A group of people on twitter recently brought a newly developing social issue to my attention: the practice of using an e-cigarette or vaping device to inhale a user chosen fragrance mixed with an adjustable dose of nicotine - products range from no nicotine to a relatively high dose. The high dose is the equivalent of the nicotine dose sustained by a chronic heavy smoker.
Honestly, I don't use the products myself, and don't even know anyone who does, so I knew nothing about the issue. Big Tobacco, which most of us have no respect for, is attempting to obtain the rights to this emerging tobacco-substitute market - feeling they have the rights to the nicotine. Big Pharma, which most of us dislike even more than big tobacco, is attempting to have this new industry put under the control of the pharmaceutical industry.
At this time, the overwhelming majority of consumers using vaping devices are smokers who want to use a safer product and ex-smokers. They are mostly people who dramatically reduced or quit the use of smoking conventional tobacco products. The majority of these quit-resistent people have tried to quit cigarettes before with the use of smoking cessation options such as nicotine gum, mists, patches and so on, but just want to continue the nicotine addiction - which is no more harmful than coffee or tea. It's just accompanied by a chosen fragrance and a bit of silly mist. Vaping liquids are available in a range of nicotine levels, including the option of none at all.
The vaping crowd claims that vaping is far safer than conventional tobacco products. I'm sure we've all seen the numbers, tobacco smoke contains some 7,000 chemicals, including 70 known carcinogens. Vaping, well, not-so-much. It appears that the few ingredients in vaping liquids, propylene glycol or natural base, a touch of fragrance, a bit of nicotine, contain only a fraction of risk as with conventional tobacco products. While I'll be the first to jump on watching what's going into these products - such as petro-based chemical saturated fillers - there are a variety of totally natural options already available.
|
|
Vaping opens up a whole new industry option for the natural community. These devices, without nicotine, would be a great delivery system for personal aromatherapy. Imagine, a shot of lemon in the morning, a hint of mint in the afternoon when you need a boost For those new to essential oils: liquids used in vaping devices are NOT essential oils. For now, we have a variety of food-grade synthetic fragrances to inhale. However, in the future, proper dilution rates for plant extracts will become more redaily available to consumers. Only use e-liquids intended for vaping devices. There are far too many health and injury risks to choosing to make up your own concoctions. That said, this could be a potential boon to aromatherapists. Part of me even wonders if that is part of the lure away from stinky tobacco products? It's worth considering...
Keeping vaping a free choice, reduces harm and saves lives by encouraging people to trade tobacco products for a far-less-harmful alternative, it is already working to reduce tobacco-use-related illnesses lowering healthcare costs for all and it is available as a potential new craft for aroma therapists.
Looks like a social win/win situation to me. I'm sure there will be problems that we could not anticipate - as long as the industry and consumers work together, with full disclosure and the industry continues listening to consumers - let's support keeping vaping a free choice. In addition, the new aromatherapy delivery system potential should be investigated. Because truthfully, it's no more harmful than blowing bubbles while sipping coffee.
For additional information regarding this issue, please read the article I wrote for the Johnson and Toxin web site, A Strong Argument Against Johnson & Johnson Control of Vaping or E-Cigs Known harmful, misrepresented drugs. Known harmful, misrepresented devices. Known toxic ingredients in baby products. Do NOT let Johnson & Johnson get control of vaping or e-cigs.
|