Aha….so that’s where that strange white powder is being made 
….
3 Likes
5 Likes
Hello everyone.
Ah, I understand, or maybe not. Smoking is allowed!
Cigarette smoke contains over 7000 chemical compounds, of which at least 70 are proven to be carcinogenic, and hundreds are toxic. Smoking damages almost every organ in the body and is responsible for about 90% of lung cancer deaths.
5 Likes
It’s no coincidence I quoted from the end of the article about who supported its creation. 
I tend to say that numbers don’t lie, allegedly. There is data on how many deaths per year can be attributed to traditional smoking (globally roughly 8 million, of which 1 million are passive smokers).
The e-cigarette also has a history of almost 15-20 years. How many deaths can be attributed to it? Even if I include poor battery and device usage, the use of drugs and other “additives”, it’s still negligible. Of course, only mountain air is healthy, but based on the above, even if it were only 10% less harmful than analog cigarettes, it shouldn’t be persecuted but manufactured and distributed within regulated, controlled frameworks. (Then one wouldn’t have to fear dubious origins and composition.) Of course, they cunningly invented that e-cigarettes must be persecuted because they are a “gateway drug,” so “for the protection of youth.” Well, yes, it’s better if they get hooked on one of Phillip Morris’s products right away… Business is business… 
For now, analog is the bigger business (human life doesn’t count).
9 Likes
As I live through my 20s since Covid, the average person doesn’t matter in anything anymore… even though there are quite a lot of us… the top 10,000 have gotten a taste for blood.
5 Likes
Oh my goodness. Heavy metals. A quantity of 6000x, aaaaaah. Materials are being included that are very difficult to obtain even for industrial circles for the so-called buzzing companies they claim to serve. Let alone for someone to buy in industrial quantities. Anyway, maybe I’m being inattentive, but I didn’t really see the type of metals.
List of Heavy Metals
Heavy metals are metals and metalloids that typically have a density 4x greater than water, can be toxic even in low concentrations, and accumulate in the environment. The most significant toxic heavy metals include lead (Pb), mercury (Hg), cadmium (Cd), arsenic (As - metalloid), chromium (Cr), nickel (Ni), copper (Cu), zinc (Zn), as well as cobalt (Co) and selenium (Se).
Most well-known and most toxic heavy metals:
Lead (Pb): Paints, batteries, fuels (formerly).
Mercury (Hg): Thermometers, amalgam fillings, industrial emissions.
Cadmium (Cd): Batteries, fertilizers, tobacco smoke.
Arsenic (As): Drinking water, pesticides.
Chromium (Cr): Electroplating, industrial processes.
Further heavy metals measurable in the environment:
Copper (Cu)
Nickel (Ni)
Zinc (Zn)
Cobalt (Co)
Selenium (Se)
Molybdenum (Mo)
Aluminum (Al)
Beryllium (Be)
Thallium (Tl)
Antimony (Sb)
Of these, which ones still enter production in an unregulated form? Copper, zinc, nickel, aluminum 
happens every day. I think someone here has been beaten with the whip of stupidity. Black market is an interesting phrasing. It might be true in cases where the given country has declared its trade inappropriate. But it’s manufactured somewhere based on something, and since it’s manufactured, it must meet certain standards.
Standard as a concept
A standard is a technical document created or approved by a recognized body, accepted by common consent, that relates to an activity or its results, and contains general and repeatedly applicable rules, guidelines, or characteristics, the application of which results in the most favorable outcome under the given conditions.
Hungarian standards are regulated by Law XXVIII of 1995.[1]
Different countries have different standards. Come on, there are commercial and international standards. This is why something might have left the country’s borders.
4 Likes
It was never expected. There are a few billion.
1 Like
“of uncertain origin…” - like any other product, right??
And you’re forbidden to buy from webshops that prove to be reliable…
I also like the much emphasized phrase “black market”. Seen from home, practically almost everything counts as such due to the regulations… 
8 Likes
This is roughly what bothers the tobacco lobby. Self-reward is present in every segment of life. Where, living the hamster wheel of weekdays, we long for something to come of it, a recognition that is missing from the employer, sometimes even from the family, but we still long for it. The enlightened generation feels and seeks less harmful gifts that can be experienced as a reward treat.
Shall we push them towards the analog? Into healthcare, where they weigh what you’ve tried to make your weekdays bearable amidst inhuman challenges… And they make healing dependent on this.
3 Likes
I’m sorry you deleted your post, I still read it in the email notification. There is room for all kinds of opinions.
I would add a small comment to this:
“And I am sad to read that it is still a conviction that it has absolutely no harmful effect.”
You might have read this from someone else, I myself always emphasize that only mountain air is healthy. However, if electronic ones are even 10% less harmful than analog ones, then they should be regulated, not “witch-hunted”.
Regarding young people getting addicted.
The more they are banned, the more attractive they become. If there were no electronic ones, what would the same young people try? Of course, we should not popularize them for them as a harmless hobby or a cool thing, but nowadays I read more scaremongering articles about electronic ones than about analog ones.
4 Likes
I deleted it because I was just butting in, and I know how annoying people like me are. 
But it’s regulated now too, it’s another matter that you can get low-quality products in tobacco shops; besides nicotine, I don’t buy anything from there, I order it instead. I agree that they separated the flavorings and nicotine, because taste is what’s attractive, but what did they achieve with it… I buy them separately and mix them. The industry won’t admit it, even though they’ve already tested the ingredients, conducted risk assessments, and I know it carries a significantly lower health risk than classic cigarettes (you don’t need to be a scientist for this; if there’s no carcinogenic risk, it’s already less harmful). The moment they would state: “according to our research, e-cigarettes are 85% less harmful than classic cigarettes,” at that moment, one could expect that those who have been hesitant about it for some reason would try it. And I support – and I would be stoned for this statement – that those who don’t want or can’t quit classic cigarettes should be offered e-cigarettes as a harm reduction alternative. (I think this will happen over time. Currently, behavioral therapy (for low-level addiction), or intensive behavioral therapy (coping), possibly with nicotine replacement medication (prescription required) is recommended (for strong or very strong addiction). (This can be easily assessed with the so-called Fagerström nicotine dependence test.)
What I find problematic is the aforementioned young age group and the flavors. I spend half my day at university, I see what different age groups use. And I see very few people under about 23-24 years old using anything other than vapes imported from China, which raises the issue of unknown composition and counterfeiting, which is a problem. (Most are original, but how much does it cost to counterfeit anything in China? A few thousand units accidentally get organic solvent instead of flavoring, and the problem is created, but that’s another matter.) I also vape sometimes, it’s incredibly delicious, that’s the problem
In summary, briefly, because it became very rambling: I support e-cigarettes as a much less harmful alternative, but they need to be put into a framework so that those who wouldn’t get hooked on classic cigarettes, and wouldn’t get hooked on this either if there were no flavorings, don’t get hooked on it for the taste. And those who can’t and/or don’t want to quit should use it, but try to use it as many times as they would light a classic cigarette a day. Because when I’m at home, or out for a beer, it never leaves my hand.
5 Likes
The essence was left out: I agree with the tobacco industry lobby. Let them produce good quality liquids, and they don’t have to fear their revenue.
5 Likes
Well, currently, the regulation here largely means prohibition, with a near-zero supply in tobacco shops. I am convinced that if it weren’t illegal, fewer young people would use it.
If they stated that it is less harmful, then someone who has so far shied away from it and would try it is very likely an analog smoker, so this would be pure profit. And whoever is not a smoker and wants to try it will try it one way or another. Then at least they wouldn’t be trying something acquired on the sly, from who knows where.
With the great “regulation,” they achieved the elimination of the then-emerging, reliable shops, where mostly knowledgeable people sold things and could give advice on usage.
It’s just a bit obvious that they didn’t deal with e-cigarettes until they posed a threat to the tobacco business. Then came the classification of nicotine as medicine. Whoever came up with that knew exactly that a smoker wouldn’t switch to e-cigarettes without nicotine. The goal wasn’t to protect young people, but to ensure people stick to analog cigarettes, which can be produced at low cost and sold with huge profit. When they directed people to tobacco shops, they also knew that a tobacco shop owner wouldn’t bother with various products when there was profit to be made from analog ones.
You say no one should get addicted because of the taste. I don’t know, can one get addicted purely because of the taste? Because we get addicted to cigarettes because of nicotine, that’s for sure, since they taste bad. (Okay, there’s menthol, but I hate it, for example.) I understand that a smoker switches, and then manages to get the nicotine content down to zero, but still continues to use it out of habit, or because they like fiddling with it.
What would make a former non-smoker get addicted to a flavored zero-nicotine liquid? There’s no addictive substance in it.
I think for young people, this is a passing “hobby.” I have an adult son, he also tried it with zero-nicotine liquids. He puffed occasionally for a while, then forgot about it, and I got my tank back.
7 Likes
I can agree. The rules are made by those who have never used anything in their lives, so anything that smokes is from the devil. If those who switched to it and experienced benefits made the rules, it would be different. But well, here at home, regulation brought purely on a professional basis in any area, well… I don’t really encounter it
7 Likes
It is not necessary for the one who makes the rules to be devout, just open-minded, humane, honest, and to listen to all sides. They should want to understand what they are regulating.
I would gladly pay even more for the devices and the liquid if I knew I could legally buy tested products from a knowledgeable person. Unfortunately, I see no movement in this direction over the years, only attempts at prohibition and obstruction, and of course, taxation/tax increases.
5 Likes
Another ‘here’s nothing, grab it tight’ article:
2 Likes
They don’t search so vehemently for harmful ingredients even in processed meats, packet soups, fuels, etc. But this sticks in people’s minds: the e-cig is harmful.
(Oh, and war and migrants)
1 Like
The domestic scientific and regulatory life doesn’t want to get to know it either. Because then it would turn out, wow, there’s nothing to it, and they couldn’t scare the less enlightened people. And also, a test, pfft, it costs money and time. One run is 2 minutes in the centrifuge, after which it’s evaluated, let the lab technician’s hourly wage be 3k . If someone in the EU has already tested it, it’s not good enough for us. No, no, why should another country tell us. A car tested abroad isn’t the real deal either, because according to them, it takes money away from the state and the inspector 
.
5 Likes
This is essentially the same article. The client is also the same.
5 Likes
Again they worry about our health. Oh, their hearts! If only they weren’t so
6 Likes