Jump to content

Recommended Posts

LondonMix Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Are you serious. Nicotine at high doses is lethal

> and nicotine poisoning can happen at relatively

> low concentrations in small children.

>

>

> Lowlander Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > OK, can I make it clear - tobacco, burned and

> > inhaled, is lethal (i.e. cigarettes and rolling

> > tobacco).

> >

> > Nicotine on its own is not lethal. And if it

> is

> > ingested in ways other than inhaled is far less

> > addictive.


Same goes for caffeine, alcohol, vitamin E and a host of other things. But lets differentiate between the odd cigar or pipe and cigarettes or vaping. I had my new year cigar and had a lovely nicotine buzz...no inhaling, and not risk free - bur it I've no desire to have another for 6-12 months (or never again for that matter).

Nicotine is scientifically proven to be an addictive substance. Just because some people don't develop an addiction doesn't negate that. That is the case for all addictive substances including heroin.


I'm not saying vaping should be illegal but it has risks and its addictive and serves no useful purpose except helping people quit a more dangerous activity: smoking. For these reasons it shouldn't be available to those underage and it shouldn't be advertised. More pupils have tried vaping than have actually tried smoking. There is a BBC article on it.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-33635571

Agreed. Vaping should not be advertised as an alternative to smoking, but as an aid to quitting. It's also worth pointing out that E-cigs only started appearing after several countries/ states etc started to introduce smoking bans in public places. Proof as if any were needed that only legislation can force manufacturers to change. We shouldn't be afraid to demand regulation.

Yes, agreed, I should have said ads should only be allowed showing it as an aid to quitting smoking. I 100% agree that's fine.


Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Agreed. Vaping should not be advertised as an

> alternative to smoking, but as an aid to quitting.

> It's also worth pointing out that E-cigs only

> started appearing after several countries/ states

> etc started to introduce smoking bans in public

> places. Proof as if any were needed that only

> legislation can force manufacturers to change. We

> shouldn't be afraid to demand regulation.

  • 10 months later...

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Agreed. Vaping should not be advertised as an

> alternative to smoking, but as an aid to quitting.



I can't see any exclusive contradictions between these two points. Vaping can be both an alternative way to deliver nicotine into one?s body, a less harmful substitute to traditional tobacco smoking, _and_ an aid to reduce consumption of the addictive substance for those who want such quitting. There are many eliquids http://gypsyvapes.com/Top-ELiquid-EJuice-Brands with zero nicotine, just water solution of PG/VG mixture and flavor.

  • 2 years later...

Hi there.

I usually read the latest news and studies on quitting smoking, vaping and cannabis industry here at Vapingdaily.

For example, this article https://vapingdaily.com/marijuana-side-effects/. By the way, my friend quit smoking thanks to vaping. So now I'm not so skeptical about that.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Another recommendation for Maurice Hinds! He installed a new handbasin in my small bathroom, and did a lovely job.  I would absolutely recommend Maurice for plumbing work.  He is very helpful, friendly and did a tidy and efficient job, and his work is reasonably priced. 
    • Sure. He is ideological driven on many things. He was the person that defended the blanket CPZ policy because he believed that 'if you asked most people in southwark if all parking should be paid for, most would say yes'. A completely unfounded belief not backed by any evidence. In the real world, that policy caused significant local electoral damage for some councillors. I personally see his disillusion with the Labour Party as one of his idealism vs the reality of governance. He will probably be much happier with the Greens.
    • Arguably, as regards local needs for free(er) flowing traffic and some acknowledgement of expressed wishes he hasn't been. The 'active travel' and particularly the cycling lobby seems to have got far more of his attention than others. In that aspect, at least he would seem to be far more likely to be happy amongst the avowedly private-car hating Greens. A perfectly reasonable stance, of course, but one which certainly doesn't qualify as 'arguing for local needs'. He hasn't, equally, been very obviously supportive of those, his direct constituents I believe, who have been less than enthusiastic about Gala.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...