"First vape" stories on the Ashtray Blog

Yesterday the Ashtray Blog published an article where 10 vapers tell the story of their first vape, and readers are encouraged to tell their own stories in the comments. James asked me a couple of weeks if I wanted to contribute to this and of course I said yes. For those of you that has read some of my previous posts you'll know that I'm a big fan of vapers telling their stories and I think these stories are extremely important to educate and make sure that people don't base their attitude towards vaping based solely on the propaganda that the anti-vaping movement feeds the media.

I must say I'm honoured to be asked to contribute alongside the other bloggers in the article. Some of these bloggers have managed to reach millions of readers every week and their work is really important to the future of vaping. Thanks James, for letting me tell my story. Read the whole story here: http://goo.gl/TWk17n. I encourage all of you to tell your own story in the comments. There is even nice prices to win if you do.

PS. Dimitris, I totally agree with you on the stick batteries. The cig-alikes don't taste and perform as good as our 2nd generation devices and mods, but they play an important role in introducing smokers to vaping.

 

Don't underestimate the value of the pleasure of vaping

Happy vaping

I once knew a man who lived until he was 104 years old. He was my fathers boss for several years, I think until he was almost 90. But he was around the office where my dad worked for even longer, keeping an eye at the business he had used his life building. I remember one day my father came home from work and told us that he had observed his old boss coming up the stairs. He was 94 at that time and using a walking stick, probably because some doctor or his family had told him he should so he wouldn't loose his balance, fall and break something. When he got to the top of the stairs, he looked around to see if someone could see him, and when he thought no-one did (he could barely see, but that didn't stop him from driving a car), he put his walking stick under his arm, and started jogging down the corridor to the office where he was heading.

When my father asked this man why he thought he had reached the age of 100, his answer was crystal clear: A minimum of 1 glass of red wine and some chewing tobacco every single day since he was 20 years old. Now, one could argue that the anti-oxidants in the wine had something to do with it. However, I think, and I'm sure he is nodding his head at me from whatever better place he is in now, that the fact that he really had allowed himself to enjoy life was the real reason he had lived this long. When he was 104 his body started getting weaker and it was difficult to live alone, so his family decided he should be in a retirement home. Probably against his will. Mentally he was still 110%, and he could tell stories both from yesterday and 90 years back. At his 100th birthday he even recognized me and my sister, only having seen us once or twice (we were like 10 and 13 years old at the time). After he moved to the retirement home however, my dad said he didn't look happy any more. He said the home was ok, but he couldn't always manage to smuggle in his wine and tobacco, and complained about all the old people there. He died a few months after he moved to the home.

So what is the point of me telling this story? Well, I started thinking about this man again now when I read about the FDA putting a value on the lost pleasure consumers may suffer from a ban on e-cigarettes (http://goo.gl/1ct5eA) and Dick Puddlecote's blogpost on the subject: http://goo.gl/tTxtOb9. The story above is a real life (and maybe extreme) example of what science also has shown: Happy people, that allows themselves to enjoy life, tend to live longer. (Loads of info on this on the internet, for example here: http://goo.gl/b6Yg8p). This leads me to think that switching to e-cigarettes has an advantage over other NRT products, and maybe oven over quitting without help, that is easily overlooked: It lets you keep the pleasure that you find in smoking. Of course when smoking cigarettes, the effect of this pleasure on your life span is negated by all the smoking related diseases you'll probably catch... and then some, but with e-cigarettes this is not the case. To quit smoking actually also has some side-effects that could make you unhappy. Weight gain is one common example (http://goo.gl/msykud), which may make you unhappy but is also not good for your health by itself. I don't have any science confirming this, but from my own experience, switching to e-cigarettes gave me no problems with increased hunger or weight gain. In fact when my lungs started healing I was able to loose 25 kilos, as I was able to run again.

The fact that we, as ex-smokers, take pleasure in vaping is largely responsible for the success of the e-cigarettes. It minimizes the chance of reverting to cigarettes, but maybe it also prolongs our lives compared to quitting by other means? I'm not saying one can't enjoy life without nicotine, but one of the reasons we were smokers once was that we enjoyed it. My dads old boss enjoyed a glass of wine, and it looks like this outweighed the negative effects that a little alcohol every day will have on your body. People take pleasure in different things and enjoy life in different ways. But whatever makes you happy (as long as it doesn't contain poisons that will negate this effect) might make you live longer, and most certainly it will make you live better. The FDA put a price on this, I'd say happiness is priceless. In fact, I might as well go ahead and admit it: I have no current plans on cutting down on my vaping... it's a pleasure I'll allow myself to enjoy, for the sake of my mental and physical health. Tonight I'm going to re-build my Hellfire dripper, whoop out some of my favourite e-liquid and just enjoy. I highly recommend you do the same. Have a nice weekend :)


photo credit: rpavich via photopin cc

E-juice review: Smokers Angel UK Premium Banoffee Pie, American Red and Mango

So I finally got around to trying out some of the juices in The Smokers Angels UK Premium range. This range is developed, tested and manufactured in the UK. The juices are batch steeped before they are sold, so they can be used straight away. However on their site they do say that although the juices are ready to use when they arrive, extra steeping might bring out some extra subtle flavours. I did not give the juices here any extra steeping. All the juices were 18 mg/ml

Banoffee Pie 
Tested on: Hellfire Mega (around 1.3 ohms)

I've got to be completely honest... I have never eaten Banoffee pie, ever. So I can't really say if this tastes like authentic banoffee pie. I remember watching Jamie Oliver make one on a youtube video and it sounded delicious so that is kind of why I wanted to try this one out. That said, I do believe this one could be pretty spot on when it comes to real banoffee pie... the first 3 words that pop into my head when I tried it was banana, toffee and pastry. This is not a juice I think I can use as an all day vape, but then again I usually have around 4 different atties set up at all times so I ended up running the whole 10 ml bottle through the Mega. At first I was thinking that this was a bit to sweet for my liking, but I kind of got used to it after a while (as I tend to do with these dessert flavours). In conclusion I'd say this is not the juice I'd choose if I was to bring one device with me for something, but definitely one I'd keep a small bottle of for vaping like once in a while. Worth a try. And I think I'll have to try real banoffee pie soon.

American Red
Tested on: Mini Aspire BDC (read my review of this here)

One of my first favourite juices when I had just started vaping was the American Red from Decadent Vapours. So I thought that this would taste something like that one... but instead it reminds me more of another one of my all time favourites, the El-toro Cigarillos from House of liquid. Not quite as strong, but the same tobacco tastes are there. After vaping it for a while I also get some of the flavours from the Decadent Vapours version, although very subtle. A good all day vape in my opinion and also an authentic tobacco vape that I'd recommend for new vapers trying to quit smoking. Usually I recommend El-Toros for people asking for something that actually tastes tobacco, but now I can also recommend this one. I have to be honest and say that the El-Toros are in fact better tasting. But this one really gives you a lot for the money, and it does not gunk up your atties, at least not as fast as the El-Toros.

Mango
Tested on: Hellfire Hybrid (around 1.3 ohms)

Last one this time is a fruit flavour I've never tried as an e-juice before. To be totally honest I'm not sure why I ordered this, as I'm actually not that found of mango. I think I read somewhere that someone loved the mango, so I decided to go for it. It's got a very nice smell once you open the bottle and the taste is pretty well balanced when it comes to sweetness. As I've mentioned before, a lot of these fruit liquids tend to taste more like a fruit salad, but this one has a distinct taste of mango and that's a good thing. As I said, mango is not my personal favourite fruit, so this won't be my favourite liquid either, but if you're a mango lover I recommend you try this one out.

For all of the juices I get a decent throat hit and good vapour production. I didn't have more than 10 ml of each to test with but they all seem to be pretty nice to my coils as well, no gunk build-up so far. Looking forward to trying out more of the juices in this range.

Disclosure:

• All my reviews are my honest opinion even if I am affiliated with the company manufacturing or selling the product. 
• This review was not sponsored by the manufacturer.
• This review contains affiliate links.

E-cigarette regulations in Norway: A status update

Will we see vape-shops like this in Norway soon?

Even though Norway is not part of the EU, most EU directives are implemented here as we are part of the EEA. The TPD is no exception and unless the Norwegian Government decides to apply for an exception (which is very unlikely) the TPD will be implemented here as well during 2016.

However, until then several member states are working on their own regulations that might be implemented before the TPD. In Wales they are talking about banning e-cigarettes in public, there are debates on regulating advertising in the UK and Spain has already implemented a ban on use in public places with devastating effects: http://goo.gl/SDBxRG

Apparently governments see the need for making their own regulations prior to the TPD. The reasons for this might be that they want regulations in place earlier, maybe to ensure control of the market and the money involved at an earlier point, but the TPD also leaves a lot up to the member states so some of these regulations can co-exist with the TPD when this is implemented. For example the TPD allows member states to decide that they want to regulate e-cigarettes as medicines, something that was pointed out by a Norwegian health official in a recent TV-debate on the subject. Some governments might also expect changes to the TPD and are not sure how it will affect them in the end, as the war is by no means over yet. The EU even states that they will monitor the development and that changes might occur. As more and more evidence is stacking up and scientist are engaging in the battle, putting their careers at risk criticizing the WHO's stance on e-cigarettes for being counter-productive and undermining public health (read the Asthray blogs post on the matter: http://goo.gl/TdOMPZ), who knows where this will end? And economic crisis and general scepticism towards the EU might even have left some members unsure of the future of the EU.

So what about Norway? What is happening here? I asked Research Director Karl Erik Lund what the Norwegian government is doing about it right now. The Ministry of Health and Care Services has now asked underlying agencies for reports on the matter:

• The Norwegian Institute of Public Health will assess the potential harm from e-cigarettes.
• The Norwegian Medicines Agency will look at whether electronic cigarettes can be considered to be medicinal products.
• The Norwegian Directorate of Health has been asked to come up with possible regulation models and has in turn asked SIRUS (The institute for Alcohol and Drug research) for assistance.

These reports will be submitted before the end of this year. Lund says it is difficult to say whether the government will implement it's own politics before 2016 or not. "They are just as concerned with figuring out what limits they have to maneuver within under the EU directive, as they are with creating their own politics in the area", says Lund.

I'm happy to see that SIRUS is asked for assistance concerning the regulation models, as in my opinion they are very focused on harm reduction. Karl Erik Lund was also one of the 52 signatories that just wrote a letter to the WHO asking them to start consider harm reduction alternatives (such as e-cigarettes) as a solution, not part of the problem: http://goo.gl/b5usNv. 

Lund says it will be interesting to see what perspective the Institute of Public Health will chose to use when assessing potential harm. Lund mentions three different potential perspectives:

Traditionally the government has used a bio-chemical reductionist perspective regarding snus and e-cigarettes, meaning they look at chemical contents, acute physiological effects and potential long term physiological effects. If they then find any reason to believe that the e-cigarettes are not totally risk free they can use that to defend a restrictive policy based on the non-harm principle (we should not facilitate something that has potential harm), precautionary principle or loss-of-autonomy principle (risk of nicotine addiction).

Alternatively they can choose a comparative perspective where the harm potential is compared to the harm of cigarettes. Because the two products have the same consumer groups one could defend such perspective. However the Ministry of Health has explicitly stated that the harm potential from cigarettes should not be used as comparison when assessing the harm potential from SNUS (Swedish smokeless tobacco). We might expect the same for e-cigarettes? This will amputate the institutes risk assessment.

The third perspective is the public health perspective that looks both the risk differences between cigarettes and e-cigarettes and at the relative recruitment and use among smokers and non-smokers. For SNUS it is obvious that easy access to the product has led to a net gain in public health, but this is a fact that is difficult to admit for the government. The tobacco-hostile norm climate makes rational approaches difficult.

Although I think it is a positive think that SIRUS has been asked to assist in the work on regulation models I do feel they should be listened to when it comes to the harm potential assessments as well. I fear that the Institute of Public Health will choose the first perspective when doing the assessment, and that they will come up with something that shows some kind of potential harm, or at least something that says we can't rule it out. And traditionally they love the precautionary principle, something that in this case could prove a danger to public health. I think 2014 will be a year where we will see a lot more debates on the topic, and most people here are now aware of e-cigarettes, and will start making up their opinions on them if they don't have them already. Hopefully more and more scientists will speak up and may manage to get some positive media coverage. I guess we have to expect some negative media coverage as well, so I hope the good work of SIRUS and the Norwegian vaping community in commenting and ripping these stories apart will continue. But, as I have stated over and over again, the vapers stories will be crucial to how the general public's views on the matter. A lot of vapers are doing a great job already, and hopefully more will join. Let's try to make 2014 the year everyone was talking about vaping.



photo credit: A.Currell via photopin cc

Switching from cigarettes to e-cigarettes puts you at less risk from MRSA

After Laura E. Crotty Alexander and her team released a study on how e-cigarette vapour affects MRSA (http://goo.gl/cmQT) on the 18th of May (http://goo.gl/8vsw9Z) the media has been throwing headlines at us that makes it look like e-cigarettes will cause these bacteria to mutate and take over the world. Not very surprising looking at how Crotty Alexander presents her research herself:

Vapour from e-cigarettes makes MRSA bacteria more aggressive

Doesn't look good now does it? The media of course, eager to attract readers by reporting another scandal, makes this even worse. Just have a look at this headline from the Daily Mail:

Are e-cigarette smokers at risk from superbugs? Vapour helps deadly bacteria to thrive, say scientists

First of all there is no such thing as an "e-cigarette smoker". It's just no smoke involved, so stop it! To make it even worse, they add this in the sub-header:

"However new study shows users are more at risk from superbugs"

Looks like we're dead then. Keep vaping and you'll get eaten alive by MRSA, right? NO! Cause there is something missing from the statement in that sub-header. They should have added this: "compared to non-smokers." Because this is what the scientists actually found: E-cigarette vapour makes the bacteria more aggressive, and the human defence system less effective, but smoking cigarettes will have the same effect... only 10 times stronger. So a more reasonable headline would have been something like this:

Are e-cigarettes the solution to fighting MRSA in smokers? Smoke makes bacteria 10 times more aggressive than vapour, say scientists.

You see it all comes down to what perspective you view the data from, and which parts you choose to promote. If you're against e-cigarettes, and like the nicotine gum and patches better, it's pretty obvious that you can present this data to make e-cigarettes look bad. It's all about which findings you focus on and which ones you tone down. The fact that cigarettes are far worse in this matter is just mentioned at the end of the Daily Mail article: "However, the study also failed to give real cigarettes a clean bill of health. In fact, they were found to fuel MRSA even more than the electronic versions." They even fail to mention the magnitude of the whole thing.

Another thing they fail to mention, and that Crotty Alexander just barely mentions herself, is this: "We have not yet pinpointed the components of e-cigarette vapour that trigger these effects, but preliminary findings suggest that the nicotine in e-juice (the liquid used in e-cigarettes that is vapourised and inhaled) is a significant contributor." This would mean that not only cigarettes and e-cigarettes would make MRSA worse, but also nicotine patches and gum... and even tomatoes and eggplant might have an effect. Why don't Crotty Alexander give her lab-mice some nicotine gum instead of letting them breath in e-cigarette vapour if she suspects nicotine is the problem?

The fact that Crotty Alexander, despite the results she has published here, still won't recommend e-cigarettes for her asthma-patients is beyond me. It really makes me wonder if the disclosure statement printed below her author info on http://theconversation.com is even remotely true. We've seen studies lately (http://goo.gl/lEbFpZ) kicking the gateway argument out the window and that makes the really important truth discovered in her research this:  

Switching from cigarettes to e-cigarettes puts you at less risk from MRSA.

photo credit: NIAID via photopin cc