e-cigarette-only users, and those using NRT while continuing to smoke cigarettes had slightly lower nicotine levels than other groups.
 +
 +How did the researchers interpret the results?
 +
 +The researchers conclude: "​Former smokers with long-term e-cigarette-only or NRT-only use may obtain roughly similar levels of nicotine compared with smokers of combustible cigarettes only, but results varied. Long-term NRT-only and e-cigarette-only use, but not dual use of NRTs or e-cigarettes with combustible cigarettes, is associated with substantially reduced levels of measured carcinogens and toxins relative to smoking only combustible cigarettes"​.
 +Conclusion
 +
 +This cross-sectional study aimed to assess whether there are differences in levels of nicotine and toxic chemicals in cigarette smokers, and former or current smokers who are also long-term users of e-cigarettes or NRT.
 +
 +E-cigarettes are designed for users to inhale nicotine without most of the harmful effects of smoking. There has been much discussion over the benefits of vaping over conventional smoking methods and this is the first long-term study assessing these effects.
 +
 +The main findings are not that surprising – former smokers who have now switched to using e-cigarettes or NRT only have significantly lower levels of toxins than those who continue to smoke regular cigarettes.
 +
 +However, the study has limitations.
 +
 +while attempts were made to control for confounders,​ it is possible that other unmeasured factors are influencing the results
 + this was a self-selected sample and therefore findings may not be generalisable to the whole population of former or current smokers indirect exposure to cigarette smoking could not be accounted for in this research the study is not able to assess the comparative effectiveness of NRT or e-cigarettes as aids to smoking cessation
 +
 +The findings of this study do appear to reassure that use of e-cigarettes and nicotine replacement therapy – while continuing to provide nicotine – can reduce exposure to toxic chemicals that can lead to cancer in cigarette smokers.
 +
 +However, this is only if you completely stop smoking – using e-cigarettes or NRT while continuing to smoke won’t help.
 +
 +Smokers who want to stop smoking can get help from NHS stop smoking services, which can reduce their risk of smoking-related disease and death. ​
 +
 +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 +
 +http://​www.quitsmokingsupport.com/​whatsinit.htm
 +
 +Have You Ever Wondered What's In a Cigarette?
 +
 +Cigarette Ingredients
 +
 +Cigarette smoke contains over 4,000 chemicals, including 43 known cancer-causing (carcinogenic) compounds and 400 other toxins. These cigarette ingredients include nicotine, tar, and carbon monoxide, as well as formaldehyde,​ ammonia, hydrogen cyanide, arsenic, and DDT.
 +
 +Nicotine is highly addictive. Smoke containing nicotine is inhaled into the lungs, and the nicotine reaches your brain in just six seconds.
 +
 +Vaporizers from Shiva Online are fast becoming the first choice for people wanting to give up smoking.
 +
 +While not as serious as heroin addiction, addiction to nicotine also poses very serious health risks in the long run.
 +
 +Nicotine in small doses acts as a stimulant to the brain. In large doses, it's a depressant, inhibiting the flow of signals between nerve cells. In even larger doses, it's a lethal poison, affecting the heart, blood vessels, and hormones. Nicotine in the bloodstream acts to make the smoker feel calm.
 +
 +As a cigarette is smoked, the amount of tar inhaled into the lungs increases, and the last puff contains more than twice as much tar as the first puff. 
 +
 +Carbon monoxide makes it harder for red blood cells to carry oxygen throughout the body. Tar is a mixture of substances that together form a sticky mass in the lungs.
 +
 +Most of the chemicals inhaled in cigarette smoke stay in the lungs. The more you inhale, the better it feels—and the greater the damage to your lungs. You can ask anyone working on bachelors degree in any medical field and they will be able to tell you what damage smoking does to the lungs.
 +
 +What's In Cigarette Smoke?
 +
 +Cigarette smoke contains over 4,000 chemicals, including 43 known cancer-causing (carcinogenic) compounds and 400 other toxins. These include nicotine, tar, and carbon monoxide, as well as formaldehyde,​ ammonia, hydrogen cyanide, arsenic, and DDT.
 +
 +Nicotine is highly addictive. Smoke containing nicotine is inhaled into the lungs, and the nicotine reaches your brain in just six seconds.
 +
 +Nicotine in small doses acts as a stimulant to the brain. In large doses, it's a depressant, inhibiting the flow of signals between nerve cells. In even larger doses, it's a lethal poison, affecting the heart, blood vessels, and hormones. Nicotine in the bloodstream acts to make the smoker feel calm.
 +
 +As a cigarette is smoked, the amount of tar inhaled into the lungs increases, and the last puff contains more than twice as much tar as the first puff. 
 +
 +Carbon monoxide makes it harder for red blood cells to carry oxygen throughout the body. Tar is a mixture of substances that together form a sticky mass in the lungs.
 +
 +Most of the chemicals inhaled in cigarette smoke stay in the lungs. The more you inhale, the better it feels—and the greater the damage to your lungs.
 +
 +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 +
 +There are only four ingredients,​ and we did not find a single one of them on the surface of the Moon.
 +
 +E-liquid begins with the main base, vegetable glycerin. We (and most other manufacturers) use certified organic VG—the glycerin doesn'​t carry flavor very well, but does produce a lot of vapor. The next ingredient is propylene glycol—this is usually cited by alarmists as being a "main ingredient in antifreeze." ​
 +
 +This is incorrect, as they'​re willfully confusing it with diethylene glycol, which has actually been found in mass market e-cig products. I absolutely do not add any of that to my liquid because I do not make antifreeze.
 +
 +Propylene glycol—or PG—is a main ingredient in albuterol, or asthma inhalers, and is perfectly safe to inhale when vaporized. PG is thinner than VG, and carries flavor very well—the next ingredient, flavorings, are usually suspended in PG. Flavorings are food-grade, can be natural or artificial, and are limited only by the imagination of the juice maker.
 +
 +A note about these ingredients—the "we don't know what's in these things"​ arguments dissolve in the face of numerous studies like these (http://​publichealth.drexel.edu/​~/​media/​Files/​publichealth/​ms08.ashx),​ showing that not only do we understand completely what's in these things, but we also have a solid understanding of their (negligible) toxicity when vaporized.
 +
 +The final ingredient is pharmaceutical-grade nicotine, and all juice manufacturers make their product available in varying nicotine strengths. They range from ridiculous (up to 36 milligrams per milliliter—basically a Lucky Strike with the filter ripped off) all the way down to nothing at all. That's right, zero. So what's the point of selling a "​tobacco product"​ with no nicotine, you ask?
 +
 +You may be tempted to think I'm full of crap, but sales figures don't lie: e-liquid in very low to zero nicotine strength (6 mg per ml and below) outsells medium-to-high strengths (12 mg and above) by better than a two-to-one margin. Also, considering that literally every single e-liquid manufacturer offers zero-nicotine liquid—and at least one makes only that—it'​s safe to say that there would be no supply if the demand did not exist.
 +
 +There are reasons for this. Most users start off at a high nicotine level when they are still getting off of analog cigarettes. When a beginner graduates to a device that produces more vapor, they don't need as high a concentration of nicotine to be satisfied. Then, they may want to further "step down" (decrease the nicotine strength) once they find that high nicotine actually screws with the flavor of an e-liquid. Simply put, the less nicotine you use, the better your liquid will taste and, despite what media pundits seem to think, it turns out that even adults like things that taste good.
 +
 +The average person has probably heard two things about the vapor produced by electronic cigarettes: either it's perfectly harmless, or it's worse than cigarettes, forest fires, and nuclear explosions combined. You've probably heard more than once that "not enough studies have been done."
 +
 +Here's where my job as author of this article gets really easy. In case you don't have time to read the linked studies in their entirety, allow me to quote:
 +
 +A 2012 Greek study ( http://​www.escardio.org/​about/​press/​esc-congress-2012/​press-conferences/​Documents/​presentations/​konstantinos-farsalinos.pdf ) entitled Acute effects of using an electronic nicotine-delivery device on myocardial function: comparison with regular cigarettes: "​Absence of combustion and different chemical composition,​ leading to less toxic chemicals created and absorbed . . . electronic cigarettes may be a safer alternative to tobacco cigarettes."​
 +
 +A 2012 research paper ( http://​tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/​content/​early/​2013/​03/​05/​tobaccocontrol-2012-050859.short ) entitled Levels of selected carcinogens and toxicants in vapor from electronic cigarettes: "We found that the e-cigarette vapors contained some toxic substances. The levels of the toxicants were 9–450 times lower than in cigarette smoke and were, in many cases, comparable with trace amounts found in the reference product . . .our findings are consistent with the idea that substituting tobacco cigarettes with e-cigarettes may substantially reduce exposure to selected tobacco-specific toxicants. E-cigarettes as a harm reduction strategy among smokers unwilling to quit, warrants further study."​
 +
 +A 2012 study entitled ( http://​www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/​pubmed/​23033998 ) Comparison of the effects of e-cigarette vapor and cigarette smoke on indoor air quality: "For all byproducts measured, electronic cigarettes produce very small exposures relative to tobacco cigarettes. The study indicates no apparent risk to human health from e-cigarette emissions based on the compounds analyzed."​
 +
 +You may not have realized this had been studied so extensively,​ and I could link to many more. I'd like to draw attention to that last study, however—the one focusing specifically on "​secondhand"​ vapor. The first inroads being made into legislating our industry are arguing that vaping should be restricted to the same areas as smoking as the vapor isn't safe. Across the board in our industry, though, the feeling is that . . . 
 +
 +1. Vaping Does Help Smokers Quit
 +
 +As our industry continues to grow, even mainstream publications are being forced to concede that there is some evidence that electronic cigarettes might be 
 +
 +effective in helping smokers to quit. We have known this for some time. Once again, I'll let the evidence speak for itself:
 +
 +"Most participants (72 percent) were former smokers, and 76 percent were using e-cigarettes daily. At baseline, current users had been using e-cigarettes for three months, took 150 puffs per day on their e-cigarette and used refill liquids containing 16 mg/ml of nicotine, on average. Almost all the daily vapers at baseline were still vaping daily after one month (98 percent) and one year (89 percent). Of those who had been vaping daily for less than one month at baseline, 93 percent were still vaping daily after one month, and 81 percent after one year. In daily vapers, the number of puffs per day on e-cigarettes remained unchanged between baseline and one year. Among former smokers who were vaping daily at baseline, 6 percent had relapsed to smoking after one month and also 6 percent after one year."
 +
 +"In a large, international survey (emphasis mine) of current, former, or never users of e-cigarettes,​ 72 percent of users reported that e-cigarettes helped them to deal with cravings and withdrawal symptoms, 92 percent reported reductions in their smoking when using e-cigarettes,​ and only 10 percent reported that they experienced the urge to smoke tobacco cigarettes when using the e-cigarette. Moreover, of more than 2000 former smokers in this survey, 96 percent reported that the e-cigarette helped them to stop smoking."​
 +
 +"In smokers not intending to quit, the use of e-cigarettes,​ with or without nicotine, decreased cigarette consumption and elicited enduring tobacco abstinence without causing significant side effects."​
 +
 +Compare this to a truly negligible success rate for traditional nicotine replacement therapy like the patch and gum—upon which some pharmaceutical companies hang their hats—and it's easy to see where the opposition comes from. Perhaps this is why the United States Food and Drug Administration is pushing legislation that will hand the reins of our industry over to Big Tobacco—those staunch guardians of public health—while putting companies like mine six feet under.
 +
 +Meanwhile, some of the actual guardians of public health are already coming around on the issue. Many of the links I've used are compiled here, and this database is added to regularly—the ever-growing pile of evidence that the media is only giving you one side of the story.
Public Domain
Driven by DokuWiki Recent changes RSS feed Valid CSS Valid XHTML 1.0