rss
12-20-2013, 10:35 PM
They're all the rage.
They're allegedly "better" than smoking.
You see 'em in mall kiosks, in the local Stop-N-Rob, and in people's hands.
What's the deal?
Well, let's start with what they are.
An "electronic cigarette" is essentially a battery-powered heater through which one draws a "juice" by inhaling. Said "juice" contains (mostly) propylene glycol, nicotine and (usually) flavors of various sorts.
Since the "juice" is heated but **t burned, it is allegedly "safe."
Well, yes and **.
Let's start with what we k**w, and then talk about what we don't -- in ** small part because there are ** decent peer-reviewed studies I can find, and thus I have **thing I can apply scientific scrutiny to.
The fact is that burning anything and inhaling the ***** is **t good for you. I don't care if it's *******, marijuana, or building materials (e.g. for firemen) inhaling ***** itself is bad. Burning material contains all sorts of nasty things, many of which are implicated in causing cancer. Further, taking that material intentionally deep into the lungs exposes the alveoli (air sacs) to these chemicals on purpose at a high concentration. These parts of the body, by design, are permeable (otherwise exchange of oxygen and CO2 couldn't occur) and as such anything in there inherently defeats the barriers that intact skin (for example) has to mitigate damage.
In addition cigarette ******* contains chemicals to prevent it from going out if it is **t drawn on. The companies don't disclose exactly what they use, but one common historical additive is small amounts of potassium nitrate, which is an oxidizer. That's the same stuff used to make gunpowder, incidentally.
But here's the problem -- there are two basic sets of issues with smoking.
The first is the cancer risk from inhaling *****.
The second is the addiction and damage done by nicotine itself.
And nicotine is in the e-cigs "juice" -- otherwise they wouldn't "satisfy" your craving for a *****.
Nicotine is extremely addictive. There are, in fact, studies that suggest that it is more-addictive than heroin, and Dr. Everett Koop (formerly the Surgeon General of the US) once called it the most-addictive substance k**wn to mankind. I can't scientifically qualify that, and indeed I don't think anyone can -- but it's without question a highly-addictive substance. E-cigs do exactly **thing about that problem.
The secondary issue is that nicotine is a CNS stimulant and does direct harm, in particular to the heart.
So on the "k**wn balance of risks" side we have the lessening of k**wn cancer risks (** ***** being inhaled) but ** change in the direct nicotine exposure risk.
But from there things get really dicey.
See, propylene glycol is considered quite safe. While it can produce acute toxicity in humans the amount required to do so is utterly ridiculous. Indeed it's so low in acute toxicity that it is approved as a direct food and cosmetic additive, including where it may be intentionally or accidentally ingested. Among other places where it's used is to winterize RV and boat fresh water systems (to prevent freeze damage); for obvious reasons small amounts of it might remain after being flushed out and thus consumed.
But less is k**wn about inhaling a mist of it on purpose, particularly over extended periods of time. Is it safe in that format? I don't k**w -- and I bet **body else does for certain either.
Next up, however, are the "flavors" and other things in the "juice." Here the data gets even more-murky, because there's little in the way of accurate labeling and testing. Indeed, I can't find anything in the literature available on exactly what's in that juice, so I can't run down the potential risks.
Again, just because something is safe to have on your tongue (e.g. taste) and/or swallow does **t mean it is safe if you inhale a vaporized mist comprised of it, especially if you do so on a regular and repeated basis.
One final issue -- biological contamination.
The risks here are IMHO huge and largely being ig**red. As far as I k**w this hasn't happened yet, but it most-certainly can, and the risk goes up a lot with the devices sold to use this stuff. Remember that moist, warm and dark are ideal environments for bacteria to colonize and get growing. An e-cig looks to me like a hell of an incubator and while the direct vaporization chamber might get hot e**ugh to kill any bacteria directly in it just downstream from there I bet it doesn't get anywhere near hot e**ugh to do so.
And the truly bad news is that if you get some sort of nasty bacterial growth going in one of these things you're then going to, by intent and design, take it deeply into your lungs where it **w has access to your body and can make you extremely ill -- and very quickly too.
My personal view?
These things are probably safer than smoking an actual cigarette, likely a lot safer when it comes to cancer risks. But that doesn't mean they're safe, there is little or ** regulation or even straight-up, honest labeling on exactly what's in the "juice", and thus I have absolutely ** idea whether inhaling the juice itself, beyond the nicotine risks, is safe or **t.
On the bad news side the biological contamination risk is likely off-the-charts, with ** decent way to mitigate it. Unlike an actual cigarette that both is very hot (and thus would kill bacteria) and in addition is thrown away after a single use these things get refilled, recharged and their cartridges replaced, and unlike a cigarette that is in contact with you for a few minutes and then is discarded these devices are going to be on and about your person for days, weeks or even months with plenty of opportunity for bacteria to colonize, grow and be inhaled.
** thanks.
أكثر... (http://market-ticker.denninger.net/akcs-www?post=226867)
They're allegedly "better" than smoking.
You see 'em in mall kiosks, in the local Stop-N-Rob, and in people's hands.
What's the deal?
Well, let's start with what they are.
An "electronic cigarette" is essentially a battery-powered heater through which one draws a "juice" by inhaling. Said "juice" contains (mostly) propylene glycol, nicotine and (usually) flavors of various sorts.
Since the "juice" is heated but **t burned, it is allegedly "safe."
Well, yes and **.
Let's start with what we k**w, and then talk about what we don't -- in ** small part because there are ** decent peer-reviewed studies I can find, and thus I have **thing I can apply scientific scrutiny to.
The fact is that burning anything and inhaling the ***** is **t good for you. I don't care if it's *******, marijuana, or building materials (e.g. for firemen) inhaling ***** itself is bad. Burning material contains all sorts of nasty things, many of which are implicated in causing cancer. Further, taking that material intentionally deep into the lungs exposes the alveoli (air sacs) to these chemicals on purpose at a high concentration. These parts of the body, by design, are permeable (otherwise exchange of oxygen and CO2 couldn't occur) and as such anything in there inherently defeats the barriers that intact skin (for example) has to mitigate damage.
In addition cigarette ******* contains chemicals to prevent it from going out if it is **t drawn on. The companies don't disclose exactly what they use, but one common historical additive is small amounts of potassium nitrate, which is an oxidizer. That's the same stuff used to make gunpowder, incidentally.
But here's the problem -- there are two basic sets of issues with smoking.
The first is the cancer risk from inhaling *****.
The second is the addiction and damage done by nicotine itself.
And nicotine is in the e-cigs "juice" -- otherwise they wouldn't "satisfy" your craving for a *****.
Nicotine is extremely addictive. There are, in fact, studies that suggest that it is more-addictive than heroin, and Dr. Everett Koop (formerly the Surgeon General of the US) once called it the most-addictive substance k**wn to mankind. I can't scientifically qualify that, and indeed I don't think anyone can -- but it's without question a highly-addictive substance. E-cigs do exactly **thing about that problem.
The secondary issue is that nicotine is a CNS stimulant and does direct harm, in particular to the heart.
So on the "k**wn balance of risks" side we have the lessening of k**wn cancer risks (** ***** being inhaled) but ** change in the direct nicotine exposure risk.
But from there things get really dicey.
See, propylene glycol is considered quite safe. While it can produce acute toxicity in humans the amount required to do so is utterly ridiculous. Indeed it's so low in acute toxicity that it is approved as a direct food and cosmetic additive, including where it may be intentionally or accidentally ingested. Among other places where it's used is to winterize RV and boat fresh water systems (to prevent freeze damage); for obvious reasons small amounts of it might remain after being flushed out and thus consumed.
But less is k**wn about inhaling a mist of it on purpose, particularly over extended periods of time. Is it safe in that format? I don't k**w -- and I bet **body else does for certain either.
Next up, however, are the "flavors" and other things in the "juice." Here the data gets even more-murky, because there's little in the way of accurate labeling and testing. Indeed, I can't find anything in the literature available on exactly what's in that juice, so I can't run down the potential risks.
Again, just because something is safe to have on your tongue (e.g. taste) and/or swallow does **t mean it is safe if you inhale a vaporized mist comprised of it, especially if you do so on a regular and repeated basis.
One final issue -- biological contamination.
The risks here are IMHO huge and largely being ig**red. As far as I k**w this hasn't happened yet, but it most-certainly can, and the risk goes up a lot with the devices sold to use this stuff. Remember that moist, warm and dark are ideal environments for bacteria to colonize and get growing. An e-cig looks to me like a hell of an incubator and while the direct vaporization chamber might get hot e**ugh to kill any bacteria directly in it just downstream from there I bet it doesn't get anywhere near hot e**ugh to do so.
And the truly bad news is that if you get some sort of nasty bacterial growth going in one of these things you're then going to, by intent and design, take it deeply into your lungs where it **w has access to your body and can make you extremely ill -- and very quickly too.
My personal view?
These things are probably safer than smoking an actual cigarette, likely a lot safer when it comes to cancer risks. But that doesn't mean they're safe, there is little or ** regulation or even straight-up, honest labeling on exactly what's in the "juice", and thus I have absolutely ** idea whether inhaling the juice itself, beyond the nicotine risks, is safe or **t.
On the bad news side the biological contamination risk is likely off-the-charts, with ** decent way to mitigate it. Unlike an actual cigarette that both is very hot (and thus would kill bacteria) and in addition is thrown away after a single use these things get refilled, recharged and their cartridges replaced, and unlike a cigarette that is in contact with you for a few minutes and then is discarded these devices are going to be on and about your person for days, weeks or even months with plenty of opportunity for bacteria to colonize, grow and be inhaled.
** thanks.
أكثر... (http://market-ticker.denninger.net/akcs-www?post=226867)