• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

E-cigarettes: fresh air or smoke and mirrors?

What do you think of E-Cigs

  • They're a public nuisance.

    Votes: 4 12.9%

  • They should be outlawed.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • They should be regulated heavier.

    Votes: 4 12.9%

  • E-cig's, no big deal.

    Votes: 19 61.3%

  • Only for tobacco replacement.

    Votes: 1 3.2%

  • My choice isn't here.

    Votes: 3 9.7%
  • Total voters
    31
grip

grip

Slow 🅖 Hand
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 1, 2011
Messages
33,000
Reaction score
13,973
Location
FL - Daytona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
E-cigs are becoming a real controversy with the tobacco police. They are a nicotine replacement system and probably as addictive, but are they a serious health problem?

Personally, I got off a 25yr smoking habit using one for a month, but that's not what everyone does with them. For those who replace a damaging tobacco habit, they're good, but how many new, young users are starting that might or might not have used cigarettes?

That's the real question?


On the edge of the SoHo neighborhood downtown, The Henley Vaporium is an intimate hipster hangout with overstuffed chairs, exposed brick, friendly counter help — but no booze.

Instead, the proprietors are peddling e-cigarettes, along with bottles of liquid nicotine ready to be plucked from behind a wooden bar and turned into flavorful vapor for a lung hit with a kick that is intended to simulate traditional smoking.

"Vaping," has had astonishing growth — in just eight years or so, the number of enthusiasts around the world has grown from a few thousand to millions.

The Food and Drug Administration plans to regulate e-cigarettes but has not yet issued proposed rules. Right now, the agency simply states on its website that "e-cigarettes have not been fully studied so consumers currently don't know the potential risks of e-cigarettes," including how much nicotine or other chemicals are inhaled, or if e-cigs "may lead young people to try ... conventional cigarettes."

Whether vaping helps regular smokers quit or leads non-smokers to nicotine addiction isn't known. Vaping may be safer — there are differing opinions — but it isn't necessarily cheap.

E-cigarettes: fresh air or smoke and mirrors?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
They are no big deal. Water vapor with a variety of flavors. Much less dangerous than real cigs, and they don't smell bad. Some of them actually have a pleasant pipe tobacco smell.
 
grip said:
E-cigs are becoming a real controversy with the tobacco police. They are a nicotine replacement system and probably as addictive, but are they a serious health problem?

Personally, I got off a 25yr smoking habit using one for a month, but that's not what everyone does with them. For those who replace a damaging tobacco habit, they're good, but how many new, young users are starting that might or might not have used cigarettes?

That's the real question?
Click to expand...

E-cigs probably greatly reduce the risk of cancer and emphysema compared to cigarettes because smoke and tar are eliminated. But the risk of vascular disease - stroke and heart attack - probably comes in large part from the nicotine, which E-cigs deliver. However, how that risk compares to the risk of those diseases with cigarette smoking isn't known. Cigarette smoke contains >4000 different chemicals, and how they all contribute to the effects of cigarette smoking isn't known. How nicotine acts if it's give by itself to humans isn't clear, but in animals it does cause vascular disease.

If we see a spike up in stroke and heart attack in the community in about 30 years we'll have our answer.
 
Who cares. To start smoking these days, you have to be a real dillhole or lacking the brains God gave a fruit fly. If you want to trade known minor health hazards and potential major ones down the road to look like a "sophisticated" hipster smoker, so be it.

If profit off of common stupidity became outlawed, half the Fortune 500 would close next week.
 
Gipper said:
Who cares. To start smoking these days, you have to be a real dillhole or lacking the brains God gave a fruit fly. If you want to trade known minor health hazards and potential major ones down the road to look like a "sophisticated" hipster smoker, so be it.

If profit off of common stupidity became outlawed, half the Fortune 500 would close next week.
Click to expand...

Please don't mistake reckless foolishness with stupidity. A great many intelligent people smoke, Ayn Rand smoked, the President smokes (despite my political disagreements I'll not doubt his intellect)

Vice and addiction can strike the smart and the stupid alike.
 
Lachean said:
Please don't mistake reckless foolishness with stupidity. A great many intelligent people smoke, Ayn Rand smoked, the President smokes (despite my political disagreements I'll not doubt his intellect)

Vice and addiction can strike the smart and the stupid alike.
Click to expand...

Mmmmm sorry...not buying it.

At one point in time, when smoking was fashioned as "cool" and exactly how many health problems it contributed to wasn't fully realized, I could give a pass.

Today, there is absolutely NO reason to start lighting up. None.

No 14 year old out there is addicted to a cigarette he has never smoked before. To begin lighting up and continuing to do so for a length of time that addiction sets in is just plain stupid. Semantics for the sake of sugar-coating a responsibility shirk won't hold water.
 
Gipper said:
Mmmmm sorry...not buying it.

At one point in time, when smoking was fashioned as "cool" and exactly how many health problems it contributed to wasn't fully realized, I could give a pass.

Today, there is absolutely NO reason to start lighting up. None.

No 14 year old out there is addicted to a cigarette he has never smoked before. To begin lighting up and continuing to do so for a length of time that addiction sets in is just plain stupid. Semantics for the sake of sugar-coating a responsibility shirk won't hold water.
Click to expand...

You're not buying the fact that there are intelligent people who smoke? That's fine, I need not sell a fact.
 
grip said:
E-cigs are becoming a real controversy with the tobacco police. They are a nicotine replacement system and probably as addictive, but are they a serious health problem?

Personally, I got off a 25yr smoking habit using one for a month, but that's not what everyone does with them. For those who replace a damaging tobacco habit, they're good, but how many new, young users are starting that might or might not have used cigarettes?

That's the real question?
Click to expand...

Well. Leave it to assholes to find a way to abuse something for their own pleasure. Chicago has banned ecigarettes indoors. I guess that's the reason. I don't think they should be outlawed if they're used in the way they were intended. But selling nicotine on the side? Throw that guy in jail.
 
My choice wasn't there (and I voted accordingly).

It isn't my business, your business, or certainly not the gubmint's business, what people put in their bodies.

If they want to smoke cigarettes, it's on them.

If they want to smoke these e-things, it's on them.

If they want to mainline a speedball of dog shampoo and arsenic, it's on them.

Bunch of busybody mother****ers in this country.
 
Lachean said:
You're not buying the fact that there are intelligent people who smoke? That's fine, I need not sell a fact.
Click to expand...

You can burn up any currency toward a label such as "smart" by doing something as monumentally stupid as taking up smoking.

You don't get a pass if you quote Nietzche between drags. We're not talking about an expensive, deadly, debilitating habit picked up through ignorance. Deliberate and willful performance of an action like this will automatically shuffle someone to the "stupid" section of the room.
 
Gipper said:
You can burn up any currency toward a label such as "smart" by doing something as monumentally stupid as taking up smoking.
Click to expand...

Whatever you say Gipper. Intelligence has nothing to do with IQ, education or knowledge so long as you've engaged in an impulsive behavior once. :roll:

You who give people a pass when "exactly how many health problems it contributed to wasn't fully realized" as if intelligent people didn't KNOW just as well then as they do now that its harmful to your health.

Gipper said:
You don't get a pass if you quote Nietzche between drags. We're not talking about an expensive, deadly, debilitating habit picked up through ignorance. Deliberate and willful performance of an action like this will automatically shuffle someone to the "stupid" section of the room.
Click to expand...

Oh the hypocrisy...
 
Lachean said:
Whatever you say Gipper. Intelligence has nothing to do with IQ, education or knowledge so long as you've engaged in an impulsive behavior once. :roll:

You who give people a pass when "exactly how many health problems it contributed to wasn't fully realized" as if intelligent people didn't KNOW just as well then as they do now that its harmful to your health.
Click to expand...

I don't believe that they did. I mean, I don't believe that anyone thought cigarettes to be "healthy", but I'd be willing to bet that they weren't aware of 90% of the potential health disasters cigarettes are linked to today. Once the Surgeon General warning became common in print and studies were linked openly, the idea that it was "worth the risk" became laughable.

My dad's generation...sure, I'll give them a pass. My generation? No.

Tell you what - if you can give me ONE legitimate reason to be under 25 and addicted to cigarettes, I'll concede the entire argument to you. One.
 
MaggieD said:
Well. Leave it to assholes to find a way to abuse something for their own pleasure. Chicago has banned ecigarettes indoors. I guess that's the reason. I don't think they should be outlawed if they're used in the way they were intended. But selling nicotine on the side? Throw that guy in jail.
Click to expand...

I am not understanding what you are saying here. Are people who use e-cigarettes indoors abusing 'something'? What was the way they were intended to be used? What are you referring to when you say 'selling nicotine on the side'?
 
No big deal. I woul prefer them over cigarette smoke when being around other people in public any day.
 
Gipper said:
I don't believe that they did. I mean, I don't believe that anyone thought cigarettes to be "healthy", but I'd be willing to bet that they weren't aware of 90% of the potential health disasters cigarettes are linked to today. Once the Surgeon General warning became common in print and studies were linked openly, the idea that it was "worth the risk" became laughable.

My dad's generation...sure, I'll give them a pass. My generation? No.

Tell you what - if you can give me ONE legitimate reason to be under 25 and addicted to cigarettes, I'll concede the entire argument to you. One.
Click to expand...

Surely the reason is 'addictive' personalities? It's not by accident that a great many addicts of any kind, go on to be addicted to something else once they kick the original vice (whatever that may be).

Paul
 
gunner said:
Surely the reason is 'addictive' personalities? It's not by accident that a great many addicts of any kind, go on to be addicted to something else once they kick the original vice (whatever that may be).

Paul
Click to expand...

Get addicted to helping.



When you're addicted to helping, you don't need an intervention.
 
Dezaad said:
I am not understanding what you are saying here. Are people who use e-cigarettes indoors abusing 'something'? What was the way they were intended to be used? What are you referring to when you say 'selling nicotine on the side'?
Click to expand...

Did you read the opening post??

On the edge of the SoHo neighborhood downtown, The Henley Vaporium is an intimate hipster hangout with overstuffed chairs, exposed brick, friendly counter help — but no booze.

Instead, the proprietors are peddling e-cigarettes, along with bottles of liquid nicotine ready to be plucked from behind a wooden bar and turned into flavorful vapor for a lung hit with a kick that is intended to simulate traditional smoking.

"Vaping," has had astonishing growth — in just eight years or so, the number of enthusiasts around the world has grown from a few thousand to millions.
Click to expand...
 
I use vapor myself. But I went with being regulated heavier.

There should be oversight to ensure they contain only the listed ingredients and that the nicotine level is actually what they say.

Other than that, who cares. It is definitely far better than smoking and for some of us, there is an actual benefit to nicotine.
 
Do they carry the same risks to OTHERS that second-hand smoke does? If not, they shouldn't be banned from public use.

That was the whole rationale behind banning real cigarettes in public... harm to others. No harm, no foul.
 
Yeah, I don't give a fig what other people put in their lungs as long as it doesn't affect mine. And as far as I know nicotine is not illegal, so who cares if that place in the OP is selling it? I fail to see the big deal here.
 
MaggieD said:
Well. Leave it to assholes to find a way to abuse something for their own pleasure. Chicago has banned ecigarettes indoors. I guess that's the reason. I don't think they should be outlawed if they're used in the way they were intended. But selling nicotine on the side? Throw that guy in jail.
Click to expand...

Another reason not to live in Chicago.
 
Gipper said:
Mmmmm sorry...not buying it.

At one point in time, when smoking was fashioned as "cool" and exactly how many health problems it contributed to wasn't fully realized, I could give a pass.

Today, there is absolutely NO reason to start lighting up. None.

No 14 year old out there is addicted to a cigarette he has never smoked before. To begin lighting up and continuing to do so for a length of time that addiction sets in is just plain stupid. Semantics for the sake of sugar-coating a responsibility shirk won't hold water.
Click to expand...

Even though your mind appears to be a closed loop, I'm absolutely positive you have some vice. Coffee, sex, gambling, under-aged girls, over-eating?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom