I think its use in the field was pretty limited. It was something a scientist at the company I work for was telling me about. They were curious given all the shit chat about a lack of longterm evidence. They wondered what is the actual earliest record of this sort of concept? They ended up finding out about experiments done with this device in some kind of wartime medical journal they showed me. We were pretty tickled by the journal article mentioning propylene glycol was the substance these old researchers were atomising. I tried finding it again to link something, but I haven’t been able to find it yet.
Thanks, that’s amazing.
I must say that when I started vaping, I was shocked about the state of modern “scientific” research into documenting effects of basically everything. Clearly it’s paid for by interest holders, and the research is not generally for the common good, but to serve the interests of those who pay for it. Just as was the case for tobacco and sugar, and lately it was revealed gas companies have done it too in the 70’s! I knew it was the case to some extend in the pharmaceutical industries, but it’s everywhere!!
There isn’t really much peer reviewed evidence suggesting vaping is significantly harmful in a tobacco harm reduction context, though. It’s all supportive of vaping, that’s why it’s been embraced by many medical organisations across much of Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. The amount of tobacco harm prevention vaping is doing in places like Kuwait right now, where up to 50% of males smoke, is fucking incredible. Australia’s blindness on this issue is a farce. They, like most western governments, are addicted to tobacco tax. It’s 4% of our overall tax income. That’s a proportion of all taxation in our economy, including all the land, property, goods, services taxes. An entire 4% of it comes just from perpetuating tobacco sales. Financially conservative governments aren’t giving that away for free. Internally they’re like “we’ll worry about addressing the leading cause of preventable death when we get voted in for another term, otherwise it won’t work out for us politically”. That’s why we have a nation of Labor state premiers that almost unilaterally support sensible ecig regulation, yet the federal health minister from the same political party has this curious unexplained blindspot on the issue and just parrots big pharma talking points about nicotine, while nicorette isn’t even kept behind the counter.
It sounds a bit like here, where they had witch hunts from health authorities against shops that sold anything vape related containing nicotine. Despite all evidence showed it was less harmful than cigarettes, and the best way to quit too. This kind of activity was almost completely unheard of, but I guess health authorities, are the ones that are best paid by big pharma.
It was only when EU regulated it, that it became legal in Denmark. Luckily being in EU we could buy from other EU countries.
I think its use in the field was pretty limited. It was something a scientist at the company I work for was telling me about. They were curious given all the shit chat about a lack of longterm evidence. They wondered what is the actual earliest record of this sort of concept? They ended up finding out about experiments done with this device in some kind of wartime medical journal they showed me. We were pretty tickled by the journal article mentioning propylene glycol was the substance these old researchers were atomising. I tried finding it again to link something, but I haven’t been able to find it yet.
Thanks, that’s amazing.
I must say that when I started vaping, I was shocked about the state of modern “scientific” research into documenting effects of basically everything. Clearly it’s paid for by interest holders, and the research is not generally for the common good, but to serve the interests of those who pay for it. Just as was the case for tobacco and sugar, and lately it was revealed gas companies have done it too in the 70’s! I knew it was the case to some extend in the pharmaceutical industries, but it’s everywhere!!
There isn’t really much peer reviewed evidence suggesting vaping is significantly harmful in a tobacco harm reduction context, though. It’s all supportive of vaping, that’s why it’s been embraced by many medical organisations across much of Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. The amount of tobacco harm prevention vaping is doing in places like Kuwait right now, where up to 50% of males smoke, is fucking incredible. Australia’s blindness on this issue is a farce. They, like most western governments, are addicted to tobacco tax. It’s 4% of our overall tax income. That’s a proportion of all taxation in our economy, including all the land, property, goods, services taxes. An entire 4% of it comes just from perpetuating tobacco sales. Financially conservative governments aren’t giving that away for free. Internally they’re like “we’ll worry about addressing the leading cause of preventable death when we get voted in for another term, otherwise it won’t work out for us politically”. That’s why we have a nation of Labor state premiers that almost unilaterally support sensible ecig regulation, yet the federal health minister from the same political party has this curious unexplained blindspot on the issue and just parrots big pharma talking points about nicotine, while nicorette isn’t even kept behind the counter.
It sounds a bit like here, where they had witch hunts from health authorities against shops that sold anything vape related containing nicotine. Despite all evidence showed it was less harmful than cigarettes, and the best way to quit too. This kind of activity was almost completely unheard of, but I guess health authorities, are the ones that are best paid by big pharma.
It was only when EU regulated it, that it became legal in Denmark. Luckily being in EU we could buy from other EU countries.