Electronic cigarettes
Mr. Benn
I'd been a light smoker for over twenty years maybe smoking 6 a day. That
was up until March when I tried electronic cigarettes. I now "smoke" these
instead and actually prefer them to tobacco. I also feel better as a
result.
In the UK, a pack of 20 cigarettes costs around GBP5 or 8 US dollars and
it's getting more expensive all the time with the price being inflated well
above the retail price index by increasing taxation. So that was another
reason for quitting tobacco.
Admittedly, I am still taking in nicotine with the e-cigs but having
eliminated the many other more harmful chemicals present in tobacco smoke,
it means that I can still get my nicotine fix without having a significant
effect on my health. My wallet is also much better off as well!
I asked my doctor and he is quite happy for me to be doing this so it can't
be that bad.
Stephenk
I haven't tried these myself but I think its pretty cool to get your
fix without actually inhaling something that's burning and has all of
those extra chemicals. I also can't believe how expensive cigarettes
are in the UK. I'm freaking out about five dollars a pack here in the
states but eight is such a wallet buster.
Bruce Watson
>>
>> In the UK, a pack of 20 cigarettes costs around GBP5 or 8 US dollars and
>> it's getting more expensive all the time with the price being inflated well
>>
>> Admittedly, I am still taking in nicotine with the e-cigs but having
>> eliminated the many other more harmful chemicals present in tobacco smoke,
>> it means that I can still get my nicotine fix without having a significant
>>
>> be that bad.
>
>I haven't tried these myself but I think its pretty cool to get your
>fix without actually inhaling something that's burning and has all of
>those extra chemicals. I also can't believe how expensive cigarettes
>are in the UK. I'm freaking out about five dollars a pack here in the
>states but eight is such a wallet buster.
But why use nicotine at all?
It doesn't do much of anything except make you use more of it.
FlatIronMike
you. E-sickerettes are still all about nicotine and addiction and
this NG is about the FREEDOM from the drugs!
FlatironMike
smober today!
Two years, seven months, two weeks, six days, 15 hours, 46 minutes and
46 seconds. 19273 cigarettes not smoked, saving $5,781.69. Life saved:
9 weeks, 3 days, 22 hours, 5 minutes.
Bruce Watson
FlatIronMike <flatiro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Bruce, except for Mr. Benn, I think everyone else here agrees with
>you. E-sickerettes are still all about nicotine and addiction and
>this NG is about the FREEDOM from the drugs!
The newsgroup is called alt.support.stop-smoking and stopping
smoking is what it's all about and there is no preferred method
for doing so. Whatever works.
Until a few short years ago, tobacco was the only way to get nicotine.
Times have changed. There's a whole arsenal of ways to fix without
tobacco. The patch and gum don't deliver with the speed smoking does.
The e-cigarette does.
I fear that the e-cigarette will be used for both good: to quit
using tobacco and all the health risks that entails, and bad:
to keep on using the drug that doesn't do much at anything but addict.
I fear never smokers who were put off by the dangers of tobacco,
the stench, and the irritating smoke might be tempted to
try it and find out the hard way nicotine is not something to
trifle with.
I fear current smokers will be tempted to quit smoking with the
e-cigarette, succeed, but find they are still hooked and,
rationalizing, continue to use it and never take the next step
to be drug free.
All could rationalize nicotine isn't the danger, the smoke is.
They would be correct with respect to emphysema and lung cancer
but the dangers of addiction remain.
The dangers are being being compelled to use it, paying for it, wasting
time procuring it, wasting time using it, wasting time rationalizing
its use, and locked into the unnecessary endless roller coaster of
craving and relief.
It's interesting to note there is a newsgroup alt.recovery.nicotine.
It is dead quiet.
Mr. Benn
b2dd-c4c...@b15g2000yqd.googlegroups.com:
> Bruce, except for Mr. Benn, I think everyone else here agrees with
> you. E-sickerettes are still all about nicotine and addiction and
> this NG is about the FREEDOM from the drugs!
It's about stopping smoking. If you can't give up the nicotine, at least
give up smoking. Replacing smoking with nicotine gum, nicotine nasal
sprays, patches, electronic cigarettes or nicotine inhalers is much more
preferable than continuing to smoke. It's even better to be nicotine-free.
But remember, it's not the nicotine that normally leads smokers to ill-
health and premature death. The nicotine is "just" the thing that makes
people continue to smoke.
My mother died 3 years ago from COPD. I don't want the same to happen to
me or anyone else.
>
> FlatironMike
> smober today!
> Two years, seven months, two weeks, six days, 15 hours, 46 minutes and
> 46 seconds. 19273 cigarettes not smoked, saving $5,781.69. Life saved:
> 9 weeks, 3 days, 22 hours, 5 minutes.
Well done Mike!
Mr Benn
7 months without tobacco
Saved $450 so far
Mr. Benn
news:12544233...@irys.nyx.net:
> The dangers are being being compelled to use it, paying for it,
> wasting time procuring it, wasting time using it, wasting time
> rationalizing its use, and locked into the unnecessary endless roller
> coaster of craving and relief.
How is that any different to chocolate for some people or in my own case
Indian curries? Both are relatively safe. Well, maybe not the hot
strength of curries that I eat. I certainly suffer the next day!
I'm not being serious of course :-)
Eldon
> In article <9a6a286e-0c89-4c2a-b2dd-c4cb4b562...@b15g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,
There are still some remaining physical hazards from nicotine. It
messes with blood sugar levels, and constricts arteries, making them
or prone to clogging. Seems like I read that it also makes the liver
and kidneys work harder. But e-cigarettes are surely several times
healthier than smoking.
Bruce Watson
"Nicotine has very powerful effects on arteries throughout the body.
Nicotine is a stimulant, it raises blood pressure, and is a
vasoconstrictor, making it harder for the heart to pump through the
constricted arteries. It causes the body to release its stores of fat
and cholesterol into the blood."
>I'm not being serious of course :-)
You would be serious if chocolate and curry were as addictive as nicotine.
You and I can eat a bar of chocolate or a curry and not think
about doing so for quite a while.
Doesn't work that way with nicotine. The addict needs its use
day in day out with let up.
"Addiction is a notion at once fearful and exotic because it sits apart
from so much of our experience. We may choose to smoke a cigarette or to
read a book, but only the cigarette can demand our attention. Addiction
has to do with power, with the ceding of the will, with the loss of
autonomous self. Because this drama can be played out elsewhere--in
romantic relationships, for example--it's not surprising that we turn to
addiction repeatedly as a concept in describing phenomena that have
nothing to do with chemical substances. Yet it is to drugs that we
invariably return to define our notion of addiction, with other
compulsions being judged "addictive" in accordance with how much they are
like drug dependence."
Smoking: The Artificial Passion, David Krogh, W.H. Freeman and Company,
1991, p 140.
"At its extremes, drug dependence often is not only the loss of an
autonomous self; it is the loss of self altogether. There is a saying
among addicts that, deep into addiction, all junkies become the same
person. There is but one need; there is but one set of activities to be
carried out; there is but one reaction to fulfilling the need.
Personality, intellect, differing interests--all the things that make us
human eventually are swallowed up into the maw of the solitary pursuit.
Things are different with nicotine in this regard only because it is
legal, it produces less tolerance, and its immediate effects are less
debilitating; . . ."
Smoking: The Artificial Passion, David Krogh, W.H. Freeman and Company,
1991. p.141
Bruce Watson
Eldon <Eldo...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>> The dangers are being being compelled to use it, paying for it, wasting
>> time procuring it, wasting time using it, wasting time rationalizing
>> its use, and locked into the unnecessary endless roller coaster of
>> craving and relief.
>
>There are still some remaining physical hazards from nicotine. It
>messes with blood sugar levels, and constricts arteries, making them
>or prone to clogging. Seems like I read that it also makes the liver
>and kidneys work harder. But e-cigarettes are surely several times
>healthier than smoking.
And a full-metal-jacketed bullet is safer than a hollow point.
It's best not to be shot at all.
Bruce Watson
Mr. Benn <%%@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>FlatIronMike <flatiro...@gmail.com> wrote in news:9a6a286e-0c89-4c2a-
>b2dd-c4c...@b15g2000yqd.googlegroups.com:
>
>> Bruce, except for Mr. Benn, I think everyone else here agrees with
>> you. E-sickerettes are still all about nicotine and addiction and
>> this NG is about the FREEDOM from the drugs!
>
>It's about stopping smoking. If you can't give up the nicotine, at least
>give up smoking. Replacing smoking with nicotine gum, nicotine nasal
>sprays, patches, electronic cigarettes or nicotine inhalers is much more
>preferable than continuing to smoke. It's even better to be nicotine-free.
>But remember, it's not the nicotine that normally leads smokers to ill-
>health and premature death. The nicotine is "just" the thing that makes
>people continue to smoke.
>
>My mother died 3 years ago from COPD. I don't want the same to happen to
>me or anyone else.
Suppose you find yourself without a cartridge for the e-cigarette.
Or suppose your community bans them which raises the price considerably
because they are illegal and available only on the black market.
What do you do to get the hit you're accustomed to?
The gum and patch aren't going to supply your drug fast enough.
Are you going to buy a pack of cigarettes?
Then, too, there's a problem with the drug. It's exhibits tolerance.
The effect will decrease with time--slower than other drugs--but
it happens. You will need more and more over the years to keep
withdrawal and craving away. You're going to need more. It's
going to cost more.
And because nicotine never fully satisfies, you may be tempted
to use other addictive drugs in order fill the void nicotine leaves.
Mr. Benn
> You and I can eat a bar of chocolate or a curry and not think
> about doing so for quite a while.
I can't not think about curry for more than 24 hours normally!
Bruce Watson
Do you carry it around with you during the day? Do you make sure
you have enough and will not run out it? Do eat it 10 to 20 times
a day? Do you avoid places where you aren't permitted with it?
We fool ourselves by talking about being "addicted" to this
or that when a powerfully addictive drug is not involved.
We underestimated nicotine when we started and continued
to when we kept on using it.
Heroin addicts say it's easier to quit junk than cigarettes.
It should be no wonder the success rate for quitting smoking
is so poor.
Eldon
> In article <ha6ejb$8l...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>
>
>
> Mr. Benn <%...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >FlatIronMike <flatironmike...@gmail.com> wrote in news:9a6a286e-0c89-4c2a-
> >b2dd-c4cb4b562...@b15g2000yqd.googlegroups.com:
>
> >> Bruce, except for Mr. Benn, I think everyone else here agrees with
> >> you. E-sickerettes are still all about nicotine and addiction and
> >> this NG is about the FREEDOM from the drugs!
>
> >It's about stopping smoking. If you can't give up the nicotine, at least
> >give up smoking. Replacing smoking with nicotine gum, nicotine nasal
> >sprays, patches, electronic cigarettes or nicotine inhalers is much more
> >preferable than continuing to smoke. It's even better to be nicotine-free.
> >But remember, it's not the nicotine that normally leads smokers to ill-
> >health and premature death. The nicotine is "just" the thing that makes
> >people continue to smoke.
>
> >My mother died 3 years ago from COPD. I don't want the same to happen to
> >me or anyone else.
>
> Suppose you find yourself without a cartridge for the e-cigarette.
> Or suppose your community bans them which raises the price considerably
> because they are illegal and available only on the black market.
>
> What do you do to get the hit you're accustomed to?
> The gum and patch aren't going to supply your drug fast enough.
> Are you going to buy a pack of cigarettes?
>
> Then, too, there's a problem with the drug. It's exhibits tolerance.
> The effect will decrease with time--slower than other drugs--but
> it happens. You will need more and more over the years to keep
> withdrawal and craving away. You're going to need more. It's
> going to cost more.
There I think you're guessing, Bruce. Some people who have smoked for
decades continue to smoke one pack a day; they don't increase their
consumption to two or three packs. There are also people who only
smoke a few or several cigarettes a day, because they metabolize
nicotine slower than normal (so it stays in the system longer). This
might be Mr. Benn's genetic makeup.
I personally find e-cigarettes ludicrous just because they're... well,
so artificial. At least people don't raise patches up to their mouths
and lick them. And what would poor Bogart do out in the jungle where
there's no electricity for a recharge?
Bruce Watson
Eldon <Eldo...@aol.com> wrote:
>> In article <ha6ejb$8l...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>
>> Mr. Benn <%...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> >FlatIronMike <flatironmike...@gmail.com> wrote in news:9a6a286e-0c89-4c2a-
>> >b2dd-c4cb4b562...@b15g2000yqd.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> >> Bruce, except for Mr. Benn, I think everyone else here agrees with
>>
>>
>> >me or anyone else.
>>
>> Suppose you find yourself without a cartridge for the e-cigarette.
>> Or suppose your community bans them which raises the price considerably
>> because they are illegal and available only on the black market.
>>
>> What do you do to get the hit you're accustomed to?
>> The gum and patch aren't going to supply your drug fast enough.
>> Are you going to buy a pack of cigarettes?
>>
>> Then, too, there's a problem with the drug. It's exhibits tolerance.
>> The effect will decrease with time--slower than other drugs--but
>> it happens. You will need more and more over the years to keep
>> withdrawal and craving away. You're going to need more. It's
>> going to cost more.
>
>There I think you're guessing, Bruce. Some people who have smoked for
>decades continue to smoke one pack a day; they don't increase their
>consumption to two or three packs. There are also people who only
>smoke a few or several cigarettes a day, because they metabolize
>nicotine slower than normal (so it stays in the system longer). This
>might be Mr. Benn's genetic makeup.
"In any event smokers are notorious liars, even to themselves.
They have to be. Most casual smokers smoke far more cigarettes, and
on far more occasions, than they will admit to. I have had many
conversations with so-called five-a-day smokers during which they
have smoked more than five cigarettes in my presence. Observe casual
smokers at social events such as weddings and parties. They will be
chain-smoking with the best of them."
--Allen Carr, The Easy Way to Stop Smoking, Sterling
Publishing, NY, 2004, p. 139.
Carr may be less than honest with us here but nicotine, like
all other drugs, has the tolerance property. It's slower than,
say, heroin which can make the user require twice as much
in just a few weeks. Nicotine takes decades to exhibit
tolerance. Today's pack-a-day smoker did not start out
at a pack a day. And today's pack-a-day smoker is looking
at smoking more in the future.
"How many of those do you smoke every day?" I ask.
"I hate that question," she said in a mind-your-own-business voice.
--Audrey Silk, founder of NYCCLASH, quoted in NYNewsday, May 3, 2005.
>I personally find e-cigarettes ludicrous just because they're... well,
>so artificial. At least people don't raise patches up to their mouths
>and lick them. And what would poor Bogart do out in the jungle where
>there's no electricity for a recharge?
That last is a good point. What does the e-cigarette addict
do when the battery runs down? I suppose he could get
a charge from someone's laptop. And I suppose there are
wall chargers.
Nicotine, being the powerfully addicting drug it is, will
not permit the user to wait an hour for a charge. There's
the siren song of the analog cigarette again.
Best not to be addicted to anything.
Eldon
> In article <7e66399d-14ed-4e97-8c2c-68363279e...@z28g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
Don't worry; the industrious Chinese will soon introduce an e-
cigarette with a little crank on the side to recharge the battery --
like those flashlights, emergency radios and kiddie laptops that can
be recharged that way. Or maybe solar cells? And how about nicotine
refill kits, like the ones for ink jet cartridges? It appears they
work about the same way.
Bruce Watson
Eldon <Eldo...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>> That last is a good point. What does the e-cigarette addict
>> do when the battery runs down? I suppose he could get
>> a charge from someone's laptop. And I suppose there are
>> wall chargers.
>
>Don't worry; the industrious Chinese will soon introduce an e-
>cigarette with a little crank on the side to recharge the battery --
>like those flashlights, emergency radios and kiddie laptops that can
>be recharged that way. Or maybe solar cells? And how about nicotine
>refill kits, like the ones for ink jet cartridges? It appears they
>work about the same way.
Reminds me not so long ago when teachers didn't permit
pupils to bring calculators into the classroom. The caveat being
what do you do if the batteries run down, or if it breaks.
The obvious answer was change the batteries or get a new
calculator. Today kids are required to have them.
I see them catching on. I don't see people rejecting nicotine.
People will always want to try something even if it doesn't do
much but addict.
I wonder what the manufacturers will claim once the market
is saturated from smokers wanting a safer alternative.
I wonder if they will market them as a stand-alone item.
They insist now the e-cigarette is NOT a smoking cessation product.
Will they aggressively market them to nonsmokers like the
cigarette manufacturers do with their products?
Will "Come to Marlboro County" become "Come to Golden Dragon Country"?
Eldon
> In article <ad294825-0c64-4f99-a00a-74ae4409b...@m18g2000vbs.googlegroups.com>,
I predict a big underground market for THC cartridges. There's already
a vaporization technology for marijuana and hashish that uses
controlled heat. Why not tap into the installed e-cigarette base?
Bruce Watson
Eldon <Eldo...@aol.com> wrote:
>> In article
><ad294825-0c64-4f99-a00a-74ae4409b...@m18g2000vbs.googlegroups.com>,
>>
>>
The cartridges would be smaller than the weed itself and easier
to conceal.
But marijuana seems to be close to becoming legal. My state has
medical marijuana and it seems very easy to qualify. You don't have
to be dying of cancer.
Weed and tobacco might just trade places.
Mr. Benn
@irys.nyx.net:
Bruce, it was a joke.
Mr. Benn
> But marijuana seems to be close to becoming legal. My state has
> medical marijuana and it seems very easy to qualify. You don't have
> to be dying of cancer.
>
> Weed and tobacco might just trade places.
I have absolutely no objection to that! Especially if THC is relatively
non-addictive but it may carry health risks. Not that it appears to have
harmed me in the past.
Eldon
> anon3...@nyx.nyx.net (Bruce Watson) wrote innews:12546105...@irys.nyx.net:
In theory, the more potent it gets, the less harmful it is (since
there's less smoke per unit of THC). One of the main problems is that
the effects aren't easily measured like those caused by alcohol.
People nabbed for driving under the influence of cannabis can credibly
say they really weren't under the influence; it was just some residual
THC from a party last week.
Bruce Watson
Mr. Benn <%%@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>anon...@nyx.nyx.net (Bruce Watson) wrote in news:1254592402.772266
>@irys.nyx.net:
>
>> In article <ha7uto$ljd$2...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>> Mr. Benn <%%@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>anon...@nyx.nyx.net (Bruce Watson) wrote in
>>>news:12545824...@irys.nyx.net:
>>>
>>>> You and I can eat a bar of chocolate or a curry and not think
>>>> about doing so for quite a while.
>>>
>>>I can't not think about curry for more than 24 hours normally!
>>
>> Do you carry it around with you during the day? Do you make sure
>> you have enough and will not run out it? Do eat it 10 to 20 times
>> a day? Do you avoid places where you aren't permitted with it?
>>
>> We fool ourselves by talking about being "addicted" to this
>> or that when a powerfully addictive drug is not involved.
>>
>> We underestimated nicotine when we started and continued
>> to when we kept on using it.
>>
>> Heroin addicts say it's easier to quit junk than cigarettes.
>>
>> It should be no wonder the success rate for quitting smoking
>> is so poor.
>
>Bruce, it was a joke.
I know.
But there are people who ascribe "addiction" to things like
your curry in all seriousness. They aren't joking. What they're
doing is, at best, underestimating nicotine if not totally ignorant
of it's potential to create physical and psychological dependence.
It's an easy trap to fall into. People, incorrectly, assume that
a drug's addictive potential is correlated with the drug's
effects. Not true. The various properties of drugs are
completely independent.
Nicotine happens to top the list. People must learn that or
they will make the same mistake we did.
Bruce Watson
Eldon <Eldo...@aol.com> wrote:
>> anon3...@nyx.nyx.net (Bruce Watson) wrote
>innews:12546105...@irys.nyx.net:
>>
>> > But marijuana seems to be close to becoming legal. My state has
>> > medical marijuana and it seems very easy to qualify. You don't have
>> > to be dying of cancer.
>>
>> > Weed and tobacco might just trade places.
>>
>
>In theory, the more potent it gets, the less harmful it is (since
>there's less smoke per unit of THC). One of the main problems is that
>the effects aren't easily measured like those caused by alcohol.
>People nabbed for driving under the influence of cannabis can credibly
>say they really weren't under the influence; it was just some residual
>THC from a party last week.
I haven't known many pot users over the years, but they all
drank alcohol. Blood alcohol content alone might be sufficient
to prosecute for driving while impaired.
Clams said he never met a pothead who was financially solvent.
Those few I've known were.
Bruce Watson
I don't condone the use of marijuana, but if you are going
to experiment, don't mix it with tobacco. It then becomes
highly addictive. That's what nicotine does.
Mr. Benn
> I don't condone the use of marijuana, but if you are going
> to experiment, don't mix it with tobacco. It then becomes
> highly addictive. That's what nicotine does.
I'm waiting for it to become available dissolved in propylene glycol.
I'm kidding. I haven't touched marijuana for at least 15 years
unfortunately. I'm showing my age!
hoser1605
Nicotine also speeds up the heart rate by 15 to 20 strokes per minute.
Bruce Watson
hoser1605 <dhh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> There are still some remaining physical hazards from nicotine. It
>> messes with blood sugar levels, and constricts arteries, making them
>> or prone to clogging. Seems like I read that it also makes the liver
>> and kidneys work harder. But e-cigarettes are surely several times
>> healthier than smoking.
>
If it's true we have only so many heart beats in a lifetime, then using
nicotine is not a good idea.
http://www.csgnetwork.com/avglifeexpfromhr.html
It also constricts the blood vessels. It could be the nicotine
and not the "tar" or CO2 that contributes to the risk of heart disease.