To quote the Smoking Still Kills report, which was backed by over 100 health organisations in the UK including the Royal College of Paediatricians, the British Heart Foundation, Cancer Research UK, and plenty more:
>This has raised concerns that the use of electronic cigarettes could lead to the ‘renormalisation’ of smoking and provide a gateway to smoking for young people. Yet so far there is little evidence that this is happening. The use of electronic cigarettes by people who have never smoked has been, and remains, negligible.
>If electronic cigarettes are a gateway, they currently appear to be a gateway out of smoking.
Which toxic drug are you suggesting is present in eliquid? You can't be talking about nicotine, since that's no more toxic than caffeine and is not carcinogenic.
That's odd, I can't reply to neotek. I didn't know there was a limit to the level of replies...
To neotek: No problem, it's easy to misunderstand people on the internet.
I do appreciate that vaping is probably safer than cigarettes, but that's a very low bar indeed...
Just because it may be (and who knows until there are long term studies), doesn't mean as a society we should be encouraging, or even allowing vaping.
At the very least I think there should be some kind of regulation around the ingredients, otherwise how can anybody say the vapor is safe for the inhaler and the people around them?
Apologies for misunderstanding your comment, however I would add that vapers don't usually end up smoking, the flow is in the other direction. I'd recommend reading the Smoking Still Kills report for more information:
Chuckle. Nobody will go from vaping something that tastes like candy to sucking on something that tastes like an ashtray.
Even if they were having a nic fit they'd still vape - you can get stronger fluid and vape more than you can get via smoking without feeling sick.
> I do appreciate that vaping is probably safer than cigarettes, but that's a very low bar indeed...
There's no probably about it. Smoking kills, and we don't see Vaping doing that.
> Just because it may be (and who knows until there are long term studies), doesn't mean as a society we should be encouraging, or even allowing vaping.
So you'd recommend we pursue measures known to kill tens of thousands of people just because there's a vanishingly small chance of harm sometime in the distant future?
You're mainly just demonstrating the problems with democracy.
> So you'd recommend we pursue measures known to kill tens of thousands of people just because there's a vanishingly small chance of harm sometime in the distant future?
Disallowing vaping is not the same thing as recommending cigarettes.
If you asked me to make a recommendation, it would be to make smoking illegal immediately. It's ridiculous that it's allowed at all, when it kills so many people for no good reason other than "it's not illegal, so get over it". It's so dangerous that it kills thousands of people that don't even do it!
I just don't want to see the horse bolt like it did with smoking. If it's safe, then it's safe. But nobody knows yet so don't insinuate that has been proven.
Like I said, if the threshold for safety is that things must be safer than cigarettes, then that's a very low bar indeed.
> You're mainly just demonstrating the problems with democracy.
It's a problem with democracy that I want a new drug delivery system to be proven safe before being allowed/recommended?
>This has raised concerns that the use of electronic cigarettes could lead to the ‘renormalisation’ of smoking and provide a gateway to smoking for young people. Yet so far there is little evidence that this is happening. The use of electronic cigarettes by people who have never smoked has been, and remains, negligible.
>If electronic cigarettes are a gateway, they currently appear to be a gateway out of smoking.