Popularity of e-cigarettes soars despite a lack of reliable information

[poledriver]

Popularity of e-cigarettes soars despite a lack of reliable information

Personal vaporiser and e-cigarette use by smokers and those who had recently quit has increased more than tenfold in just three years, and more than two in five admitted using nicotine in the devices, despite it being illegal without a medical prescription.

Dr Coral Gartner, a senior research fellow with the University of Queensland, said there was much confusion around what was legal and illegal because there were many laws involved.

"Different laws apply depending on whether the device contains nicotine or not and whether it makes a 'therapeutic claim' or not," she said.

Dr Gartner and Anke van der Sterren from the Alcohol Tobacco and Other Drug Association ACT spoke about e-cigarettes and personal vaporisers at a conference in Canberra this week.

Dr Gartner said there was a need for the public to be provided with factual information about the products, including how to minimise short-term harms through safe storage and handling practices as well as what is known about the likely harmfulness of short and long-term use.

Ms van der Sterren agreed.

"There's really a lack of information out there that people can rely on to give them some information about: do they want to use personal vaporisers or e-cigarettes and what should they use and where should they go for it and what's legal and not legal," she said.

"All the information people are looking for can be quite contradictory and difficult to make your way through so that's a really big issue for us."

She said there was debate about the safety of the devices, whether they were effective at helping smokers quit, if they were a gateway to smoking for young people and were they a way of renormalising smoking.

Dr Gartner said data on use of personal vaporisers by Australian smokers and former smokers who had quit recently had increased from 0.6 per cent in 2010 to 6.6 per cent by 2013.

More than 40 per cent of those reported using nicotine in their devices, despite it being illegal without a medical prescription.

Dr Gartner believes there was a need for federal, state and territory governments to consider whether the existing approach to regulation of both personal vaporisers, with and without nicotine, and regular cigarettes, was the optimal one for public health.

Cont -

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/national/popu...nformation-20140925-10lpou.html#ixzz3ENnahqW5

 

[Mysterie]

who uses an e-cig with no nicotine in it??

since when is nicotine juice illegal to import from overseas?

She said there was debate about the safety of the devices, whether they were effective at helping smokers quit, if they were a gateway to smoking for young people and were they a way of renormalising smoking.

im sick to death of Australian media always including "think of the children" in every article regarding drugs...

lame fear tactics imo, i fail to see how vapour can be more harmful than inhaling combusting chemical laden processed tobacco .

only people at risk here are the people that sell 10 nicotine patches for $35, and big tobacco..

 

[421]

who uses an e-cig with no nicotine in it??

Plenty of people apparently since both nicotineless disposable ones and 0mg eliquids are available everywhere. There's still the flavorings, even tobacco flavor which might be enough if it's just a habit instead of a physical dependency. And I suppose it satisfies some kind of oral fixation.

 

[Crankinit]

From what I've read, a lot of heavy smokers start out with a high nicotine content in their juice, then slowly reduce the nicotine content to taper down until there's none left and they're just vaping for the oral fixation (and the nice flavor).

 

[_DankOpiAmp_]

He refers to the e-cigarettes as if they are radioactive and need to be handled with caution while constantly mentioning the "harms" that have been largely fabricated/exagerated by governments planning to lose money. I saw this border patrol show about Australia where they did a mass police operation to confiscate smuggled cigarettes because the duty/ tax they would have lost was over a million dollars. They will go to extreme lengths to keep making money off of you. The disingenuous attempts to seem concerned about public safety are sickening.

 

[rickolasnice]

Hmmm.. any chance tobacco companies are pushing for these OTT scaremongering stories?

 

[_DankOpiAmp_]

Hmmm.. any chance tobacco companies are pushing for these OTT scaremongering stories?

Tobacco companies are both trying to push these stories to maintain profits and attempting to enter the electronic-cigarette market in some cases.

 

[One Thousand Words]

He refers to the e-cigarettes as if they are radioactive and need to be handled with caution while constantly mentioning the "harms" that have been largely fabricated/exagerated by governments planning to lose money. I saw this border patrol show about Australia where they did a mass police operation to confiscate smuggled cigarettes because the duty/ tax they would have lost was over a million dollars. They will go to extreme lengths to keep making money off of you. The disingenuous attempts to seem concerned about public safety are sickening.

Liquid nicotine is extremely toxic and you should ideally handle it with gloves. The point of the article states that very few people are probably aware of this risk because of lack of education regarding the product.

I'd be highly surprised if a direct link to cancer and second hand vapour isn't established with 20 yrs, as was found with traditional cigarettes. After all it is vaporising a complex chemical. The government is probably wise not to actively promote these products in an attempt to avoid similar health problems that exist with cigarette addicts today.

 

[stardust.hero]

0% nicotine juice can be made DIY by buying vegetable glycerin (available at many pharmacies) and adding any flavoring the user wants to it. The flavoring is used to artificially flavor candy, baked goods, etc. Generally juice is sold already suspended in propylene glycol.

Many people have gone the route of DIY by creating/buying homemade mechanical units as well as creating their own coils and juice. Those who have gone beyond basic store bought ecigarettes create mechanical mods that can produce far more vapor than the average cig-alike. High nicotine content in juice is usually not preferred. Many find joy in tinkering with new setups to create larger vapor clouds. 0%nicotine content is sometimes preferred. It's become somewhat of a hobby for some people.

Massive clouds + delicious flavor + oral fixation = pleasure

 

[_DankOpiAmp_]

Liquid nicotine is extremely toxic and you should ideally handle it with gloves. The point of the article states that very few people are probably aware of this risk because of lack of education regarding the product.

I'd be highly surprised if a direct link to cancer and second hand vapour isn't established with 20 yrs, as was found with traditional cigarettes. After all it is vaporising a complex chemical. The government is probably wise not to actively promote these products in an attempt to avoid similar health problems that exist with cigarette addicts today.

First of all, the liquid nicotine will not come in direct contact with one's skin during the normal use of e-cigarettes and any that drips can easily washed. The only real risk would be to those who do not consume nicotine because, without drinking some of it, ( which could indeed cause death) A significant toxic reaction ie: overdose, is essentially impossible. The worst it will do is give you a temporary " jacuzzi finger effect if your devices has a leak while you are holding it all day and you do not notice. (Happened to me...)

The idea the not first hand but second hand vapour would be linked to cancer in the future is absurd. We already know what chemicals can be produced be the vapourizers, including those from poorly made devices and devices that use higher temperatures and degrade some the components of the liquids. Theses things can and have been measured today and every risk and toxic found (some only in certain brands however) has been advertised to the extreme for propaganda reasons. The actual levels compared to tobacco differ by orders of magnitude.

When tobacco smoke has thousands of chemicals in higher concentrations, many of which have been linked to cancer definitively, it is unreasonable to think simple flavoured nicotine vapour could cause comparative harm. Vapourising nicotine is still not BURNING it, think about that. Something like half of the nicotine in tobacco is destroyed/ reacted into other chemicals when you light the cigarette.

The only real potential I see is if some flavourings degraded to toxins which I have heard rumours of happening with imitation dairy flavour.

 

[One Thousand Words]

The US Centers for Disease Prevention says you are mistaken

http://www.webmd.com/smoking-cessat...ettes-a-growing-public-health-threat-cdc-says

It took scientists almost 30 years to prove that smoking cigarettes caused lung cancer, today it is accepted by every sane man alive to be carcinogenic. I'm happy to wait just as long to say I told you so if you want.

 

[...]

No experience with this stuff: Do consumers ever handle the nicotine liquid, or is it always sold inside the devices?

If you have millions of non-pharmacists handling liquid fucking nicotine, poisonings will occur.

Also, some people are suicidal...

Maybe keep some atropine handy. No this is wrong. Atropine is a muscarinic antagonist.

 

[_DankOpiAmp_]

I

The US Centers for Disease Prevention says you are mistaken

http://www.webmd.com/smoking-cessat...ettes-a-growing-public-health-threat-cdc-says

It took scientists almost 30 years to prove that smoking cigarettes caused lung cancer, today it is accepted by every sane man alive to be carcinogenic. I'm happy to wait just as long to say I told you so if you want.

With modern technology we will not have to wait thirty years, that is ridiculous. We already know what is in it so riding mystery amounts to fear mongering. You will be still be waiting in the grave. Vapourizer nicotine is not the same as burned tobacco.

Also, the article you posted was about accidental poisonings that mostly occurred with children. I don't see how that goes against what I was saying. Users are at minimal risk but if ingested, nicotine can easily kill a non- user. I also know from personal experience that drinking a few drops is not deadly to a user but can indeed cause gastrointestinal distress.

 

[One Thousand Words]

I think you hold "modern technology" in too great a light, but do tell me how computer modelling can predict cancer formation over a human life?

Cancer can often take decades to develop, it can take just as long for many serious carcinogenics to display a statistically proven health risk. If you can't wait that long there is still a number of recent studies showing a strong link to nicotine's health impact.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/278265.php

the patterns of mutation found were similar to those observed in cells experiencing oxidative stress, a known precursor to cancer. The authors conclude that nicotine exposure can adversely affect genes by inducing mutations, and over the period of significant exposure may contribute to increased cancer incidence.

]

 

[.:Holy::Toast:.]

In Canada it is completely legal to sell nicotine liquid, it is just illegal to advertise it as being a safer alternative to cigarettes.
I certainly don't know the long term effects of vaping, but I do know that propylene glycol is ingested in nearly all the food we eat and has been researched and concluded to be considered safe, at least in the doses ingested by vaping.
Obviously there will be downsides, there are still solid particulates and the heat of the vapour itself can cause bronchitis and I believe even COPD.
However considering cigarettes carry much worse risks I feel pretty confident in saying that overall vaping is a much healthier choice than cigarette smoking.

 

[...]

Nicotine is a tumor growth promoter, but not a carcinogen.

Having said that, I don't think chronic administration of nicotine is a good idea.

 

[One Thousand Words]

The jury is still out on that one though.

It's worst attribute is vasoconstriction that seriously interferes with wound healing. It is the first question I ask any new patient and I refuse to perform surgery on smokers. I have the same protocol with vapers even though the scientific data is limited at the moment.

 

[Dystopia35]

I have been vapeing for 6 months.Have not gone back to the stank ass ciggs...And I feel a lot better.I have no morning cough anymore and my energy level is higher.

 

[_DankOpiAmp_]

I think you hold "modern technology" in too great a light, but do tell me how computer modelling can predict cancer formation over a human life?

Cancer can often take decades to develop, it can take just as long for many serious carcinogenics to display a statistically proven health risk. If you can't wait that long there is still a number of recent studies showing a strong link to nicotine's health impact.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/278265.php

To think it is likely that the vapour would have an carcinogenic effect even one tenth that of tobacco is moronic. I know nicotine itself has some carcinogenic effect but it is negligible. You are getting roughly the same amount of nicotine as you would if you smoked. The primary carcinogens in tobacco are radio isotope polonium-210 and tobacco specific nitrosamines. The few ( tobacco based) liquids that did contain the nitrosamines had them at levels one thousandth those found in tobacco smoke. Those are hardly the only carcinogens in tobacco.

A minuscule association with cancer may be found but it is not going to be worse than breathing city air so it is irrelevant.

 

[Jabberwocky]

How many known carcinogens are accounted for in cigarette smoke or when tobacco products are combusted? Legitimate juices (e-cig liquid) are limited to the following ingredients: PG, VG, certain flavor(s) and concentration of lab grade nicotine ("medical" grade).

Logic would then suggest that the risk of inhaling smoke containing a number of known carcinogens linked to cancers, as well as a host of other problematic compounds, universally recognized as harmful, would cause more illnesses and health problems than inhaling a vaporized solution of PG, VG, flavoring(s) and nicotine.

Tobacco products, especially cigarettes, contain 4000+ or so compounds, again many extremely problematic to say the least. On the other hand, any legitimate e-juice contains at least three ingredients and at most nine ingredients (depends on whether PG is used along with VG, or if the juice is only VG based for those allergic to PG, and how many flavorings are used). Few flavorings used in e-juice are carcinogenic or otherwise problematic (and those that which have been found to be have all but been banned throughout the industry), and in many cases companies make organic flavoring for their e-juice (such as the organic almond juice I make: soak organic certified almonds in clean, purified water, concentrate finished product, sterilize, and done - and absolutely delightful in terms of flavor) which may remove this possible issue altogether.

Finally, and other than the relative amount and safety ingredients, when used properly (as they designed to), e-cig and vaporizers DO NOT burn or combuste the nicotine/pg/vg/flavored solution, unlike tobacco products like cigarettes.

I don't think anyone has pointed this out, but when vaporized, nicotine itself behaves in a significantly different way than it does when it is combusted. So does PG, VG and flavorings. Think about how substances that are turned into an aerosol behave versus when they're combusted? Combustion in and of itself changes the substances in question, whereas vaporizing them, or heating them until they become an aerosol, generally doesn't have nearly as much impact on the substances being affected.

There is a reason vaporizers don't hit you like cigarettes hit you, although some do set vaporizers up to accomplish such, but this is something they do and no product I've heard of does this without the user intentionally setting it up and modifying it to do so (vaping at 0.02ohms for instance with a 100% PG juice for instance).

On a personal note, vaping 6mL of a juice that is 100% VG based, using a single organic flavoring, and with a nicotine concentration of 3mg/mL is INFINITELY better for my health than smoking 10-30 cigarettes every day like I used to.

I have yet to meet a single doctor, even though against vaping for the most arbitrarily asinine reasons, have had to admit that my health and overall quality of life, has improved dramatically. Even when I was only smoking five a day, and especially since I was smoking a pack a day, my teeth became SO much whiter after vaping for merely a week. I do intend to stop vaping eventually though, having reduced my nicotine intake from 24mg/mL to 3mg/mL (volume remaining the same).

Vaping might not be absolutely safe or healthy for you, but given the either vaping or smoking cigarettes, it's fair to say vaping is in fact healthy.

Anyways, I'm with OTW.