Soldato
Thats a good enough reason for me not to use them, atleast you know the risks of normals smokes.
When they become properly licensed or regulated then i would be more than happy to make the switch.
Cigarette Prices
- Thread starter richthomuk
- Start date
Thats a good enough reason for me not to use them, atleast you know the risks of normals smokes.
When they become properly licensed or regulated then i would be more than happy to make the switch.
Haha! that was my incentive to give up a year and a half ago. I have my PC now, chuffed to bits with it and I have the added bonus of being a non smoker now!
Permabanned
The price of fags might be steep but the amount of money I spent this week on vaping gear would pay for my fags for 4-5 months but on the plus side I believe it to be less damaging and my kit should last far longer than 4-5 months - I can lower the amount I smoke until I stop and can sell the stuff I bought and get some return on it. I can also still enjoy nicotine....
Vaping is simply win
Vaping is simply win
Man of Honour
I feel the same way about obese people or people that do not look after themselves.
It is elitist and it’s unfair (possibly), I know that, but it’s just how I feel about that. I’d rather people with congenital conditions and issues, people with medical issues which aren’t as a result of self abuse shouldn’t have to suffer from a strained NHS because of people who take it for it’s worth and abuse themselves and the system. I know it’s a little black and white, and life isn’t like that – and if I’m honest, as long as I get the care I need (if ever I need it) then frankly I don’t care. I guess my feelings are down to why people don’t want to be healthy or look after themselves!
Heck, we can all catch horrid diseases or conditions in the most random of ways even if we’re horridly healthy with our lifestyles, it just depends on the hands we are dealt – but trying to do your best to minimise that by following a healthy lifestyle seems so intuitive to me and doing the opposite seems daft (to me).
True you pay tax for the cigarettes you smoke, but it’s like me buying a unique Van Gogh painting and then peeing on it because I paid for it and I have the right to do it – it’s such a waste, and means others cannot enjoy this masterpiece owing to my selfishness.
This is where I agree with you – I don’t like people’s freedoms and freedoms of choice being inhibited, and hence my conflict on this subject. And the governments ridiculous spending on some or even many of the taxes we pay are absolutely infuriating. As you suggest, our taxes may go up as a result, but potentially at the same time people would be more productive (less smoking breaks), ill less often and so the economy would balance itself out nonetheless? Utopian perhaps, but still a possibility. What I’d prefer is for people to smoked those e-cigs, at least they are less messy (people who chuck butts and other rubbish on the floor rile me no end – it’s disgusting, which also then leads on to spitting (something a lot of smokers seem to do
), less smelly, and less of a nuisance to non smokers.I went through a little phase of “social smoking” – despite it being an antisocial thing, but I can count on 1 hand the number of packets I probably ended up smoking – so pretty tiny. I agree the outdoor policy is fair, and it’s also polite – nothing worse than going into someone’s home and it stinks of smoke, and having that yellow staining and grease on everything. I guess the things I take issue (and this probably doesn’t apply to 99% of the smokers on here) are those that just do it with ignorance, expect the free ride, and think that it’s part and parcel of life in the UK that they should get everything without making an effort to help themselves.
I commute now (fortunately not a long one) and the number of people who reek of smoke and just generally body odour (because they cannot smell themselves) is horrific. I do get up and move, because I don’t want to be subjected to people’s poor hygiene or bad habits.
Well done on quitting by the way.
If you ask me the only reason they haven't become licensed is cigarette companies are insanely powerful and completely against e-cigarettes and they all have their fingers in many pies, in government, in business, in the medical community.
Effective NRT? Oh no no no, we can't have that, people might actually quit smoking our cigarettes!
Current NRT is ****ing useless by comparison, and to be honest, it's just an inhalator that allows the nicotine to go past your mouth and into your lungs in order to administer it effectively and instantaneously. Wheras an inhalator only puts nicotine into your mouth to slowly be absorbed.
Permabanned
The big cigarette companies are buying up ecig companies.
They're also buying up farmland for when weed gets legalised.
Until they have established market share, they don't want it to take off.
And to be honest, high market share allows them control over the market when compared to the real cigarette market.
That's just common sense, you don't need a DBA to work it out.
Thats a Russian 91.
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Feb 2008
- Posts
- 11,108
I feel the bigger picture behind big tobacco companies buying and setting up e-cig companies is little more than a ruse. They're doing so in order to undertake a multi-pronged attack on the tech. Call me a conspiracy theorist, but it doesn't take a big stretch to see.
1. Governments eye e-cigs suspiciously, not least due to potential tax revenue losses directly associated with growing adoption.
2. Tobacco sees massive revenue loss as smokers make the switch to this safer alternative.
3. Tobacco buys e-cig companies. The media immediately jumps on this and makes false correlation between the historical harm peddled by tobacco companies, and the fact that they're now moving into the arena. So it must be bad.
4. Dumb politicans board the bandwagon, and enforce strict medical regulations on e-cigs. While leaving tobacco freely available on shelves to all who want them -- and yes, we already know that includes children.
5. The tobacco companies are now in a position, with their e-cig companies, to *******ise and neuter the technology into a "proper", acceptable and licensed NRT.
6. Just like other currently available NRTs, this *******isation results in a product that is effectively useless to the dedicated smoker (in comparison to the experience offered by today's e-cig), and efficacy goes through the floor.
7. Finally, the e-cig is dead and buried except for the enthusaist and underground scene, and tobacco once again rules the land with a death-dealing iron fist.
Way to go.
Of course, if governments should happen to turn a blind eye and see the tech for the benefits it offers society, tobacco companies also stand to make a lot of money themselves by moving into the arena. Either way, they still win.
Were they to become "properly licensed", they'd be useless to you. Regulation, in terms of the current market, means nothing more than warning labels on bottles and a ban on under-18 sales. That would be welcome, of course -- but why do you feel the need for that to happen before you'll try it?
All of the science already shows that they are immeasurably better for you than smoking tobacco. That much is already proven, and can be seen merely by the combination of ingredients used in the liquid itself. You don't need to be a scientist to see that.
Talking of not knowing the long-term effects is nonsense when used as justification to continue inhaling something that you know is damaging you. It also depends on what you consider "long term". Personally, I've been vaping for three years (two days on a cruddy cig-a-like and I never looked back), and haven't felt better since ... well, before I started smoking.
If anything, the physiological reaction to vapour should tell you all you need to know at this moment. Take a nice big drag, hold it in as long as you can. You don't start coughing and spluttering like holding in smoke. It just disappears.
Take another big drag, and blow it in someone's face. It doesn't prompt a reactionary recoil (unless you have halitosis, I guess), doesn't sting the nose, and doesn't water the eyes. Similarly, you know that horrible eye-stinging you get when you puff that little bit wrong and chuck a plume of smoke too close to your face? Yeah, doesn't happen with vaping. You can chug like a train, all over your face, keep your eyes open, and nothing. Absolutely nothing. Your body is capable of telling you when something is wrong or harmful. Smoking has plenty of immediate signs. Vaping? None that I've seen.
Well, except for farting a lot from swallowing air occasionally.
I feel the same way about obese people or people that do not look after themselves.
It is elitist and it’s unfair (possibly), I know that, but it’s just how I feel about that. I’d rather people with congenital conditions and issues, people with medical issues which aren’t as a result of self abuse shouldn’t have to suffer from a strained NHS because of people who take it for it’s worth and abuse themselves and the system. I know it’s a little black and white, and life isn’t like that – and if I’m honest, as long as I get the care I need (if ever I need it) then frankly I don’t care. I guess my feelings are down to why people don’t want to be healthy or look after themselves!
Heck, we can all catch horrid diseases or conditions in the most random of ways even if we’re horridly healthy with our lifestyles, it just depends on the hands we are dealt – but trying to do your best to minimise that by following a healthy lifestyle seems so intuitive to me and doing the opposite seems daft (to me).
True you pay tax for the cigarettes you smoke, but it’s like me buying a unique Van Gogh painting and then peeing on it because I paid for it and I have the right to do it – it’s such a waste, and means others cannot enjoy this masterpiece owing to my selfishness.
This is where I agree with you – I don’t like people’s freedoms and freedoms of choice being inhibited, and hence my conflict on this subject. And the governments ridiculous spending on some or even many of the taxes we pay are absolutely infuriating. As you suggest, our taxes may go up as a result, but potentially at the same time people would be more productive (less smoking breaks), ill less often and so the economy would balance itself out nonetheless? Utopian perhaps, but still a possibility. What I’d prefer is for people to smoked those e-cigs, at least they are less messy (people who chuck butts and other rubbish on the floor rile me no end – it’s disgusting, which also then leads on to spitting (something a lot of smokers seem to do
I went through a little phase of “social smoking” – despite it being an antisocial thing, but I can count on 1 hand the number of packets I probably ended up smoking – so pretty tiny. I agree the outdoor policy is fair, and it’s also polite – nothing worse than going into someone’s home and it stinks of smoke, and having that yellow staining and grease on everything. I guess the things I take issue (and this probably doesn’t apply to 99% of the smokers on here) are those that just do it with ignorance, expect the free ride, and think that it’s part and parcel of life in the UK that they should get everything without making an effort to help themselves.
I commute now (fortunately not a long one) and the number of people who reek of smoke and just generally body odour (because they cannot smell themselves) is horrific. I do get up and move, because I don’t want to be subjected to people’s poor hygiene or bad habits.
Well done on quitting by the way.
Thanks
I Think what helped me through it was the fact I had man flu for a week, and felt a tab would destroy me the way i felt. After one week I decided to carry it on, and here I am now. I sometimes still would enjoy a cig, because I used to enjoy toking on one, as much as others say they dont. I just wont go back down that route, as it was an addiction, and a habbit, and something that if I got back into, would lead me to needing a credit card to foot the bill.. £8-£9 a packet, no thanks!
I guess I just hate control, rather than anything else, heh
thanks for a proper debate rather than just spouting accusations, its actually nice to discuss subjects with full reasoning of opinion rather than just make false speculated comments as another did.
Man of Honour
There are on occasions when GD does hold a fairly decent conversation/debate!
As much as E-Cigs dont make you smell you still have massive risks smoking them. Nobody knows the long term risk of smoking concentrated nicotine vapor. They are proven to have just or almost as much carcinogens and formaldehyde as the average cigarette (proven, not me making up or exaggerating facts) but again, its down to the choice of the smoker. I wouldnt dream of tell a "vapor" its right or wrong, for me it's no different to drinking alcohol or smoking tobacco as it still damages the body there for its kinda/very hypocritical.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Feb 2008
- Posts
- 11,108
That statement is factually incorrect, for a few reasons.
Firstly, that study has already been debunked due to having been performed by a consumer association who would not reveal the methodology when challenged (last I checked up on it).
Secondly, the results have been misinterpreted (intentionally or unintentionally) by the media in order to spin negative news. Out of a number of samples of e-liquid tested in this study, less than a third were found to contain a single carcinogenic element also found in cigarettes. The issue is that they were found in miniscule amounts by comparison.
The journalist(s) involved, however, ignores that, and also ignores the fact that while one element was detected (in, remember, a minority of samples), more importantly what was not detected is the plethora of other nasty crud found within a single cigarette.
Also remember that "an e-cig" isn't an all-in-one utility. The physical item you see is merely a battery and an atomiser. In terms of the potential harm via content inhaled, it's down to the e-liquid in use. So focus should be placed on ensuring that that is clear of damaging elements, rather than the blanket statement that "e-cigs are harmful". That's a very off-base stance, and again not something that many journalists seem to be taking into consideration.
So instead of coming to the conclusion that "a minority of samples were found to contain levels of carcinogens that, while far below that of a cigarette, could be eliminated through stricter control of ingredients", you get the deluded scaremongering that is your original quote -- "They are proven to have just or almost as much carcinogens and formaldehyde as the average cigarette."
That's categorically wrong.
Apologies if that seems defensive or anything, as it really isn't. More a reminder to check sources and be very wary of what you take as truth from the media. It irks me in the extreme to see so-called journalists chucking out repackaged press releases from all and sundry without investigating a single point, and the current struggle over e-cigs is today's biggest example of the practice.
350g's Amberleaf = £45 in portugal
350g's Amberleaf = £105 in rip off britain, that's me sorted for a while
£6.43 a pouch, go to Belgium for your holiday instead next year AL is £5.35
Fair enough if thats been debunked but how ever you look at E-Cigs, even though they look appealing, until the day real research comes out, they cannot be deemed as safe or a "healthy" option to tobacco. I understand its not you having a rant or being defensive. You have very good points. I'm also not saying tobacco is great and as much as I enjoy smoking, I understand others find it repulsive and I can see why but each to their own.
Afew of my close friends use E-Cigs and they admit they feel much healthier but people also said the same after switching from full fat Coke-a-cola to Diet Coke
Afew of my close friends use E-Cigs and they admit they feel much healthier but people also said the same after switching from full fat Coke-a-cola to Diet Coke
Haha.
Soldato
Smoking is a mugs game, I was one of those mugs for 17 years.
Give up on them before they give up on you.
Give up on them before they give up on you.
Soldato
Put them up to £20 a packet!!!
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 7,613
The chances on vapes being worse than cigs is pretty slim given the nature of the 2 delivery systems. But as has already been said, it depends on the quality of the juice.