- Messages
- 305
- Location
- bushey, Hertfordhire
hehe, you have to love predictive text! has got me in some interesting debates at work!
Looking at the last link, I went for my usual source (I find more entrusting) WHO. Page 174, they state and I quote:
'likely to be less toxic for adult established smokers.....might have a role to play in support for those who has failed other treatment.....recommend parties to regulate e-cigs'
This says it all for me. Reads like a cover our ass article.
Less toxic for established adult smokers- no mention of youngsters using it as an introduction to smoking or the harm on a new smoker.
Role to play after failed treatment- last chance saloon usually the hard hitting stuff appears here, the likes of Champix etc.
Then the age old needs to be regulated statement. So which brands are regulated? Well none, not one has been registered as a medical device to my knowledge. So vaping five years on is an unregulated system.
The link regarding stats from 11 year old and up I wouldn't IMO consider to be 'proof' I know how I would have answered at 11, ten minutes before lunch.
I used to be a Pharmacist and have had many questions come in about several pills/remedies/lotions. My question was forgetting Dr. Google's first response, what relevant sources support your comment and are they credible. In this case the comment that vaping is 5% harmful compared to a cig I cannot substantiate, as they would be regulated.
Given, I have not read every source or the whole article. But my premise is that if regulated the device may be appropriate. My guess is that anything containing benzene ring based formaldehydes, for the purpose of ingestion, will never be regulated.
Everyone to their own!
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
Being registered as a non-medicinal product relieves any liability. That rings alarm bells to me. Doctors in my area haven't prescribed any vape sticks. I know this as I own a Pharmacy (used to be a Pharmacist), Doctors surgery and currently pursuing a nursing home. Formaldehydes are present in the mixture from the offset. I would be bewildered if you could decipher which mixture, device, and at any given specific temperature, would affect the stability and structure of the formaldehydes used. If you can and have the means to conduct gas chromatography on the given mixture I would be very interested.I am sure last time this came up I linked to show the one that has been not only regulated but actually licensed as a medical device? Since its licensed as a medical device how do you know doctors have not all ready prescribed it, I know plenty who actively refer patients to shops to take up vaping. Formaldehydes are only present really when used in correctly. It's like lighting a cigarette from the filter end and doing a MS on the fumes from the filter and saying look at all these chemicals in there we never knew about.
Also as of May 2017 every device and liquid on the market will be regulated by MHRA as a non medicinal product.
The WHO document you referring to. Is it there tobacco framework document? Last published report I seen was nearly 2 years ago from them on the matter.
Being registered as a non-medicinal product relieves any liability. That rings alarm bells to me. Doctors in my area haven't prescribed any vape sticks. I know this as I own a Pharmacy (used to be a Pharmacist), Doctors surgery and currently pursuing a nursing home. Formaldehydes are present in the mixture from the offset. I would be bewildered if you could decipher which mixture, device, and at any given specific temperature, would affect the stability and structure of the formaldehydes used. If you can and have the means to conduct gas chromatography on the given mixture I would be very interested.
I think someone best said it best above, with a similar principle to, if it ain't broken don't fix it. If it works for you great.
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
Thanks I never knew my Pharmacy was not a pioneer for the rest of the UK, learn something new everyday.It's not a medicinal device so why would you register it as one. Though there is one registered as a medicinal device the large large large cost is why not many have chosen to go down this route.
The fact your pharmacy has not issued any does not mean rest of UK does not. You know in Scotland you don't go to your doctor for free nrt you get it from the pharmacy itself no prescription, everywhere is different and doctors are free to prescribe any medicine they see fit.
Formaldehydes are not present from the off. PG can break down to produce them MS has been done to show under normal operating conditions there is no detectable trace. http://www.clivebates.com/?p=2706
MS will be done on all liquids and on the vapour produced through a device from that liquid too within next 5 month. But I suppose that is a attempt by government to relieve liability when they had none in first place.
Formaldehyde though is present from fires cars and about a 100 other things we are exposed too everyday. Unfortunately not ecigs
Thanks I never knew my Pharmacy was not a pioneer for the rest of the UK, learn something new everyday.
Formaldehyde and heat exposure is the key. It's a slimey argument and this article exposes it best. My worry is that if a device is unregistered as a medical device, or in other words, is not registered specific to its purpose. Then I don't personally trust the product for its health benefits.
https://www.gov.uk/drug-safety-upda...use-of-medicines-prescribers-responsibilities
Anyhow once again I'm with the guys who believe it works, I just wouldn't use one.
http://www.ecigarette-research.com/web/index.php/2013-04-07-09-50-07/2015/191-form-nejm
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
No idea mate sorry.Nishy I must be missing something as your first article is about prescribing unlicensed medicines and such. But the one I am talking about is a licensed medicine I don't get how it ties in?
Hitting yourself in the face with a mallet is safer than a sledgehammer.
"Less harmful" rather than "safer" ...