- Status
Look - smoking is addictive; and probably because of the MAOI + nicotine combination. Many can switch to just nic and in all likelihood decrease the nic to zero quite easily, because nic alone is not that addictive.
So what about those for whom the MAOIs were an important factor - and for whom nic alone does not satiate (for whom just nic cannot substitute effectively for tobacco smoking and who therefore cannot switch from smoking to vaping just nic)? That's why we need a WTA liquid.
It is not 'addiction' per se that is the concern; it is what one is addicted to! If we can cut out the radioactive polonium, and the combustion products, and some other unnecessary adjuncts, we have something in all likelihood 100x safer. That is the key take-away here; spare the 'still addictive' red herring !!
So what about those for whom the MAOIs were an important factor - and for whom nic alone does not satiate (for whom just nic cannot substitute effectively for tobacco smoking and who therefore cannot switch from smoking to vaping just nic)? That's why we need a WTA liquid.
It is not 'addiction' per se that is the concern; it is what one is addicted to! If we can cut out the radioactive polonium, and the combustion products, and some other unnecessary adjuncts, we have something in all likelihood 100x safer. That is the key take-away here; spare the 'still addictive' red herring !!
My only concern about vaping is with high concentratons of VG. But even that cannot compare with smoking.
The MIC (Medical Industrial Complex) cares only for profits and it, plus its minions and dupes, will be against anything that might reduce its capacity to fleece the public. Try to get off analogs and try to get off med.s too. Get informed, see the truth, take responsibility and best wishes to you all.
The MIC (Medical Industrial Complex) cares only for profits and it, plus its minions and dupes, will be against anything that might reduce its capacity to fleece the public. Try to get off analogs and try to get off med.s too. Get informed, see the truth, take responsibility and best wishes to you all.
Last edited:
From my inbox (and my reply) :
I can't explain why PG 'seems' to cause some people problems. While much is probably psychsomatic, I cannot discount something real.
While acrolein (VG only) is real and a pity, it is as a concern far less than continuing to smoke, with radiocative polonium and many more combustion (decomposition and oxidation) products.
Unless you are sure PG does not suit you, I'd suggest more PG than VG but even if you use mostly/only VG as a base, that's still far better than smoking. Hope that's clear.
ps: on holiday for the next month or so.
I can't explain why PG 'seems' to cause some people problems. While much is probably psychsomatic, I cannot discount something real.
While acrolein (VG only) is real and a pity, it is as a concern far less than continuing to smoke, with radiocative polonium and many more combustion (decomposition and oxidation) products.
Unless you are sure PG does not suit you, I'd suggest more PG than VG but even if you use mostly/only VG as a base, that's still far better than smoking. Hope that's clear.
ps: on holiday for the next month or so.
Last edited:
One of the most important scientific reports of recent years :
Are genes our destiny? Scientists discover 'hidden' code in DNA evolves more rapidly than genetic code
Almost 30 years ago at a lecture on morphogenesis* (a truly amazing aspect of our world and little understood, even now) I realised that the simple model of genotype and phenotype (both genes and environment control one's outcome) was lacking and that epigenesis must entail some mechanism beyond mere environmentally controlled expression of genes and, critically, sometimes be inheritable.
Reasons were two-fold: my thought-experiments (hunches) said that individual adaptations could well be passed on in a single generation; that my back-of-envelope calculations supported this idea in that gentic mutation could not account for the rapidity of evolution, even taking into account super-genes that affect other genes' being active or not.
Now we are at the very beginnings of discovering that epi-genetic inheritance is very real, and something of the processes involved.
Another recent report : http://scitechstory.com/2011/07/29/epigenetic-memory-another-path-for-genetic-inheritance/
* I was at the time studying psychology rather than biology but my interest in what I called the 'evolution of consciousness' led me to this open, evening lecture.
While I didn't doubt that Darwin was right, I thought there might well be, nay must be, some mechanism by which Lamarck's 'inheritance of acquired characteristics' could, to some extent, be true as well.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Related (to morphogenesis if not epigenesis)
For obvious reasons, stem cell therapy research is heavily supressed by the MIC, but has amazing potential.
Are genes our destiny? Scientists discover 'hidden' code in DNA evolves more rapidly than genetic code
Almost 30 years ago at a lecture on morphogenesis* (a truly amazing aspect of our world and little understood, even now) I realised that the simple model of genotype and phenotype (both genes and environment control one's outcome) was lacking and that epigenesis must entail some mechanism beyond mere environmentally controlled expression of genes and, critically, sometimes be inheritable.
Reasons were two-fold: my thought-experiments (hunches) said that individual adaptations could well be passed on in a single generation; that my back-of-envelope calculations supported this idea in that gentic mutation could not account for the rapidity of evolution, even taking into account super-genes that affect other genes' being active or not.
Now we are at the very beginnings of discovering that epi-genetic inheritance is very real, and something of the processes involved.
Another recent report : http://scitechstory.com/2011/07/29/epigenetic-memory-another-path-for-genetic-inheritance/
* I was at the time studying psychology rather than biology but my interest in what I called the 'evolution of consciousness' led me to this open, evening lecture.
While I didn't doubt that Darwin was right, I thought there might well be, nay must be, some mechanism by which Lamarck's 'inheritance of acquired characteristics' could, to some extent, be true as well.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Related (to morphogenesis if not epigenesis)
For obvious reasons, stem cell therapy research is heavily supressed by the MIC, but has amazing potential.
Last edited:
Ok, I better give a vaping angle to the above.
The hypothesis would be, in this relation, that epigenesis could be equal to or greater a factor in an individual's tendency to 'take to' smoking. That is, if one or more of one's parents smoked; the environmental co-existence in most cases would make this hard to prove, however; but I see it as quite possible, even likely.
+++
Perhaps it makes sense to say that one doesn't just inherit one's parents genes, but the state of those genes at conception.
The hypothesis would be, in this relation, that epigenesis could be equal to or greater a factor in an individual's tendency to 'take to' smoking. That is, if one or more of one's parents smoked; the environmental co-existence in most cases would make this hard to prove, however; but I see it as quite possible, even likely.
+++
Perhaps it makes sense to say that one doesn't just inherit one's parents genes, but the state of those genes at conception.
Last edited:
From Wikipedia:
Darwin's Origin of Species proposed natural selection as the main mechanism for development of species, but did not rule out a variant of Lamarckism as a supplementary mechanism.[1] Darwin called his Lamarckian hypothesis Pangenesis, and explained it in the final chapter of his book Variation in Plants and Animals under Domestication, after describing numerous examples to demonstrate what he considered to be the inheritance of acquired characteristics.
His ideas on possible mechanisms are dated and off-the-mark, but his insight once again top level.
Darwin's Origin of Species proposed natural selection as the main mechanism for development of species, but did not rule out a variant of Lamarckism as a supplementary mechanism.[1] Darwin called his Lamarckian hypothesis Pangenesis, and explained it in the final chapter of his book Variation in Plants and Animals under Domestication, after describing numerous examples to demonstrate what he considered to be the inheritance of acquired characteristics.
His ideas on possible mechanisms are dated and off-the-mark, but his insight once again top level.
Quick latest-thoughts update. Too tired to go int detail but I'm getting the feeling that Chinese e-liquids, some at least, are already somewhat at least WTA rather than pure nicotine. I have in mind DeKang and Kanger (same?). Feels like I get more satisfaction from these than from much higher pure-nic liquids made in the west. With so many variables, contexts, and the subjective factor, I can't be sure right now, but maybe ...
Maybe, and sensibly, Chinese e-liquid extracts to alkaloids, and not further?
+++
On a somewhat different tack, I have noteiced some significant differences on changing from 901s to 808s and tentatively feel the answer will lie in the ration of pure vaporised alkaloids to droplet containing alkaloids ... In short, more powerful PVs give a better 'fix' (possibly just volume difference ?) It's enough to swing a so-so to a convert;
Maybe, and sensibly, Chinese e-liquid extracts to alkaloids, and not further?
+++
On a somewhat different tack, I have noteiced some significant differences on changing from 901s to 808s and tentatively feel the answer will lie in the ration of pure vaporised alkaloids to droplet containing alkaloids ... In short, more powerful PVs give a better 'fix' (possibly just volume difference ?) It's enough to swing a so-so to a convert;
Last edited:
Enjoying the insight and knowledge in all your postings kinabaloo, please keep them coming!
Cheers, Tha Jeebs.
Cheers, Tha Jeebs.
It might just be the liquid makers wanted to keep something of the flavor of tobacco, but by keeping more it would indeed be more 'effective'.
It's not just me, DeKang liquids are quite widely appreciated (though not by all). DVap and myself, and others, have postulated that some are more hooked on the nic and some more on the other alkaloids / combination. For sure, in something as chemically complex as smoking, there will be different 'needs'/attractions ...
goodnight
On an earlier theme, you cannot effectively replace an addiction with something that is not addictive - that;s a fantasy. You can only replace it with an addiction to something less harmeful. Then, if wish, deal with it from there. First, get out of the fire !
Last edited:
Alast point before sleep, and people wont like it but it needs to be said - there is still too much potential for 'burning' in vaping. Don't doubt that I am a definite advocate, but there is an issue here that could be improved ...
If you like, it's the old temperatue control issue. It's a wicking flow rate issue. There is still chance to get burning filler / liquid.
Maybe Raidy will come up with smething; would be great to get past that issue - if only for the experiencial joy
If you like, it's the old temperatue control issue. It's a wicking flow rate issue. There is still chance to get burning filler / liquid.
Maybe Raidy will come up with smething; would be great to get past that issue - if only for the experiencial joy
Last edited:
I recently heard a neurologist give a speech to this effect. He expressed frustration that people have been brainwashed into believing that anything that is "addictive" is bad. First, people confuse "addictive" with "habituating" (almost every time people use the term "addictive," they actually mean "habituating"...the key -- and VERY important -- difference is that "addictive" means that you continually crave a higher and higher dose). Second, the idea that being habituated to anything -- even if it has positive effects -- is bad is patently absurd (e.g., countless people are habituated to regular aerobic/cardio exercise).
This confusion serves the interests of groups that are demonizing something like smoking, but it makes physicians' jobs more difficult, because they then routinely encounter patients that refuse to take needed medications because they are "addictive."
Physicians don't have all the answers, but apparently many -- especially front-line primary care providers -- can see that black-or-white thinking has failed, and that harm reduction is impossible in an environment in which people are afraid to embrace a "lesser evil" in order to take baby steps towards a healthier lifestyle.
Last edited:
Hello old friends. It looks like the company that made CigRx recently launched another product named "Anatabloc," in which the active ingredient is Anatabine (one of the key components of WTA). I started a thread about it here...
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-yet-made-same-company-cigrx.html#post5538759
If you've tried it, then please share your feedback!
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-yet-made-same-company-cigrx.html#post5538759
If you've tried it, then please share your feedback!
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
