For some reason I kinda want to get one that is clearly not a real cigarette and just fill it with water (so just water vapor, no costly buying flavored oils and shit). I think its mostly because it'd be fun to troll some super rabid anti-smoking people I know.
They can have nicotine in, but they do not have to. The liquids available on the market have a wide variety of formulations, with numerous different flavors/aromas and varying levels of nicotine (including zero).
Typical formulations are a base fluid of glycerine, or a mixture of glycerine and propylene glycol, to which are added traces of essential oils for perfuming and flavor. Both glycerine and PG are "generally regarded as safe" which means that they can safely be added to food in unrestricted quantities, and are regularly used as diluents for food flavor extracts or prescription drugs.
It seems foolhardy to classify e-cigs as tobacco given that the harm of cigarette smoking is well established, whereas e-cigs have no plausible mechanism for causing harm, except through nicotine (which in itself, is relatively benign as a drug, albeit addictive).
If controls are needed, they are for high concentrations of nicotine in e-cig liquid. However, I see little point in regulating zero and low nicotine liquids.
I'd agree they should be classified different but, I've got two issues with your post. First, just because its safe for ingestion (and sorry but "unrestricted quantities" is straight BS for obvious reasons), doesn't necessarily mean its safe to vaporize and ingest it, especially when its mixed with other things. (Now, is it likely safe? Probably, but it'd be nice if we'd get actual peer reviewed evidence, of which apparently there is some so not much of a real issue after all.) The other thing, you seriously don't think there should be any regulation at all? You do realize that'd open it up so they could put in pretty much whatever they want (that isn't explicitly illegal) in it, right? Plus they wouldn't have to say what's all in it if its not regulated at all either (and they could absolutely put a limited ingredient list to try and act like its just those things). Its not like we don't have a very blatantly obvious example of why that's a terrible thing (that being what these products are claiming to be trying to replace).
Hell, we wouldn't even have the issue with cigarettes if instead of them not regulating them then trying to outright ban them, they, I don't know, made it so they had to test their products and limit the toxic shit that's in them.
Its always blown my mind that people went "OMG there's rat poison in cigarettes?!? BAN them!" and not "WTF is rat poison doing in cigarettes? Why don't we ban them from putting that shit in there?"
Yeah, we do. Unfortunately the kind of information we need can only be found after decades of use to really know what their effects will be on health. The proof is in the pudding as they say. Also, there is already perfectly clear information on what is in the vapor. People pretend we don't have any idea what's in these things, and that's plain false. We don't know long term effects. We can make educated guesses, but that's the best anyone can do.
You absolutely could study the toxicity of the ingredients (specifically from vaporization) quite quickly and get an idea of worst case scenario.
Now maybe its just paranoia, but right now its like all those shitty synthetic drugs that gave rise to synthetic cannabis and "bath salts". Its leaving things open to be abused badly. There's also a shit ton of people that buy them online where they're sourced from China, and sorry if I might be worried that the ingredients might not be as good as their posited to be.
There is one aspect that would take a long time to study though, and that's if there's any correlation between younger people getting started with e-cigarettes and them using real cigarettes. To me that is a legitimate concern, and I believe some of the tobacco companies have actually been looking into e-cigarettes as being a bridge to younger customers. For obvious reasons that does not look to be a good thing.
Dude youre talking out of your ass here. The vaping community isnt saying its 100% safe. Hell. Its not 100% to stand on the corner and wait for the bus. In fact, you'll inhale more toxic chemicals than what a vape will give you. If you did any kind of research whatsoever you would know that instad of flapping your gums.
Research? Theres been a fuck ton of it.
HERE is a good start. If you really cared to educate yourself, youll even click the footnotes.
Thank you for providing something real to actually consider. My problem is that because of the lack of regulation right now, there's potential for products that are not offering the same thing that the ones they tested are, and as far as I know there's nothing keeping the companies making these honest beyond their own integrity, and we know how that holds up.
Hell, even with tobacco's vested interests, counterfeit cigarettes are still a huge issue, and those are very likely worse than even the normal cigarettes with regards to their health impact.
To me, the best route would be some regulation. FDA should come up with some guidelines for what these products should be comprised of, have studies showing their health effects, and work with the industry to ensure some general standards (so that we don't get a bunch of counterfeit shit from China that contains other things). If a company wants to make a product that doesn't match the guidelines then they should have to have it tested. Would the alcohol industry make a good model for regulations?
I just think there is a middle ground, and I think it could be beneficial to both consumers and companies making them. If they toe it right, I think it could actually also be a model for widespread legalizing marijuana (which would also benefit the vaping industry).
Facebook
Twitter