- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- And a happy ******* New Year
And a happy ******* New YearFollow
Around here the government and local anti-smoking groups are scared young people will take up smoking through e-cigs and are banning the flavours that aren't tobacco related.
Donate. One day it could be your family.
An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo
An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Around here the government and local anti-smoking groups are scared young people will take up smoking through e-cigs and are banning the flavours that aren't tobacco related.
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Around here the government and local anti-smoking groups are scared young people will take up smoking through e-cigs and are banning the flavours that aren't tobacco related.
Tobacco companies use fruity flavors and kiddy-names and packing on non-cigarette tobacco products to bypass marketing restrictions and make them appeal to people. The law makers are just trying to keep up with the original intents.
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
Mint Chocolate Ice Cream Cigarettes.
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
Smasharoo wrote:
Yeah...or chew nicotine gum or use a patch. Your conclusion to "change the ritualized behavior" isn't "use an entirely different delivery device" it's "change the flavor"? Jesus, you are stupid.
Lol. I'll just correctly identify you as ignorant.
Quote:
The hardest part about quitting smoking is the crushing physical addiction.
Wrong. This is the least hardest part. It's why patches and gums are almost statistically indistinguishable from cold-turky as a quitting methodology (with some admitted caveats).
Quote:
The second hardest part is the ritual and social cues.
Wrong. This is by far the most difficult part. It's the "habit" of the habit. It's why e-cigs have a massively more successful rate at getting people to give up tobacco products. You allow them to continue with the same habits but with a relatively harmless product rather than one that's got thousands of carcinogens in it.
Quote:
The 900th hardest part is what smoke tastes like.
Wrong. In the context of sticking to an e-cig and not falling back to smoking tobacco cigarettes, this is the biggest fail point. Most people who either give up on e-cigs entirely, or never quite stop using tobacco cigarettes occasionally in addition to e-cigs do so because the e-cig doesn't provide the same flavor and throat hit of a tobacco cigarette. Seriously. Spend like 10 minutes on an e-cig forum and read what actual people who have experience transitioning from tobacco cigarettes to e-cigs are saying. You might just learn something.
Oh. And here's an admittedly potentially biased source of info about nicotine as it relates to e-cigs. Some of the links off that page are interesting reads as well. It's just amusing to me to read all the hype and fear about e-cigs running around.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Around here the government and local anti-smoking groups are scared young people will take up smoking through e-cigs and are banning the flavours that aren't tobacco related.
Which is about the most moronic thing they could do. If they actually want to reduce the health costs associated with smoking, that is. Now, if they want to cling to their "cause" no matter how irrational it becomes, then it makes perfect sense.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Re-read this and it occurs to me that you've totally missed the point I was making. I just blew your comment off earlier, but I want to elaborate on *why* you're ignorant of the facts here.
The mistake you are making is assuming that the objective is to "change the ritualized behavior". So you conclude that patches or gums are the answer. But that's a circular assumption. The objective is "stop exposing yourself to thousands of carcinogens contained in tobacco smoke". That's it. The whole point of e-cigs is to allow the person to continue with the ritualized behavior of smoking, just without all the harmful bits contained in tobacco smoke. Using an entirely different delivery device is much harder in this context than simply changing the flavor but keeping everything else the same.
I'll say it again: One of the biggest problems people have with switching to e-cigs is that the flavors they initially try to use (tobacco and/or menthol) are designed to mimic those of the cigarettes they smoke. They think this will help them, but it actually does not. The flavors just aren't as good or as strong, so they fall back to cigarettes. If they switch to a completely different flavor, as strange as this may sound, it prevents the mind from comparing the flavor they're inhaling to that of a cigarette. So they still get the ritual behavior (taking a puff of a cylindrical device and inhaling), but the flavor is different, which they can handle just fine. And because it tastes different, and they expect it to taste different, they aren't disappointed with the change in strength or harshness of the flavor. And they stick with the e-cig and stop smoking tobacco products.
Which, in case we all forgot, is the actual objective.
Oh. Here's an article that talks about it as well. He's not making the exact same point as me, but similar (more about staying quit than initially quitting, but that's kinda important as well):
Edited, Jan 6th 2015 6:37pm by gbaji
Smasharoo wrote:
Yeah...or chew nicotine gum or use a patch. Your conclusion to "change the ritualized behavior" isn't "use an entirely different delivery device" it's "change the flavor"? Jesus, you are stupid.
The mistake you are making is assuming that the objective is to "change the ritualized behavior". So you conclude that patches or gums are the answer. But that's a circular assumption. The objective is "stop exposing yourself to thousands of carcinogens contained in tobacco smoke". That's it. The whole point of e-cigs is to allow the person to continue with the ritualized behavior of smoking, just without all the harmful bits contained in tobacco smoke. Using an entirely different delivery device is much harder in this context than simply changing the flavor but keeping everything else the same.
I'll say it again: One of the biggest problems people have with switching to e-cigs is that the flavors they initially try to use (tobacco and/or menthol) are designed to mimic those of the cigarettes they smoke. They think this will help them, but it actually does not. The flavors just aren't as good or as strong, so they fall back to cigarettes. If they switch to a completely different flavor, as strange as this may sound, it prevents the mind from comparing the flavor they're inhaling to that of a cigarette. So they still get the ritual behavior (taking a puff of a cylindrical device and inhaling), but the flavor is different, which they can handle just fine. And because it tastes different, and they expect it to taste different, they aren't disappointed with the change in strength or harshness of the flavor. And they stick with the e-cig and stop smoking tobacco products.
Which, in case we all forgot, is the actual objective.
Oh. Here's an article that talks about it as well. He's not making the exact same point as me, but similar (more about staying quit than initially quitting, but that's kinda important as well):
Quote:
Picking a different flavor makes a break from the habit. Once you move from tobacco to another flavor, whether it is fruity, spicy, warm, cold or icy, you will find that you rarely go back to the tobacco flavor. It makes it easier to quit. You’ve not only taken away the actual “real†cigarette and replaced it with an electronic cigarette; you have taken away the tobacco taste and smell. Once you move from tobacco to other flavors, if you try and have a “real†cigarette, you will find that it tastes like the worst thing you have ever had in your mouth. It makes quitting easier and gives you added protecting against slipping back into the world of “real†smoking. Breaking away from the habit in this manner is a really good idea and you will see what we are trying to say when you try it for yourself.
Edited, Jan 6th 2015 6:37pm by gbaji
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Oh. Here's an article that talks about it as well. He's not making the exact same point as me, but similar (more about staying quit than initially quitting, but that's kinda important as well):
This looks like the typical highly reputable source we'd expect from you. This is clearly a scientist who is making evidence based observations about human behavior.
I kid, I kid, it's a blog that's an ad for e-cigarettes and flavors.
There's a lot of recent research about this issue, specifically E-cigarettes I mean, as a smoking cessation device, not your moronic "try the pineapple" thing, obviously, who would seriously put that in a grant proposal? Anyway, they are effective at smoking cessation, which is great. About as effective in the short term as patches or gum or whatever. There's no indication they are more or less effective than any other nicotine delivery device. So: great. That's good news.
There is an indication, however, that they are quite a bit harder to quit after they've replaced smoking. The similar ritual to smoking allows all of the social reinforcement to continue, and that's a problem if you want to stop using nicotine. I've quit smoking. It's not easy. One of the ways nicotine effects the brain is that it becomes a "punctuation drug". You generally want to smoke after something happens. Making sweet love down by the fire, eating, coffee, whatever. The similar method and speed of delivery of "vaping" strongly reinforces that behavior. Something that doesn't really apply to gum (too slow of an effect) or patches (steady state nicotine throughout the day so no punctuation effect). Being addicted to nicotine in some manner that isn't burning tobacco is wildly safer than smoking, but it's still not healthy, and there are legitimate concerns about allowing the marketing of very addictive produce that shows no real benefit over less addictive cessation methods.
I'd link articles, but I can't be bothered to find free sources and you don't have a jstor account because you're a fucking janitor or whatever. Let me know if "www.buyesmokecandynow.com" has any rebuttal evidence.
This looks like the typical highly reputable source we'd expect from you. This is clearly a scientist who is making evidence based observations about human behavior.
I kid, I kid, it's a blog that's an ad for e-cigarettes and flavors.
There's a lot of recent research about this issue, specifically E-cigarettes I mean, as a smoking cessation device, not your moronic "try the pineapple" thing, obviously, who would seriously put that in a grant proposal? Anyway, they are effective at smoking cessation, which is great. About as effective in the short term as patches or gum or whatever. There's no indication they are more or less effective than any other nicotine delivery device. So: great. That's good news.
There is an indication, however, that they are quite a bit harder to quit after they've replaced smoking. The similar ritual to smoking allows all of the social reinforcement to continue, and that's a problem if you want to stop using nicotine. I've quit smoking. It's not easy. One of the ways nicotine effects the brain is that it becomes a "punctuation drug". You generally want to smoke after something happens. Making sweet love down by the fire, eating, coffee, whatever. The similar method and speed of delivery of "vaping" strongly reinforces that behavior. Something that doesn't really apply to gum (too slow of an effect) or patches (steady state nicotine throughout the day so no punctuation effect). Being addicted to nicotine in some manner that isn't burning tobacco is wildly safer than smoking, but it's still not healthy, and there are legitimate concerns about allowing the marketing of very addictive produce that shows no real benefit over less addictive cessation methods.
I'd link articles, but I can't be bothered to find free sources and you don't have a jstor account because you're a fucking janitor or whatever. Let me know if "www.buyesmokecandynow.com" has any rebuttal evidence.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
I quit burning tobacco immediately after switching to vapes, and eventually cut out nicotine from my mixes almost entirely. Still going strong after six years and my bag is a sweet caramel-type flavor (RY4) in a big tank device. Though I'm coming to realize that I prefer the smaller pen-style ones better.
I seem to be addicted to the physical or tactile sensations of the actions of vaping. I was never a very heavy smoker to begin with, but need to have something in or at hand, and inhaling and exhaling clouds. Especially spending so much time in the car for work, a vape in hand is better than my phone.
I seem to be addicted to the physical or tactile sensations of the actions of vaping. I was never a very heavy smoker to begin with, but need to have something in or at hand, and inhaling and exhaling clouds. Especially spending so much time in the car for work, a vape in hand is better than my phone.
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
As in all things gbaji has never done or experienced or studied, he's an expert on smoking and should be assumed absolutely correct in all he says on the subject.
****ing duh...
****ing duh...
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.
gbaji wrote:
Oh. Here's an article that talks about it as well
About Us - Ecig Reviews wrote:
Ecig-reviews.net was created by 2 electronic cigarette enthusiasts, Norm and Tony.
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
Smasharoo wrote:
Oh. Here's an article that talks about it as well. He's not making the exact same point as me, but similar (more about staying quit than initially quitting, but that's kinda important as well):
This looks like the typical highly reputable source we'd expect from you. This is clearly a scientist who is making evidence based observations about human behavior.
This looks like the typical highly reputable source we'd expect from you. This is clearly a scientist who is making evidence based observations about human behavior.
Like the study mentioned in the article that started this particular conversation? The one about how by changing environmental factors you can significantly change addition behavior? All I did was mention that this same factor works with regard to e-cig flavor choice affecting your odds of switching back to smoking regular cigarettes.
Quote:
There's a lot of recent research about this issue, specifically E-cigarettes I mean, as a smoking cessation device, not your moronic "try the pineapple" thing, obviously, who would seriously put that in a grant proposal? Anyway, they are effective at smoking cessation, which is great. About as effective in the short term as patches or gum or whatever. There's no indication they are more or less effective than any other nicotine delivery device. So: great. That's good news.
More recent studies show them to be significantly better at helping people quit smoking than patches or gums. 60% higher rate in one recent one. Some numbers I've been reading suggest even higher (found a mention of a 35% 6month success rate for e-cigs versus a 1.8% success rate for patches in one article, but it didn't link to the source, so you know how that goes). Given that this aligns pretty directly with the mountain of anecdotal evidence out there, and the seeming panic that the smoking cessation products owners are undergoing, I wouldn't be surprised if the real numbers weren't even higher. When you go onto a forum talking about patches or gums, it's filled with people posting about how hard it is, how many times they've failed, encouraging others to keep with it, etc. Go to an e-cig forum and it's filled with people talking about how easily they stopped smoking, how amazed they are at how good they feel, etc.
So unless you're suggesting that the product without any major companies behind it has populated the internet with shills saying great things about their products, while the one backed by big pharma and a host of government and special interest orgs are being unfairly maligned by people pretending to be users having difficulties with their products, maybe we can take this as a huge sign that e-cigs work. Really really well.
Quote:
There is an indication, however, that they are quite a bit harder to quit after they've replaced smoking.
Eating pasta is hard to quit after quitting smoking. And proven to be just as harmful to your health. What's the point?
Quote:
The similar ritual to smoking allows all of the social reinforcement to continue, and that's a problem if you want to stop using nicotine.
And if I want to quit pasta? Same problem, right? In the quantities we're talking about, there's close to zero evidence that nicotine is in anyway harmful, and a truck load that shows that it helps with mental capabilities, including reducing incidences of Alzheimer's, ADD, and possibly a whole list of mental ailments and mood problems. If someone doesn't want to or can't quit nicotine, it's probably not going to cause any problems for him. Again, you are coming at this from the assumption that the problem is inhaling a substance with nicotine in it. But the problem is inhaling tobacco smoke. And e-cigs are remarkably effective at solving that problem.
Quote:
I've quit smoking. It's not easy. One of the ways nicotine effects the brain is that it becomes a "punctuation drug". You generally want to smoke after something happens. Making sweet love down by the fire, eating, coffee, whatever. The similar method and speed of delivery of "vaping" strongly reinforces that behavior. Something that doesn't really apply to gum (too slow of an effect) or patches (steady state nicotine throughout the day so no punctuation effect). Being addicted to nicotine in some manner that isn't burning tobacco is wildly safer than smoking, but it's still not healthy, and there are legitimate concerns about allowing the marketing of very addictive produce that shows no real benefit over less addictive cessation methods.
Again, who cares? It's about as harmless as drinking a cup of coffee. You're still obsessing over quitting nicotine, when that's the 1lb weakling standing next to the 800lb gorilla.
Edited, Jan 7th 2015 4:25pm by gbaji
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Oh. Here's an article that talks about it as well
About Us - Ecig Reviews wrote:
Ecig-reviews.net was created by 2 electronic cigarette enthusiasts, Norm and Tony.
It's not promoted and funded by large pharma corps. Correct. Same with just about every other pro-e-cig site. It's still largely a grass roots thing and is having to fight against the pharma industry because their product threatens their sales of smoking cessation products, the tobacco industry because their product threatens their sales of tobacco products, and well meaning but under informed activists who equate their product to smoking (often because of the false information spread by the first two groups), and government because their product threatens their health care budgets justified to fight smoking related illnesses, and the money they get from the lobbying by the first three groups.
So yeah, it's not surprising that they appear to be the unprofessional, non-scientific, non-glossy looking folks in the room. Doesn't mean that they're not absolutely correct though. What we have here is that rare case where the little guy really did come up with the cheap, easy, effective alternative to the big expensive status-quo solution. And the resulting backlash against it is pretty predictable.
Edited, Jan 7th 2015 4:22pm by gbaji
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
It's not promoted and funded by large pharma corps. Correct. Same with just about every other pro-e-cig site. It's still largely a grass roots thing
Has anyone ever spoken to you about the potential problem of the world imploding from the force of what a giant sucker you are?
Again, who cares? It's about as harmless as drinking a cup of coffee.
It is, in fact, dramatically worse than that.
http://content.onlinejacc.org/article.aspx?articleid=1121737
Why don't you pretend to read that and then badly paraphrase the conclusions and wrongly argue they support your statement. No rush.
Has anyone ever spoken to you about the potential problem of the world imploding from the force of what a giant sucker you are?
Again, who cares? It's about as harmless as drinking a cup of coffee.
It is, in fact, dramatically worse than that.
http://content.onlinejacc.org/article.aspx?articleid=1121737
Why don't you pretend to read that and then badly paraphrase the conclusions and wrongly argue they support your statement. No rush.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Let's compare the number of people who've died in the last say 5 years from overdoses of caffeine to the number who have died to overdoses of nicotine. Get back to me when you're done.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Let's compare the number of people who've died in the last say 5 years from overdoses of caffeine to the number who have died to overdoses of nicotine
No wait, let's compare how many people were stabbed with onions instead of baseballs.
Is there any other pointless **** you want to trot out to avoid admitting you are, as usual, catastrophically wrong?
No wait, let's compare how many people were stabbed with onions instead of baseballs.
Is there any other pointless **** you want to trot out to avoid admitting you are, as usual, catastrophically wrong?
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Smasharoo wrote:
It's not promoted and funded by large pharma corps. Correct. Same with just about every other pro-e-cig site. It's still largely a grass roots thing
Has anyone ever spoken to you about the potential problem of the world imploding from the force of what a giant sucker you are?
Again, who cares? It's about as harmless as drinking a cup of coffee.
It is, in fact, dramatically worse than that.
http://content.onlinejacc.org/article.aspx?articleid=1121737
Why don't you pretend to read that and then badly paraphrase the conclusions and wrongly argue they support your statement. No rush.
Has anyone ever spoken to you about the potential problem of the world imploding from the force of what a giant sucker you are?
Again, who cares? It's about as harmless as drinking a cup of coffee.
It is, in fact, dramatically worse than that.
http://content.onlinejacc.org/article.aspx?articleid=1121737
Why don't you pretend to read that and then badly paraphrase the conclusions and wrongly argue they support your statement. No rush.
Which is funny given that I asked about a comparison between nicotine and coffee. Is that present in the study?
But hey. How about we just quote from the study you linked, but obviously didn't bother to read.
Quote:
In view of the known adverse effects of cigarette smoking and the current understanding of the pharmacology of nicotine, as reviewed previously, it is to be expected that acute cardiovascular events occurring in people using nicotine medications would raise concern. Accordingly, there are scattered published reports linking nicotine replacement therapies to acute cardiovascular events. Acute myocardial infarction in five patients who were smoking cigarettes while using nicotine patches has been reported in the press (98). Full details of these cases have not been published, but they were carefully reviewed by a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advisory committee and judged not to be causally related to nicotine (99). Published case reports of adverse cardiovascular events are summarized in Table 1. Postmarketing surveillance data (New Drug Application Supplement) have shown only isolated and sporadic cardiovascular events, with no consistent relationship to the NRT.2
Establishing whether the relation between NRT and cardiovascular events is causal is difficult. Acute cardiovascular events are common in cigarette smokers, and the increased risk for such events persists beyond the time when they stop smoking. Therefore, it is impossible to ascertain from retrospective reports whether acute cardiovascular events reflect the risk of underlying disease, cigarette smoking, concurrent cigarette smoking or nicotine medications, alone or in combination. Smokers and ex-smokers are at increased risk for acute myocardial infarction, and a higher than average number of infarctions would be expected in the general population of people trying to quit smoking, with or without the use of NRT to aid smoking cessation.
Because of the relative infrequency of the cardiovascular events of concern, the number of subjects in a formal study needs to be quite large. One large source of observational data is the Lung Health Study cohort, in which 5,887 middle-aged smokers with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were followed up for 5 years. During that study (100), two-thirds of the subjects were provided with smoking cessation therapy, including nicotine gum. Many of these subjects used nicotine gum heavily for several years. A comparison of smokers versus quitters with nicotine gum versus quitters without nicotine gum showed no increase in hospital admissions for cardiovascular events with nicotine gum treatment (101). In fact, the opposite was observed. Study participants who quit smoking and used nicotine gum had a lower hospital admission rate for cardiovascular disease than participants who quit smoking and did not use gum. Hospital admission rates were similar among subjects who failed to quit smoking, with or without nicotine gum use. In considering these results, it should be remembered that nicotine treatment was not randomly assigned, and therefore the usual caveats regarding sources of bias from comparisons of subgroups must be applied. For example, some participants motivated to use nicotine gum may have had a lower cardiovascular risk to begin with. Nevertheless, the data strongly suggest that nicotine gum use did not increase the rate of hospital admissions for cardiovascular disease.
Establishing whether the relation between NRT and cardiovascular events is causal is difficult. Acute cardiovascular events are common in cigarette smokers, and the increased risk for such events persists beyond the time when they stop smoking. Therefore, it is impossible to ascertain from retrospective reports whether acute cardiovascular events reflect the risk of underlying disease, cigarette smoking, concurrent cigarette smoking or nicotine medications, alone or in combination. Smokers and ex-smokers are at increased risk for acute myocardial infarction, and a higher than average number of infarctions would be expected in the general population of people trying to quit smoking, with or without the use of NRT to aid smoking cessation.
Because of the relative infrequency of the cardiovascular events of concern, the number of subjects in a formal study needs to be quite large. One large source of observational data is the Lung Health Study cohort, in which 5,887 middle-aged smokers with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were followed up for 5 years. During that study (100), two-thirds of the subjects were provided with smoking cessation therapy, including nicotine gum. Many of these subjects used nicotine gum heavily for several years. A comparison of smokers versus quitters with nicotine gum versus quitters without nicotine gum showed no increase in hospital admissions for cardiovascular events with nicotine gum treatment (101). In fact, the opposite was observed. Study participants who quit smoking and used nicotine gum had a lower hospital admission rate for cardiovascular disease than participants who quit smoking and did not use gum. Hospital admission rates were similar among subjects who failed to quit smoking, with or without nicotine gum use. In considering these results, it should be remembered that nicotine treatment was not randomly assigned, and therefore the usual caveats regarding sources of bias from comparisons of subgroups must be applied. For example, some participants motivated to use nicotine gum may have had a lower cardiovascular risk to begin with. Nevertheless, the data strongly suggest that nicotine gum use did not increase the rate of hospital admissions for cardiovascular disease.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Smasharoo wrote:
Let's compare the number of people who've died in the last say 5 years from overdoses of caffeine to the number who have died to overdoses of nicotine
No wait, let's compare how many people were stabbed with onions instead of baseballs.
No wait, let's compare how many people were stabbed with onions instead of baseballs.
How about we compare the comparison between caffeine and nicotine to that of being stabbed with onions instead of baseballs. Because that makes so much more sense! Speaking of onions, you've got multiple layers of insanity going on with that one.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Which is funny given that I asked about a comparison between nicotine and coffee. Is that present in the study?
Yes. Give reading it a shot.
Yes. Give reading it a shot.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Quote:
Why don't you pretend to read that and then badly paraphrase the conclusions and wrongly argue they support your statement. No rush.
But hey. How about we just quote from the study you linked,
Wow, that's fast work. Good going.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Smasharoo wrote:
Quote:
Why don't you pretend to read that and then badly paraphrase the conclusions and wrongly argue they support your statement. No rush.
But hey. How about we just quote from the study you linked,
Wow, that's fast work. Good going.
Did Smash just use a Quote?
Edited, Jan 7th 2015 8:04pm by TirithRR
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
Smasharoo wrote:
Which is funny given that I asked about a comparison between nicotine and coffee. Is that present in the study?
Yes. Give reading it a shot.
Yes. Give reading it a shot.
Really? find for "coffee" or "caffeine" on the page you linked provide no results. Can you perhaps quote the section where this is mentioned?
Edited, Jan 7th 2015 5:10pm by gbaji
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Smasharoo wrote:
Quote:
Why don't you pretend to read that and then badly paraphrase the conclusions and wrongly argue they support your statement. No rush.
But hey. How about we just quote from the study you linked,
Wow, that's fast work. Good going.
In Smash's universe, directly quoting something is the same as badly paraphrasing it.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Really? find for "coffee" or "caffeine" on the page you linked provide no results. Can you perhaps quote the section where this is mentioned?
Sure, I could. Or. Just spit-balling here, you could read it.
Sure, I could. Or. Just spit-balling here, you could read it.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
I'm gifting to you all this link to All Songs Considered Listeners top album picks of 2014 Countdown.
I've listened to it multiple times now. There's some great music sloshing around on this recording.
I've listened to it multiple times now. There's some great music sloshing around on this recording.
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
Recent Visitors: 366
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (366)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- And a happy ******* New Year
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC