back to article Reg man inhales the smooth, non-cancerous, taste of USB nicotine

Electronic cigarettes, also known as e-cigs or vapes, sound like a great idea because they deliver a nicotine hit in a familiar form factor, but without the nasty stuff you'll find in conventional smokes. The jury's out on whether they're safe, with a University of Queensland study attracting criticism almost before it began, …


This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Labyrinthman

    One other benefit...

    In many places of employment, there are no rules against vaping in the office, either. No having to step outside for a smoke break. I know several companies where you can vape at your desk.

    Granted, this may change as more companies become aware of vaping as a whole.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: One other benefit...

      There may be no rule against it, but your eCig might get snapped in half if you sit next to the wrong for instance.

      1. dogged

        Re: One other benefit...

        How dare anyone breathe water vapour near you?

        Alternatively, snap my e-fag, I snap your index finger.

      2. Stephen Gray

        Re: One other benefit...

        You'd only do it once. Then you'd have no teeth.

      3. Psyx

        Re: One other benefit...

        "your eCig might get snapped in half if you sit next to the wrong for instance."

        You might get punched in the face for doing that to the wrong person... me for instance.

        There is no rational reason to lash out at someone smoking one of these things any more than there is for a tee-total person to lash out at someone drinking a pint near them.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: One other benefit...

          "There is no rational reason to lash out at someone smoking one of these things any more than there is for a tee-total person to lash out at someone drinking a pint near them."

          Actually it's more like an alcoholic pouring vodka down my throat. If you think all of the nicotine is removed by your lungs then you're obviously less bright than we all thought. Given you're a smoker, that's a pretty low bar...

          1. MrDamage Silver badge

            Re: One other benefit...

            You truly are thick, arent you?

            The tee-totaller would absorb as much alcohol through evaporation, as you would inhale unabsorbed nicotine from a vaper's e-cig. Given that the main problem with smoking isnt so much the nicotine, its the rest of the nasties that you breathe in either through active, or passive smoking, your complaint about being "forced" to suck in the nico being exhaled is dwarfed by the amount of volatile chemicals you would inhale putting on your deodorant and after-shave in the morning.

            Even those chemicals would dwarf in comparison to the daily lungful you willingly expose yourself to from traffic fumes, and particulate matter from the tube or subway.

            So go ahead and snap my e-cig. I guarantee the last words you'll hear would be "Pick a window, you're leaving".

            1. John Tserkezis

              Re: One other benefit...

              "The tee-totaller would absorb as much alcohol through evaporation, as you would inhale unabsorbed nicotine from a vaper's e-cig"

              This was a concern, and I looked it up and ran some estimations. There's that little nicotine left over, I couldn't realistically be worried about it.

              My major concern was the particulate matter of regular tobacco. My sinuses react quite aversely to it, so much so, the smell of tobacco instinctively sets me off as a "precautionary" measure. If the vaporiser is using tobacco flavoured juice, I'm going to react. If it's indoors, you're going to get hurt.

              To show this is purely a phsycological reaction, I've been near fruity vapors, and actively sought it out to sniff some more.

              But since tobacco isn't going to go away any time soon, I don't see my stance changing. I didn't choose to have a screwed up body, deal with it.

          2. Psyx

            Re: One other benefit...

            "Actually it's more like an alcoholic pouring vodka down my throat. If you think all of the nicotine is removed by your lungs then you're obviously less bright than we all thought."

            How about you bother to read up on them, instead of being perfectly ok with vandalising people' property and assaulting them for no rational reason and resorting to throwing insults at someone you've never met to back up your argument, instead of a few facts.

            "Given you're a smoker, that's a pretty low bar..."

            Given that you're trolling a load of rubbish anonymously on forums, yours is lower.

  2. jake Silver badge

    One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...

    ... the exhaled fumes pollute the atmosphere of the un-addicted.

    1. Cliff

      Re: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...

      That pesky steam!

      In seriousness, there is a trace of glycerin/glycol vapour (same stuff as club smoke machine use, but staggeringly less) plus some of the 'flavours' are untested/unproven. The nicotine levels are again negligible (and contrary to the article you don't need nicotine at all, the bulk of the habit is hand to mouth). Nicotine is very similar to caffeine.

      So don't worry about them polluting the office, opening the window or wearing cheap deodorant is probably more actually polluting. Cigarettes were banned on the basis of the tar and chemicals in secondhand smoke harming others and making their clothes smell. E-fags don't have tar, steam is just steam, there are no combustion products, so on material grounds there is not a compelling argument against them in the workplace TBH. Now that's out of the way, are we actually really upset about the smoke, or just that we want to point out faults in others when we may crack knuckles/clip nails/keep a messy workspace/be less confident/whatever?

      What's the real reason for the complaint? I initially objected as a gut feel based on the visual similarity with the great taboo of indoor smoking, then thought it through as an engineer, and now frankly who cares?

      1. jake Silver badge

        Re: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...

        "That pesky steam!"

        Yeah. Pesky. And containing nicotine. In my airspace.

        No matter how you you look at it, these narcotic drug delivery systems are evil.

        1. dogged

          Re: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...

          I never had you figured for a puritan, Jake.

          "Stop enjoying things that don't affect me in any way, you scum!"

          1. jake Silver badge

            @dogged (was: Re: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...)

            Uh ... dogged, nicotine has an overall negative affect on the human system.

            Do you really think sharing your addiction with all and sundry is a good idea?

            1. dogged

              Re: @dogged (was: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...)

              Yeah, and you've probably got a cold and any number of other viruses.

              Given the statistically non-significant amount of nicotine in e-cigarette exhaled vapour, overall human health would probably be improved far more if we banned you. Or any other human being. Or diesel fuel.

              But we don't. And it helps smokers not to produce something that can definitely kill you.

              This whole thing is like building a footbridge over a busy road to keep pedestrians safe only to find some prick with a placard bitching about the fact that very, very occasionally, people jump off bridges.

              1. jake Silver badge

                Re: @dogged (was: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...)

                So basically, dogged, you're just trying to justify a jones that you know is going to kill you? OK, carry on. Follow your bliss. Who am I to argue.

                1. dogged

                  Re: @dogged (was: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...)


                  No, i'm trying to stop. I tried patches. I tried cold turkey. I tried pretty much everything. And I still smoke because it's a fucking addiction. I tried hypnosis, they told me I can't be hypnotised. I tried acupuncture, they told me I was perfectly aligned, whatever that means. Basically, nothing works.

                  This has cut my cigarette intake in half in three weeks. I'm hoping that in three months, it will have cut it to none. And then I can move away from the e-fag because why not?

                  I want out, Jake. Stop trying to set fire to my ropeladder.

                  1. Anonymous Coward
                    Anonymous Coward

                    Re: @dogged (was: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...)

                    "I want out, Jake. Stop trying to set fire to my ropeladder."

                    Do you actually want to stop, or do you feel like you should want to, due to peer pressure?

                    I found that when I actually wanted to, for myself, that it became a lot easier. I was fed up with the fact that it makes you smell like a tramp and cough like a WWI gas victim in the morning, and so decided to stop. Because it was me that was the motivating factor, I didn't feel like "cheating", as I'd always know. The difference was night and day.

                    Anyway, it's established that there are two separate issues- the chemical addiction and the habituation. I feel that anything too cigarette-like is just a crutch, and leaves them too associated. Thus, I went for a "divide and conquer" approach, tackling them separately.

                    For the chemical addiction, I went for patches. Holy hell, you get a bit wrecked at first, though. Beware around machinery, driving etc.. I found myself zoning out a bit. Following the instructions and stepping the size down over time let me get rid of the chemical addiction.

                    The habituation was actually a bit harder- the times you normally light up.. Killers are often after a meal, when you get out of work, etc.. The way around that was to have other things to do- even if it's horribly boring like doing the washing up (bleh). Hell, little reward activities can work too, like a a quick game of $mobilegame or whatever. Just don't leave yourself unoccupied at those key times, when you're weak and can fall under the spell of the Dark Side.

                    The funny thing is that I was always very discrete, not on of those horrible, lairy militant smokers who clumps in doorways and hurls abuse at people, and always tended to do it outside to avoid my clothes smelling.. So, after I warned a colleague that I might be cranky because I was a couple of weeks into giving up smoking, she was shocked- having never suspected that I even did.

                    Anyway, maybe it's an alternative approach, if simulating the oral fixation of a cigarette and associating it with the chemical hit in such an obvious way continues to prove transparently counter-productive :)

                    Good luck.

                    1. dogged

                      Re: @dogged (was: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...)

                      > Do you actually want to stop, or do you feel like you should want to, due to peer pressure?

                      No, I don't want to but my son is seven months old. I've kept it to "at work only - may include commute" since he was born which is hard enough but there's no way I'm risking his health.

                      So I have to stop.

                      1. Anonymous Coward
                        Anonymous Coward

                        Re: @dogged (was: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...)

                        "No, I don't want to but my son is seven months old. I've kept it to "at work only - may include commute" since he was born which is hard enough but there's no way I'm risking his health."

                        Yeah, far better to smoke on your own and orphan him when he's 7 years...

                  2. Justin Case

                    Re: @dogged (was: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...)

                    Having been there and done that I can categorically state that all you need to do is stop. Never take another puff. No one makes you buy cigarettes. If you truly want to stop then you will. The crutch of cutting down or nicotine replacement products does not work well because the only way of removing the addiction is to stop ingesting the chemicals that cause and feed the addiction. Yes, it's stressful. Yes, it's difficult.

                    Grow some cahones, man up and take responsibility for your own actions.

                  3. Anonymous Coward
                    Anonymous Coward

                    Re: @dogged (was: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...)

                    This has cut my cigarette intake in half in three weeks. I'm hoping that in three months, it will have cut it to none. And then I can move away from the e-fag because why not?

                    I want out, Jake. Stop trying to set fire to my ropeladder.

                    If this is working for you, then go for it. That said, because the devices look and behave a lot like cigarettes, probably best to treat them as such — go outside to have one. If you're outside or in somewhere well ventilated, it won't be a problem, but in enclosed, less ventilated spaces, it could be seen as a problem (even if it is only steam).

                    My big objection to regular cigarettes is the smell of them … they stink, and some smokers generate quite thick clouds with them. If there's a good breeze though, this gets dispersed quickly, and so is less of a problem. I'm not sure how much the e-cigarettes produce relative to their analogue cousins, maybe less, in which case this is a step in the right direction.

                    1. Steven Raith

                      Re: @dogged (was: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...)

                      Stuart Longland - compared to ciggies, the smell is nothing and it dissipates in seconds. I've asked people around me this question before and it's always the same issue, it's just not an issue.

                      I've just done a straw poll with my colleague, and other than the sound of inhalation, he can't tell my smell that I've been using it. And he's six feet away from me. I'm chugging on menthol at the moment from a dual coil atty.

                      Certainly I can now smell people smoking in other cars in traffic - when I'm hammering my own one in the car.

                      It's really a non-issue, I'm happy to report.

                      Steven R

            2. Colin Millar

              Re: @dogged (was: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...)

              Yeah - so does alcohol - lets ban that too. Now what shall we call the campaign - oh yeah lets call it Prohibition 2.0 coz it worked out so well first time round.

              Can't you nazis get it through your heads - it's my human system and if I want to fuck it up that's my choice.

              1. The First Dave

                Re: @dogged (was: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...)

                When you drink a pint, you don't (usually) pour the dregs down my throat, whether I like it or not...

              2. Lusty

                Re: @dogged (was: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...)

                "Can't you nazis get it through your heads - it's my human system and if I want to fuck it up that's my choice."

                Do it in a cupboard and we'll leave you alone. Do it next to us and we will bother you about it. That doesn't make us Nazis, that just means we don't like what you're doing. I wouldn't like you sitting next to me if you shit your pants so why would I like you blowing your crap in my face?

                Drinking alcohol sensibly is not the same as this since none of the alcohol ends up near other people. A drunk pissing on your desk is more like what;s happening here. There may not be alcohol in it but I still don't want it anywhere near me...

            3. Psyx

              Re: @dogged (was: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...)

              "Do you really think sharing your addiction with all and sundry is a good idea?"

              Do you go and hide in the cupboard when having your morning coffee or evening pint, then?

        2. flearider

          Re: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...

          you'll actually find theres more nic in a potato than in whats exhaled from a ecig ..

          yes a lot of food has nic in it at very low doses

          1. jake Silver badge

            @flearider (was: Re: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...)

            Uh ... no.

            Solanine is not nicotine.

          2. Sorry that handle is already taken. Silver badge

            Re: flearider

            "you'll actually find theres more nic in a potato than in whats exhaled from a ecig .."

            So why not just switch to potatoes then?

        3. Dr Stephen Jones

          Re: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...

          No matter how you you look at it, these narcotic drug delivery systems are evil.

          No, that's how you look at it because "evil" is an ethical position, not a material scientific fact.

          Provable harm is required before banning something. The e-cigarettes may annoy you, but they cause you no harm. Therefore you have no reasonable to stop other people enjoying them, any more than you can ban people for being left-handed.

          Now take your nasty intolerant Puritan little self off and go and cry in the corner.

          1. jake Silver badge

            Re: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...

            "but they cause you no harm"

            Yes, and no. Yes, they cause me no harm because I stopped smoking a quarter century ago and see no need for a surrogate. No, because when they are used in my vicinity, I can feel the affects of the nicotine.

            Nasty & intolerant? Pardon me while I fart in your general direction.

            1. Steven Raith

              Re: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...

              "No, because when they are used in my vicinity, I can feel the affects of the nicotine"

              You might feel something, Jake - more likely a placebo/nocebo effect, or just impotent rage that someone else can enjoy their habit without, to the best of our knowledge from *reputable* research that has been done, seriously harming themselves or those around them - but I can tell you now, if you can detect the remnant nicotine in exhaled vapour (somewhere between 5-15% of the original inhalation dose), then smoking a cigarette would make you vomit/faint, by volume of nicotine.

              Hope that helps.

              1. Graham Marsden

                @jake Re: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...

                I'd love to see a double-blind test where two people take turns to sit next to you, one smoking an e-cig and the other a non-nicotine containing water vapour emitter and see if you can actually tell the difference or whether it's actually just all in your head.

                A point that I *do* remember is that I and my friends used to meet in a pub and even though we sat in the "non-smoking" area, I would always leave there with my clothes *reeking* of cigarette smoke. Now, with e-cigs, there's no such problem and also no "excuse me, just got to nip out for a fag..." hassles.

                If people want to indulge in this sort of thing and it's not affecting me, why should they not be allowed to do it?

                1. Shinku

                  Re: @jake One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...

                  Entirely possible, you can buy or even mix your own nicotine-free eliquid. You can also get flavourless nicotine (and nic-free) liquid if you want to eliminate flavours from such an experiment. Two identical ecigs, one with VG+PG+nic and one with just VG+PG, indistinguishable by eye, the vaper may notice the difference in taste or "throat hit" but bystanders would be none the wiser. Seems like a simple test to perform to me.

              2. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...

                @Steven Raith

                @Graham Marsden

                You'll never convince Jake. Ever.

                He'll also conveniently ignore the fact that in all juices the easiest to absorb ingredient is (by design) the nicotine. This means the overwhelming majority of nicotine is absorbed when inhaled.

                IT's PG/VG vapour being exhaled, not nicotine. He's never been one to let inconvenient truths and facts get in the way of his opinion though.

                1. Steven Raith

                  Re: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...

                  @DigitulSupport - yeah, I know, I know, but I can't help feeling that responding to him might at least convince others of the correct argument, rather than his rampant incorrectness.

            2. Bgfreeman

              Re: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...

              Anyone who says they 'feel the effects" of nicotine in exhaled vapour is delusional or suffering from psychosomatic symptoms.

              Nicotine is absorbed extremely fast and E-cigs deliver it less efficiently than cigarettes (something to do with particle size) so the quantity of Nicotine in exhaled vapour is effectively nil.

              1. Sir Runcible Spoon

                Re: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...

                Hey Jake, how do you know there was nicotine in the vapour?

                When I used one to give up (13 years ago now) I ended up making my own refills from glycerol because the cartridges were so damned expensive (even the ones without nicotine).

                I don't think I was mixing it right either coz I got a couple of wicked headaches from it - it was all a bit trial and error back then.

            3. Psyx

              Re: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...

              "when they are used in my vicinity, I can feel the affects of the nicotine."


        4. Psyx

          Re: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...

          "No matter how you you look at it, these narcotic drug delivery systems are evil."

          I can look at it in plenty of ways that aren't evil.

          What you are saying though is that your drugs of choice are fine, and everyone else's are evil. If you do happen to be tee-total and don't consume other mind-altering drugs like caffeine and chocolate then I might consider retracting my statement, but until then you're just being a massive hypocrite.

        5. Thomas_Kent

          Re: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...

          "No matter how you you look at it, these narcotic drug delivery systems are evil."

          Nicotine is not a narcotic. Addictive yes, but not a narcotic.

      2. Khaptain Silver badge

        Re: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...

        Cliff, I understand your point of view, but as an ex smoker I feel that allowing people to smoke them in the office is akin to holding company meetings in a bar when you know that half the staff were once alcoholics.......

        I have given up for a few years so they dont bother me too much but anyone that is trying to give up will constantly see someone holding a cigarette and that can become a real problem ( OK, I know that they are not real cigarettes but you know what I mean)

        Personally I feel that everyone should be encouraged to give up smoking and that cigarettes should be completely forbidden. Removing cigarettes from Society will do nothing worse than making Philip Morris less rich.... ( The ex-smopers money will always be spent, just on different things)

        1. Elmer Phud

          Re: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...

          Some parents used to hide away to smoke, now many don't as they think its not harmful.

          Has the highly addictive nature of nicotine been removed?

          1. Dr Stephen Jones

            Re: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...

            the highly addictive nature of nicotine

            Don't forget the highly addictive nature of coffee. Or doughnuts. Perhaps those should be banned too?

            No doubt some twitchy Puritan is already working on the campaign. They won't be happy until it looks like Utah.

        2. Steven Raith

          Re: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...

          I've had comments from ex-smokers before about my e-cig, and without exception, they've either been highly positive about it, or if they're currently a bit raw from stopped recently, they've been fine with me doing it out of sight/around a corner/in the kitchen/etc.

          If they're ex-smokers, they'll appreciate that getting off the tabs isn't easy, and that anything that helps you, me, or any other smoker who wants to stop is a good thing.

          If they don't, they're puritan fucks and should have that pointed out to them.

          I tried e-cigs one weekend about two years ago, never looked back - I have a ciggy every few months to remind myself why I stopped, they're fucking awful.

          Menthol and strawberry at 18mg through a dual-wick clearomiser for me, ta!

          Steven R

        3. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...

          Banning cigarettes & tobacco will NOT stop its consumption. People that want to smoke, will buy them on the black market. Which would drive an already dangerous product underground, into the hands of criminals. Not to mention the Tax revenue taken away from the Government.

          So, how exactly would banning tobacco be of any benefit? A couple of examples...

          1. Alcohol prohibition in 1920s USA. Government lost tax revenue, clubs and bars went underground, and criminal cartels such as the Mafia illegally imported booze & reaped all the rewards. The ban funded organised crime & expanded their operations. Smart move, eh?

          2. Banning cannabis has been a tremendous success, hasn't it? The amount of money & Police resources wasted due to this "war on drugs" is outstanding, and yet weed is grown on a large scale, by criminal gangs employing illegal immigrants in rented properties, in every town and city in the UK. Yet the evidence suggests that, as long as it's not abused, weed is no more dangerous than alcohol.

          Therefore, I am suggesting that you seriously think about the implications of banning tobacco products, which have been available, legally, in the UK for over 4 centuries. If you want yet another potentially dangerous product falling into the hands & control of organised crime, great :) But common sense will dictate that an outright ban will NEVER happen.

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...

        As someone who is allergic to propylene glycol, I do hope that it isn't in the side-vapour, or what gets exhaled ...

    2. Maharg

      Re: One point that is often conveniently forgotten ...

      If having your car windows down while stopped in traffic for 10 minutes is on a par with having a smoke, I really don’t think the water vapour is something to worry about, unless you are the type of person who holds their breath when near a boiling kettle.

      It’s like complaining about the amount of sugar in blue smarties while drinking cans of Redbull …

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    It won't last

    A market that provides hits (let's call it for what it is) at approximately 25% of the cost of cigarettes? Expect dirty tricks from the tobacco trade soon, like "regulation", followed by bringing out their own "approved" versions.

    1. Cliff

      Re: It won't last

      With vegetable glycerin costing a couple of quid for a large bottle at pharmacy purity over the counter, that 25% figure is massively overstated also, it could be dramatically lower. All the tobacco companies have e-fag brands either in development or on the shelf already, especially as their original market is being slowly but surely eroded.

    2. David Webb

      Re: It won't last

      They tried didn't they? UK Gov. wanted to have the fluids treated as "medical" so it could only be sold from a chemists, seriously ramping up the costs. Luckily the EU stepped in and stated it's not medical so the Gov can't get put huge amounts of tax.

      Who loses? Cig makers, if people are going for e-cigs they aint buying cigs.

      NRT suppliers. If e-cigs are more effective (and apparently they are) then the NRT suppliers are losing money as people are not buying their product.

      Anti-Smoking-Gestapo. You know the ones, the sort of people who would demand the death penalty for you if you smoke within 5 miles of a school which is closed for summer, who demanded pubs ban smoking so they could go drink without smokers ruining it (then finding their pub shut because the smokers left and the pub couldn't support itself).

      I got an e-cig, so far it's not been effective, I'll have to get a higher level of nicoteen I guess, and maybe some flavours, ohh, vagina flavour, golden vagina, sounds nice!

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: It won't last

        > ohh, vagina flavour, golden vagina, sounds nice!

        If I had a quid for every time I'd asked for "25g of Golden Vagina" in shops I would have a small amount of money to partly offset my expensive and debilitating habit.

      2. Shinku

        Re: It won't last

        Elements of the UK govt and the European parliament are still trying to regulate ecigs as medicinal products, they haven't given up, if you have an interest in ecigs whether for yourself, family members, friends or the public in general it's a good idea to contact your local MP to have them do something about it.

        Analysis of the situation is available here:

        As for who wins or loses, cigarette companies are already busy investing in and buying up e-cig companies, they win whatever happens. If e-cigs are medicinal, tobacco companies can afford the licenses, the little guys can't. Medical companies stand to gain with strict regulation, since if e-cigs are freely available they can't have the market all to themselves and it's competition to NRT, as you say. You also mention the anti-smoking brigade, who will rally against anything which "normalises" (ie: looks even remotely like) smoking, even if it reduces the harm done through less clean methods of nicotine consumption.

        The whole thing makes my head hurt, quite frankly. Seems only logical to me that a less harmful product should be able to freely usurp a long-standing and more harmful method of consuming nicotine, as long as sensible quality standards are upheld (which doesn't require medical regulation).

      3. Robert Carnegie Silver badge


        I don't think that the EU has ruled against any proposed UK regulation yet. A BBC web site report in February says "E-cigarettes are currently classed as a general consumer product and regulated by trading standards. It means they cannot contain hazardous chemicals, for example, and that the battery in them must meet EU standards."

        I exhale water vapour without the assistance of any such device, as is apparent on cold days. Vapour exhaled from the mouth that's visible indoors presumably is the Vaseline or whatever it is that you mix your flavour in.

        Presumably the device could be miniaturised and worn inside the mouth or nose for more discreet drug-taking.

        Nicotine is an addictive drug, has undesirable side effects, and is a poison, being used as such in some Agatha Christine stories, so making you get a limited quantity for personal use from the chemist sounds like a good idea to me. Apart from limited medical applications, and some neurological effects for which getting a good night's sleep would probably be just as good, I'm not sure what the good of it is.

        1. Shinku

          Re: Regulation?

          There has been no ruling either way by either the UK or the EU at this point, however the discussion is currently in progress both here in the UK and in Europe. The UK govt's stance currently appears to be that ecigs should be regulated as medicinal products. The EU recently voted in favour of some restrictions, but not medicinalisation. This has faced opposition and is still up in the air, the decision has not yet been made.

          See this document for more info (page 2 onwards):

          Part of the attraction to ecigs is that they replicate (approximately) the hand to mouth action of a cigarette, the inhalation action and the expulsion of a visible product upon exhaling. This, along with the nicotine, fulfills the habitual and chemical requirements of a former tobacco smoker. In addition, the flavourings and the differently configured devices allow customisation to taste.

          This would not happen with a medical device, which would be considerably less effective due to inflexibility and a considerable lack of options due to regulatory expense and licensing requirements. For example, I am currently vaping a fruit flavoured eliquid with a 2.5% concentration of nicotine which is stored in a large tank and is being turned into vapour by a coil consuming 10 watts of power. None of this is likely to be possible with a medical product, which would almost certainly be restricted to tobacco and menthol flavours, at a specific strength, on a specific device capable of delivering considerably less power. Each variation on this theme would require a new medicinal licence, every strength of every flavour in every new type of device. This would render a medicinal device ineffective for me. I would not enjoy it as much, I would consider it inferior, it would not satisfy my requirements, I would most probably end up nipping down the shop for half an ounce of Golden Virginia and a packet of papers. Does this concern me? Not as long as I have electronic cigarettes the way I use them, no. Why should I be denied this option?

          Several final points: there is no petroleum jelly in my, or hopefully anybody else's ecigs, and much like alcohol there is some expectation of reasonable responsibility regarding the use of nicotine, I have yet to hear of once single instance of death due to proper or improper use of electronic cigarette nicotine solutions. Finally, regarding the use of it, consider it analogous to caffeine, it is a mild stimulant.

  4. Moffy

    Image on the icon seemed appropriate..

    I found that my quit campaign worked better with the e-cig than the other types such as patches and gums and sucky sweet things. Theyre all rancid to use and don't really help. more mind over matter and for a long term smoker thats a failure.. me anyway.

    The e-cig when used as a normal cig.. ie out to the smoking area to use it, etc rather than sat at a desk has been more productive in helping me quit. a week of use found me reducing the need for a cig quite markedly to the point i can go a whole day without a cigarette. Im not planning a quick fix give up in as much as a slow one, but the e-cig (i have a eGo-T) has been a great help and definately the better of all the options.

    Previous steps had been swapping to a Pipe and tobacco, which also helped with the draw down (pun intended) from cigarettes. one bowl of baccy lasting me the best part of a day.. although proper use of a pipe is somewhat an artform in it's use, so not maybe for all.

  5. frank ly

    Smoke on the water vapour

    "Instead of smoke, the vapour is nearly all water vapour,..."

    This statement is repeated on every website article I've seen and also in the UK NHS website articles.

    How can it be that a mixture of glycerine and propylene glycol, when heated, produces water vapour??

    The answer is that it doesn't, it produces glycerine and propylene glycol vapour. I am amazed that the false statement about 'water vapour' has been repeated all over the internet. (There is a small amount of water added to the mixture to make it easier to flow when filling and for wick wetting.)

    Note: I use the Ego-T and the plastic ciggy models and I've figured out how to refill the cartidges that you can buy cheaply in Asda. I mix my own e-juice and prefer the plastic ciggy for the 'natural' feel, but they don't last anywhere near as long as an Ego-T on a full charge and a full tank.

    1. Steven Raith

      Re: Smoke on the water vapour

      Frank ly - I was of the understanding that when heated to past it's flash point (IE where it vapourises) the PG/VG 'transmogrified' into what is basically water vapour - in the same way that combusing paper turns it into carbon, etc. I'm not chemist, so excuse my poor explanation, but I think you get the gist.

      Regardless, it's the same trick as used in smoke machines, and there has yet to be a reputable study that shows significant harm from the vapours, nor have there been any medical problems attributed to the normal use of e-cigs (that aren't already obvious - an asthmatic might not like it much, for example) in any reliable manner in the decade or so they've been on the market.

      Comparing this to the extremely well established and obvious harm that normal ciggies do, even if they were proven to be half as harmful as a B+H silver, it's *still* better than smoking for a variety of very relevant reasons.

      I'm firmly of the opinion that people who aren't behind E-cigs either don't understand them at a fundamental level, or are just being deliberately ignorant to back up their own prejudices.

      1. frank ly

        @Steven Re: Smoke on the water vapour

        The pale grey clouds produced by e-cigs are not water vapour. They are a 'fog' of glycerine and propylene glycol. (Visible steam from a kettle is a fog of water). For some reason, a longish time ago, somebody on the internet stated that the e-cig stuff was mainly water vapour, which is obviously incorrect by any rational analysis. If you read internet articles about e-cigs you will find that exact same statement repeated all over the place, with very similar wording - it's an internet meme, or lazy journalism, call it what you will.

        I am not making any statements about the health aspects of e-cigs. I am simply stating what should be obvious after any rational analysis.

        Note: if you did heat glycerine and propylene glycol up so much that it 'transmorgified', it would probably produce something very nasty indeed.

        1. Steven Raith

          Re: @Steven Smoke on the water vapour

          Is it possible it's a conflation between what it *actually* is, and what it *effectively* is in terms of expected health effects?

          I'm not being difficult, it's just that as you say, you'd think trading standards would get all up in their junk about this if that is the case and there isn't a rational, sensible reason for the description of it as water vapour.

          As for transmogrification, well, it is transmogrifying, from a liquid to a vapour - the flash point (boiling point, more accurately, I suppose)for PG/VG vaporisation is a touch over 100deg IIRC - and if you get it over 400deg it will ignite if exposed to a flame. I'd expect *that* would be nasty, as that would be combustion rather than vaporisation, which is a rather different process.

          1. frank ly

            Re: @Steven Smoke on the water vapour

            The trading standards authority is only concerned with advertisments directed at the general public (and the quality of delivered items compared to stated quality, etc). E-cig adverts don't make any statement about the composition of the vapour and are careful to state that e-cigs are a substitute for smoking tobacco and that they contain nicotine and that if you don't use nicotine then you should not use e-cigs - all good stuff and no problem.

            When I first started with e-cigs, last year, I did a lot of 'internet research' on them and I found that the 'serious' websites, usually run by the suppliers of e-juice and e-cig components, had very good explanations of how they worked and what they produced.

            However, the tabloid press types of websites stated that the e-cigs produced mainly water vapour. This was repeated all over the internet on these types of sites. I've no idea why this is and I was amazed that the UK NHS website made exactly the same incorrect statement. It may be that at an early stage, somebody did say that it was 'like inhaling water vapour' (which it isn't) but I have no idea how this 'meme' started.

            1. Steven Raith

              Re: @Steven Smoke on the water vapour

              Ah, interesting. Got some links to the more technically biased/serious sites?

              I'm interested :-)

              1. frank ly

                Re: @Steven Smoke on the water vapour

                If you're interested and in the UK, I recommend that you look at Vapeland and Liberty-Flights. If you do a Google search for e-cigs, e-cigarettes, etc. then you'll find loads of links and you'll easily be able to tell which are 'tabloid' type sites and which are the serious forum type of site.

                My personal recommendation is that you start with the plastic-ciggie ones from Asda and learn how to take the end cap off the cartridges for refilling (hint - use a short stubby screw and a pair of pliers). Get 24mg strength e-juice and dilute it with glycerine, from the high street chemist, to knock it down to about 18mg strength, or whatever. Use a syringe or a needle capped plastic bottle to inject the e-juice down the side of the casing. I use a strong 'pipe' flavour mixed with caramel flavour - it's all personal taste and experimentation.

                If you get fed up with the regular recharging and refilling with plastic ciggies, splash out on a twin-pack of eGo-T style of systems from Vapeland. They supply e-juice as well, as do many internet based sites.

                I have no connection with any supplier of e-cigs, etc. This is all my personal experience and opinion.

                1. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: @Steven Smoke on the water vapour

                  Of course the exhalation does contain water vapour, as does anything breathed out from the lungs. The exhalation may even contain more water vapour than VG/PG particles; but I'm not in a position to measure that.

                  The nicotine is mostly absorbed by the lungs of the vapee and I'm given to understand that the remainder is negliable...certainly not enough to affect someone sitting next to you unless you're blowing it directly into their face; and anyone claiming otherwise is either delusional or in a bathysphere with a dodgy air-scrubber.

  6. Caff

    fountain pen

    Could method for filling old fountain pens be adopted by manufactuers for filling the e-cigs?

    1. Steven Raith

      Re: fountain pen

      Probably, if someone wanted to, but then you have to put that convenience against the fun of breaking out the droppers, sample bottles and syringes, and doing your 'drugs' in front of colleagues and customers.

      Mad scientist evil laugh optional.

      Steven R

      PS: Obviously, assuming they know what it is your doing - as I've noted before, treating people like human beings and explaining yourself *before* going all Wierd Science on them with chemicals and all that tends to get a better reaction. Just call me Puff The Magic IT Technician, sir...

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: fountain pen

        Do you think there is a way of rendering cannabis into one of these things and claiming it's a weed flavoured insert?

        1. Steven Raith

          Re: fountain pen

          I beleive the THC is in a state where doesn't vape cleanly (if at all) hence why it's not really popular - oils, etc, which seperate from the base liquid. People have tried it.

          If you could get the cannaboids and other 'whee, my hands feel weird' bits extracted and bound to the PG/VG base (in the same way the nicotine does) then I suppose it'd be technically possible...

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: fountain pen

            Yes people have experimented with getting the goodness out of cannabis and into an eliquid.

            The few forum posts i've read on the subject said it works to a point but doesn't vapourise cleanly so you don't get the full benefit and you ruin your atomiser/cartomiser very quickly indeed.

            It'll come though.

  7. Oh Homer

    Not the same as the real thing

    As a forty-a-day man who chokes his lungs up every morning, I was desperate to ditch the coffin nails, so I tried these e-thingies.

    I certainly got a hit, even more than with a real fag, to the point where I actually got a headache, but the overall sensation is just not the same at all. It may be purely psychological, but I'm still desperate for a fag immediately after vaping. Alternatively, maybe I'm also addicted to some chemical other than nicotine, that's mixed in with the tobacco (apparently there are over 4000 of them).

    Either way, I found them to be just as useless as patches.

    1. dogged

      Re: Not the same as the real thing

      Like the article's author, I find it's reduced my intake. Hopefully I can kill the whole habit this way.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Not the same as the real thing

      @ Oh Homer and others

      did you try the cartridge jobs that look like a normal cig?

      If so they're awful. Almost everyone I know who has tried one of them (myself included)got headaches, sore throat etc.

      You want a battery/tank setup and a good quality juice with (importantly) the correct level of nicotine in. I vape at 18%/18mg right now. I tried a 24+mg and it blew my head off nicotine content wise.

      1. Shinku

        Re: Not the same as the real thing

        18mg/ml is actually 1.8%, not 18%.

        I personally use 24-36mg depending on the liquid in question (many don't come in concentrations higher than 24mg) and that works nicely for me, but it's a bit of trial and error if you're new to vaping. It's really impossible to recommend a specific strength for a new vaper, but I usually suggest starting no lower than 18mg. The reason for this is that if it's too strong you can always dilute it with a weaker liquid and it's not wasted, but if you try a liquid which is too weak, say 8mg for example, you may consider the whole concept to be kaput because it's not doing the job.

        Something else to note is that if the device in question is a dinky fag-alike then it's not going to have the gumption to provide bags and bags of vapour, so you're effectively getting less nicotine per puff, so I suggest a higher strength in something that small. The coil takes a little while to warm up, and the battery is so small that it simply can't deliver the amount of power required to really get the thing cooking. Then it'll promptly die because you've sucked all the charge out of it by driving it so hard. On the other hand, if you have an 18650 (that's a size of battery, commonly found in laptops, large laser pens and heavy duty flashlights, many "mod" style ecigs use them, or similar) driven drainpipe with a 20 watt setting and a huge quad coil atomiser on the top, you'll probably need less concentrated liquid, it'll be chucking vapour out like a steam train.

        1. Steven Raith

          Re: Not the same as the real thing

          Quad coil atty?

          I'm sorry, I demand a link!

          I'm currently using a TW Vivi Nova (it's a joyetech rebrand AFAIK) which is doing me nicely. Tried a Mini Nova last week and found it to be quite good, but a quad coil atty sounds pretty interesting...

          1. Shinku

            Re: Not the same as the real thing

            Haha, sadly I'm not sure such a thing is commercially available in a pre-made form, but DIYers build their own in rebuildable atomisers, there are many videos on the youtubes showing them off and explaining how to do it. The Innokin iClear 30 is a dual coil clearomiser though, in case you fancy a gander. Apparently there were (are?) triple coil cartomisers too, but I've never run into one myself.

      2. John H Woods Silver badge

        Re: Not the same as the real thing

        Actually there are cig-type e-cigs that *are* quite good, although they are more expensive. My wife is happy with V2s for smoking outdoors and a tank-type thing for smoking at home. She is a previously moderate-to-heavy smoker who hasn't smoked cigs since her brain told her to stop in Feb 2010 (by having a stroke).

        1. Shinku

          Re: Not the same as the real thing

          Oh yeah, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that cigalike ecigs are useless, they're obviously not for me and I might've come across a bit biased, as far as I'm concerned if it works for one person then it's a viable choice. It's not untrue to say that cigarette sized ecigs are necessarily lesser-performing though, there's just no way to cram a huge amount of battery power and eliquid into a space that small. No reason to disregard them as an option though, it's just something to bear in mind if they aren't quite floating your boat.

  8. Anonymous Coward 101

    What's the Issue?

    My understanding is that old fashioned smoking alternatives (such as snuff) are sold tax free as they are considered much less harmful than smoking. The nicotine is what smokers want, but it isn't the most health damaging substance in tobacco. If you are a smoker, switching to e-cigs is obviously a good idea.

    Will there be some people who take up smoking e-cigs who would otherwise not start smoking? Yes. Should we balance that against the positives of e-cigs? Yes. They are a harm reduction measure, like needle exchanges and methadone for heroin addicts.

  9. jai

    halo cigarettes

    my gf uses the ones sold at

    before, she'd tried again and again to stop smoking by all sorts of methods but none of them stuck.

    but she got a starter kit of these Halo ones and hasn't had a proper cigarette since. that was at least 18 months ago.

    she says it's because she can still feel herself breathing something in, and she can see the vapour being exhaled. those are the things she missed when using patches.

    i figure, even if these things aren't 100% healthy, they're still a lot better than inhaling burning tar, right? So it's a step in the right direction at least.

    and a lot cheaper.

    1. Anonymous Coward 101

      Re: halo cigarettes

      "she says it's because she can still feel herself breathing something in, and she can see the vapour being exhaled. those are the things she missed when using patches."

      No, it's because she was getting an instant 'hit' from the nicotine. You don't get that from patches, which release nicotine slowly.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: halo cigarettes

        @anonymuos coward 101

        Actually my experience ties with the previous posters.

        Yes you get the instant nicotine hit from vaping, just like smoking BUT the bit about vaping I found helped me quit cigarettes so easily was the fact it also ticks EVERY other box that smoking does and other qids to quitting done.

        Hand to mouth movement

        Vapour can be made to be warm/hot like smoke so mouth feel and feel when inhaling are all ticked boxes too.

        It offers all of these things and others that are just as much a part of the addiction in mental terms when you're a smoker.

        Similarly to others whatever date I bought my ecig kit was the last day I smoked a cigarette and I had also tried everything else.

      2. Lottie

        Re: halo cigarettes

        Strikes me that the "breathing stuff in" and vapour thing makes sense. There's lot of things associated with any habitual activity. Most smokers that are giving up cite the habitual activities as being very difficult to overcome and it makes sense that the brathing in and exhalation mouth/ throat feel would be an aspect.

        1. Steven Raith

          Re: halo cigarettes

          I'll just add that a couple of times I've found I've lacked premix, and I've used all my nicotine base - but I've had some base liquid and flavouring, so I've made up some non-nicotine fluid for myself.

          I notice the lack of nicotine, but only after a few hours. It's enough to keep me tided over till I can get to my local stockists, at least.

          Not scientific, but there you go - it's definitely a mix of the strong physical interaction, and the nicotine being either equal, or slightly below that for the first few hours.

          Steven R

          (yes, I know, I'm posting a lot here, but I'm finding a lot of things to respond to and ecigs are something I've very pleased with from a technical and practical standpoint, so excuse me for that please!)

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: halo cigarettes


          I think that's the main reason vaping worked for me. There wasn't one habitual side of smoking it didn't replace.

          The actual addiction to nicotine is only one of the addictive behaviours associated with smoking, this is the only one (patches, gum etc) that ticks any box other than "contains nicotine"

  10. unwarranted triumphalism

    I see the Puritan Brigade have assembled...

    Not that they have anything constructive to say, just the usual scare stories.

    An e-cig helped me quit nearly 5 years ago and I have not used nicotine since, nor have I been tempted to.

    But you're not interested in success stories, are you?

  11. Andraž 'ruskie' Levstik

    On side effects

    Until it is proven these things don't have any side effects on second hand vapers I'd prefer they are relegated to the same spot as normal cigs.

    And from my personal experience with someone in the office trying to use the e-cig a couple of times I felt poorly after that. So it certainly isn't just water vapour. There is enough in there that can cause issues in the short term.

    I'm not opposed to letting people enjoy what they want. I'm just opposed to having it affect others or myself.

    1. the spectacularly refined chap

      Re: On side effects

      Until it is proven these things don't have any side effects on second hand vapers I'd prefer they are relegated to the same spot as normal cigs.

      It's impossible to prove them safe, just as it is impossible to prove anything is safe. It's possible to show harm but not vice versa. We'll ban whatever new gadget you like on the same precautionary principle, shall we? Oh, and the air you are breathing and the water you drink - after all, we know those can be harmful.

      One thing we do know is that I observed this kind ignorant, knee-jerk response that is based purely on anti-smoking sentiment as opposed to any facts raised my blood pressure and was thus harmful. Using the same logic you should be banned from El Reg.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: On side effects

        Mmm, but this is the argument used by bansturbators now. Ban e-cigs! Ban menthol cigs! Ban fracking! Ban nuclear! We can't be absolutely 100% sure it's safe!

        Reactionary nonsense peddled by the infantile.

    2. Anonymous Coward 101

      Re: On side effects

      "And from my personal experience with someone in the office trying to use the e-cig a couple of times I felt poorly after that. So it certainly isn't just water vapour. There is enough in there that can cause issues in the short term."

      I suggest it is more likely that it is due to a nocebo effect - you thought you would feel poorly, and so did feel poorly as a result.

  12. Martin H Watson

    My clothes don't smell after sitting next to a smoker in the Pub any more. Leave them alone.

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Passive vaping - asthma

    Some colleagues have gotten into these flavoured vapors, some give me asthma attacks, and are creating ambient smells in their offices, so great idea, but can't be tolerated in the workplace?

    1. Darryl

      Re: Passive vaping - asthma

      I find that a lot of perfumes/colognes and some soaps can seriously affect my asthma, but I haven't been lobbying to have them banned

  14. Mr Fuzzy


    It's probably worth mentioning that you get better results with a monster battery - the heating coil is a hell of a draw on a poor little lithium ion cell. Using a comically oversized battery well give more consistent results, as they are less prone to sagging as you draw.

    I use a Protank on a highly suspect small cigar tin stuffed with parts salvaged from bits of old broken tech. It draws a surprising number of positive comments in pubs.

  15. Tachikoma

    I have a box of various e-cigs and keep going back to rolling my own as I have not yet found an e-cig that makes me feel like I'm sucking on the exhaust of a JCB. I have found some that "hit" the back of your throat nicely, I have found some that make me spin out from the nicotine, but I have not found one that gives that "hit" on my lungs. Closest I can get is overheating the liquid by drawing slowly.

    If anyone can recommend one that gives a "hot" vape, let me know. Cheers.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward


      you want to look into what o the forums and onlines vape shops are shows as either "customer or mod"

      Monster battery teamed with a tank that you can vary the voltage and ohmage.You can vary the voltage and ohms until you get the experience you're after. You do have to actually want to quit though as with all methods.

      Can we post links? I'm in no way affiliated with any seller, this tank is amazing and the company is simply the top of google. start here and shop around.

  16. flearider

    get the nic right

    for all those that are trying these for them to work you must get the nic right ..

    it go's from 0mg to 32mg

    for a 20 a day smoker it's around 15-18mg nic content

    for a 40 a day up to 24mg but cut down over time

    after smoking for 30 yrs I've now gone 8 months and it's great I can run again

    I don't stand near smokers if I can help it .. they smell bad .. did I smell like that yes

    I mix my own juice it's cheaper ..

    my favourite atty the spheroid on a mech mod ..

    will I ever give up nic .. prob not will you ever give up caffeine

  17. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Good article.

    I was wondering when the Reg would review these.

    I'm a vaper myself. Unlike previous attempts at quitting I honestly could not tell you when I quit.

    I bought an e-cig (one of the ego kits in this article) around a year ago and I haven't had a cigarette since that day. It replaced smoking so well and completey that there was never that "5,10,30 etc days without a fag" period.

    Anyone considering it please take the plunge. don't get the ones that look like cigs, they're crap. Like most I started on an ego style kit and have now moved on to the customer/mods which deliver a much better experience.

    I don't miss smoking at all, the range of flavour available is incredible and some of them are amazing.

    I do vape in the office but we're a small outfit here so I simply asked all my colleges if they minded or not.

    PS - anyone who does vape - "Totally wicked Orange candy" is amazing (it's orange tic-tac perfectly done) as is "Ewizards Mucho Mango". Pricey (for juice, waaay cheaper than smoking still) but both are 10/10 (IMHO)

  18. Shinku

    Good to see coverage, but a few notes:

    Few points to note and correct, I'll start at the top:

    1: The vapour is not water vapour, it's VG/PG vapour.

    2: The term most often used during discussion is "harm reduction" rather than minimisation, but that's a little pedantic.

    3: eGo actually refers to the battery form factor, the thicker battery used in the article is one, but eGo-T is the name for a now obsolete kit which included an atomiser with a removable plastic capsule-like tank, usually a semi-transparent frosted tank with a moulded mouthpiece integrated into the end. I can understand this mistake because the batteries are often still branded as eGo-T, but for the sake of completeness I thought it noteworthy. The top half of the eGo-T kit in this case appears to be a Vision eGo (also known as a Stardust in the USA).

    4: The kit which looks like an immitation cigarette (#2) is neither eGo nor eGo-T, this is known as a "cigalike". The battery itself appears to be an automatic 510 battery, and the filter-coloured piece with the liquid in is called a cartomiser, a 510 cartomiser (to match the threading on the 510 battery). As this uses a cartomiser (a "cartridge with a built in atomiser", as opposed to the earlier types where the two were separate pieces), it isn't a "-T", as the -T stands for Tank. Unlike a tank, a cartomiser is filled with a wadding which absorbs the liquid to store it.

    5: Device #3 is also misnamed, depending on how you look at it. 510 is several things, it's the name for the thread type which connects an atomiser to a battery (specifically the thin type, the type which is on the end of that cigarette sized ecig's filter end), but it's also used to describe the size and shape of battery included in kit #2. However, kit #3 wouldn't really be considered a 510 kit, since it uses an eGo battery with what's called eGo threading - that is, whilst it's compatible with 510 threading atomisers, it also has an external thread which accommodates aesthetic improvements and larger atomisers, like tanks which are threaded on the widest part of the base, not the centre. Also, there is no foam in the type of "clearomiser" (clear cartomiser - usually has a transparent tank and no filler wadding) used here, just a set of silica wicks leading to the atomiser coil.

    6: #4 is in fact a Kanger (the manufacturer) ProTank, not "Kanga".

    7: A "mod" is usually the term for the battery tube, with or without electronics inside it. Pretty much anything larger or more complex than an eGo battery could be considered a mod. Without electronic is called a "mechanical mod", it relies purely on a mechanical switch to connect the battery when you want to use it, and has no regulation or safety circuitry. With electronics is an electronic mod, and it usually contains regulation circuitry, safety protection and often has functions for increasing and decreasing the amount of power delivered to the atomiser coil (which is known as Variable Voltage or Variable Wattage). Although a tank could be considered a mod, it's not a common usage of the term. Of course, the term itself refers to a time during which people would "mod" their own ecigs, by modifying existing ecigs or creating their own custom ecig power supplies out of flashlights and the like.

    8: Flavours are, as the article suggests, entirely subjective, but tobacco flavours very rarely taste anything like you expect them to taste. They generally don't taste how you remember a real cigarette to taste, so don't expect an absolute replica of the experience of smoking a cigarette. On the plus side, there are thousands of flavours, and there's bound to be something you like amongst them, pick a few and see what you like, it's a process of experimentation.

    Source: Me, I've been vaping exclusively for 3+ years and I'm involved in ecig communities.

    Having said all that, I'm very glad to see coverage of ecigs on ElReg, and I can't recommend ecigs highly enough, I have a handful of large mods (a VAMO, a Joyetech eVic and an Innokin iTaste MVP in case anyone's interested, with iClear 30s and a ProTank 2 on top, plus various other bits and bobs for emergencies) and I love vaping.

    1. Moffy

      Re: Good to see coverage, but a few notes:

      eGo-T is obsolete? Are you sure? Dying out maybe with newer models but obsolete? not quite yet! Plenty of places still do them, UK and oversea and i've had no problems with spares.

      Other than that, great write up Shinku.

      1. Shinku

        Re: Good to see coverage, but a few notes:


        Just to be clear, what I mean by eGo-T is the original kit which bears that name - a kit with an eGo style battery, an atomiser (a larger version of the 510 style, except with a spike inside instead of an exposed bridge) and a transluscent plastic hollow tank cartridge with a sealed hole in the end which you had to puncture to fill/use.

        If you still use that type of ecig then that's great, the beauty of ecigs is that everyone can build one to their own taste, and I'm not one to be telling anybody they must upgrade to Uber-Vape v5 or whatever, but I would consider them obsolete by this point, they've been outclassed and left in the dust of the eternal evolution of eciggery. All for the better, too, I owned a 510-T and I could taste nowt but plastic, very muted flavour... :P

  19. MJI Silver badge

    Never understood smoking

    Along with a lot of friends never understood why people started.

    School smokers used to get flak from the ordinary pupils, and I remember getting a prefect into trouble, she told me to do lines, I told no, she reported me, I reported her for smoking on the school bus and she got the bollocking.

    But then as soon as I was 16 I rode to school, saved an hour a day for 5p of petrol, own transport beats smelling any day of the week.

    1. dogged

      Re: Never understood smoking

      Jesus, you could have saved yourself a lot of keystrokes by just writing "I'm a smug cunt and always have been".

      1. MJI Silver badge

        Re: Never understood smoking

        And you are an ignorant twat so what!

        1. dogged

          Re: Never understood smoking

          "ignorant twat"? Ignorant of what? My eyes are open.

          At least I'm not a sneak, a grass or smug about anything.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Never understood smoking

      Very useful input MJI, many thanks.

      Any more interesting anecdotes about how you're better than us?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Never understood smoking

        Hey, smug cunt, did you ever consider that some kids were addicted by their parents?

        I started smoking myself from the age of 9, but I guess I was a smoker since I was born. Even when I got car-sick and wanted a window open because the car was also full of smoke I wouldn't be allowed because the adults would get 'cold'.


        1. MJI Silver badge

          Re: Never understood smoking


          Yes seen it happen, not good and pretty horrible.

          I remember when young smokers in confined spaces making me feel ill.

      2. MJI Silver badge

        Re: Never understood smoking

        Of course.

        Well for a start I lost THREE grandparents to cancer, two of them from smoking.

        One grandfather lost a whole lung and a lobe of the other to lung cancer.

        Sorry I cannot sit there getting insulted by addicts!

        1. Darryl

          Re: Never understood smoking

          I think the reason you're getting insulted by addicts is because of your original comment about how you never tried smoking and therefore never got addicted to it (obviously) and then some anecdotes about how you're better than the evil smokers around you.

          Personally, I've never tried heroin and therefore am not addicted to it. But I don't make a point of going into a forum where heroin addicts are discussing methods of quitting or at least cutting down on their heroin intake and smugly claiming that I'm not addicted to heroin and I don't understand people who are.

          The responses to your original comment are along the lines of "if you have nothing constructive to add, then don't add it."

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Never understood smoking

            As the AC who was addicted by their parents - I am no longer an addict.

            I smoked from age 9-29, and now aged 42.

  20. Tromos

    Use in an office would be OK with me, but I've seen their use banned in a couple of places and have to agree with the reasoning behind the ban. These places were a pub and a station platform and in both cases the reason given is that the staff are too busy to wander over and check the nature of each cloud of smoke seen from a distance to determine if it is electronic or burning weeds.

    Overall, I approve of them as a way to get the nicotine fix without the tars and crap, but I'm utterly unconvinced that they are a method to break the habit. I successfully managed to give up 20 years ago by just stopping. Wasn't easy until after a full month, but haven't looked back since. Funnily enough, to this day I still occasionally catch my hand unconsciously straying towards my pocket in quest of fags and lighter when sat in a pub with a few friends. Even if I were to find cigarettes there, I know I wouldn't light up, but it shows how powerful the habit is that it remains a reflex action after a couple of decades.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Pubs are starting to ban it. Our local doens't alow it inside. I asked why and was told it "gives the wrong impression". It's a chain pub not a private landlord.

      1. Steven Raith

        My local banned it.

        I stopped going to my local.

        Capitalism in action, kids!

        Steven R

      2. HippyFreetard

        If you hold it in for 10 seconds, there's nothing to breathe out, by the way...

        If you want to really annoy the fascists, though, hold it like a fag, wave it about publicly, occasionally tap the filter end on the bar, but don't ever take a draw. If they say "you can't use that in here" just tell them you're not. You will destroy them inside, visibly sometimes.

        Watch out for policy that says "No smoking, and that includes e-cigarettes". They don't listen when you tell them (puff) that's it's okay (puff), you don't have a lighter (puff), and the thing would probably melt plastic everywhere anyway (puff). Would probably make a person very ill, too (puff).

    2. Oh Homer
      Big Brother

      re: "staff are too busy" to be arsed checking if it's a real fag

      So what do they do in cold weather when exhaling causes clouds of vapour?

      Do they ban breathing too?

  21. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Used to smoke, mostly dope and roll ups...

    Went to some free classes, hated the taste of the tablets, got bored with the patches, just stopped and never started again. (It is called will power, seems to be out of fashion now)

    T'other half had a much harder time, went on for several weeks with various nicotine therapies, eventually we got settled down and we now rather dislike the smell of old smoke etc.

    BUT I really would like the very occasional joint. Bright spring mornings etc. I'll smoke a little joint of (modern) grass, straight, with a long roach, and very good it is too. Seriously hits me though. Last time (when the bastard Thatcher died?) I had a little celebratory smoke and totally forgot all my passwords and how to get into things, for a whole 24 hours!

    Is there any point in any of this 'vaping' stuff, can I add some dope into the mix somehow? I seem to have entirely lost my 'chillum lungs' and now cough and splutter like a newbie.


    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Used to smoke, mostly dope and roll ups...

      Alas, not at the moment, really. The things that THC dissolves in (butane and the like) aren't the solvents used in e-cigs. Oil and water, basically. You *can* add some ash oil to vaping fluid and it'll work; but it's quite wasteful and it'll fuck up your atomiser really quickly. Also, if you've lost your 'chillum lungs' you'd need to experiment with a few different fluids - mostly fluids are built to replicate the 'throat hit' and can be harsh even for a habitual heavy smoker if you choose the wrong one.

      On the plus side, the hash oil loses most of the distinctive smell in the process and you can get monstered in a public, enclosed space without anyone knowing. Until you order 3-dozen doughnuts.

    2. Flakey

      Re: Used to smoke, mostly dope and roll ups...

      Check this out as used in all the best coffee shops in Amsterdam. Theses are the real vapes

  22. Nigel 11

    Isn't Nicotine itself harmful?

    Cigarettes cause cancer and heart disease. The former can be squarely blamed on the carcinogens in the tar, but the latter? The blame was usually laid with the nicotine ... is this now believed to be incorrect? (Citations rather than opinions sought).

    If Nicotine is indeed a cardio-toxin, there is good reason for banning vaping in a public space or workspace. As for smokers turned vapers, they're reducing the harm to themselves, but by how much? Are they reducing their nicotine intake, or increasing it?

    1. Steven Raith

      Re: Isn't Nicotine itself harmful?

      You could just google it? ;-)

      I had a look into this a while ago, and the idea that nicotine is about as harmful as coffee on the human body was borne true by the more recent studies that have looked at nicotine specifically in humans, as opposed to cigarettes overall, nicotine on mice, etc. There haven't been many studies on passive vaping, which is really what you want to see. The ones that have been done have been....just awfully badly done, at least the ones that I found at the time. They've been ridiculed by the scientific community for their methodology and testing practises.

      I'll see if I can dig out the info I found, but I am at work and a bit strapped for time - if anyone else wants to Do The Research for me, feel free, as I recall it was a bit tricky to find and I don't have an hour to go trawling the web at the moment...

      Steven R

      1. Shinku

        Re: Isn't Nicotine itself harmful?

        "Comparison of the Cytotoxic Potential of Cigarette Smoke and Electronic Cigarette Vapour Extract on Cultured Myocardial Cells" - Dr Konstantinos Farsalinos + team.

        See also:

        1. Steven Raith

          Re: Isn't Nicotine itself harmful?

          Thanks Shinku, that was one of the few studies I can think of that has been done in a reasonably sane and sensible manner (as opposed to stuffing someone in a box filled with e-cig vapour and watching them cough, etc).

      2. Nigel 11

        Re: Isn't Nicotine itself harmful?

        Well, if the toxic effect on the vaper himself really is no worse than a serious expresso habit, I'm willing to accept that passive vaping is unlikely to be a serious hazard after the vapour is diluted in a large volume of air. Which just leaves the aromas.

        During the hayfever season, most strong aromas and scents can send me into a sneezing fit. Vapers, please note. (This occasionally happens on the tube in response to perfumes. Any heavy perfume-wearers reading this, please fix in your memory that I enjoy my sneezing even less than you do, and that it is YOUR FAULT -- although I'm usually too polite to point this out )

        1. Steven Raith

          Re: Isn't Nicotine itself harmful?

          On the subject of aromas, it's pretty faint. If I've been puffing away in the workshop on something fruity or sweet, someone will pop up asking who's got the Fangtastics, etc. but it dissipates pretty quickly - within seconds IME unless you've been hammering it. And it really doesn't linger.

          It's certainly nothing like as bad as the perfume a lass in here uses to hide her cigarette smoking smells after her lunch break - which makes my fecking eyes water! ;-)

          (she doesn't believe she smokes enough to justify giving up or switching to leccy tabs - and as I'm not 'that' kind of ex-smoker, I don't push it. Apart from pointing and laughing when her lighter breaks...muhahaha, etc.)

          Steven R

    2. The Stolly

      Re: Isn't Nicotine itself harmful?

    3. Scroticus Canis

      Re: Isn't Nicotine itself harmful?

      Yup, it's a neuro-toxin and a widely used insecticide due to this property, a 60mg dose is lethal to most humans. Like most neuro-toxins it affects the transmitter agent receptors between neurons, stimulating some and suppressing others; vis increased heart rate but paralyses the bronchial cilia which remove crap from the lungs.

      So while an e-fag is much less harmful than a real one due to no tar, it is not fully harm free.

      Being an old smokey myself I have tried the 10 Motives brand (any supermarket) and found it quite effective with a couple of hits dispelling the NEED. More than that actually is too much. Also none of the quality or cleaning problems related in the articles as the tip you suck on is the bit replaced when empty.

      Patches just don't work for me and the gums taste awful, like a stale ashtray smells.

      1. Shinku

        Re: Isn't Nicotine itself harmful?

        Actually the LD50 of nicotine has recently been called into question, see this article by Professor Bernd Mayer from Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Karl-Franzens University Graz, Austria:

        I'm not going to pretend I have any real insight into the toxicology of nicotine, or indeed any substance, but I'd rather we get the figures right. I'm sure that nicotine is probably toxic in a large enough quantity, but if the currently accepted figure is incorrect, I'd rather it be debunked. After all, that's what science is for, no?

  23. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Not as safe as people believe

    My workplace used to allow them onsite but outdoors in the smoking area but has now banned them from all locations.

    The reason for the ban - 1 exploded whilst being charged and has damaged the work area and nearly burnt the person that owned it.

    1. Steven Raith

      Re: Not as safe as people believe

      They'd best ban mobile phones and laptops too - they have been known to have exploding batteries too....

      1. Nigel 11

        Re: Not as safe as people believe

        To say nothing of PCs and other electronics with exploding power supplies. I once watched a switch turn itself into a small flamethrower. It's a good thing I was there to yank its power cable. Another time a PC PSU went BANG and took out the power to about forty rooms.

        And don't talk to me about water heaters.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Not as safe as people believe

        They have actually.

  24. Petertatdell

    Tolerance for all

    I am vaping for the last two years and like someone else I am also back running and also cycling.

    A few points to make in regard to others comments.

    Firstly even if someone is suffering from a placebo effect then they are still affected so I would be tolerant.

    However I object to being sent to the smoking area as I view myself now as a non-smoker and I don't want to be next to someone smoking a cigarette. So we might have to compromise somehow on that one.

    My local cinema has banned e-cigs and I can understand the logic and accept it. For instance if there is a smoker sitting next to you then you may make them feel uncomfortable because they want to smoke. Likewise we would also have the placebo effect for other non-smokers. I say placebo but it is entirely possible that people are affected so I am not having a pop at anyone.

    Similarly I have used them on aircraft but as a courtesy I would only use in the loo for similar reasons to the cinema.

    For me I found out one thing that I need. I had a unit that delivered a good hit of nicotine but failed to produce much vapour. I need the visual stimulus of a heavy vapour.

    The bottom line for me is I am not going to be dogmatic about my right to vape. I will be courteous to others and respect their views.

    But I will have a sneaky puff now and again where I shouldn't.

  25. Somerset John

    For some people these E-cigs are a literal lifesaver. My wife was averaging four hospital stays a year due to COPD, asthma and sundry lung infections, mostly due to smoking. Since starting on e-cigs back in February this year only one infection, less severe than usual, and no hospital stays.

    As an ex-smoker I don't think e-cigs are good for you, any more than any other addiction is good for you. I do think that e-cigs are much less harmful for the user and much less unpleasant for close spectators.

  26. ukgnome

    Within a week I quit tobacco altogether, within a month I was mixing my own juice, within 2 month I was modding my kit.

    After 4 month I started craving some good old THC, but didn't want to roll, and as it happens I found dry vape chambers. All in all, I vape, and this is a happy smiley thing.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Dry vape chambers? How does that work? Got a link? I must confess; THC is the main barrier to me ditching tobacco altogether. Also, how is it in practice...smell, effect and the like?

  27. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    good review - i am using an electronic cigarette and patches to try to kick the habit - I find the patches deliver the nicotine I need and the e-cig helps with the habit of smoking - the problem is, after nearly 3 months, I am still hooked to nicotine - i need to figure out a way to stop the patches, the e-ciggy is hardly ever used now. Still, not smoked a real ciggy in that time, so providing I can get over the last hurdle of stopping the patches, I hope I can actually quit nicotine for real. Will keep the e-ciggy for emergencies where I feel I must smoke something.

  28. TRT Silver badge

    Oh Christ, not another one...

    e-cigs are a time bomb.

    There are two key papers out there already. One discusses the quality of these vaporisers, namely a nichrome wire which heats up and cools down repeatedly, sloughing off nano-particles of nickel into the vapour stream which you pull deep into your lungs, and the other discusses the effect of nickel nano-particles on the brains of both mice and humans. Turns out they can start off the cascade of neuron death that becomes Alzheimer's.

    Like asbestos and thalidomide, this is another tragedy-in-waiting.

    1. Shinku

      Re: Oh Christ, not another one...

      I'm not going to claim to be an expert in such fields, but that cartomiser is either of incredibly poor quality (and yes, I agree that quality control is important in such a device), has been overheated to the point of destruction (which couldn't happen during actual use, it would begin to taste unusably foul long before that) or both. I would also question whether the numbers involved are of unacceptable levels, we inhale all sorts of horrific crap every day but the presence of a chemical isn't the important bit - the quantity is. There are traces of all sorts of nasty stuff all over the place. Consider alcohol, it's a poison, in significant quantities it can lead to death, in lesser quantities we consider it within a sensible risk envelope, enough to use it recreationally. Is ethanol dangerous? Yes. Is it dangerous in small quantities? Not really, no.

      The point I'm trying to get at here is that I want to know the actual numbers which would put a user at risk. Is a miniscule trace of nickel more damaging or more harmful in the short or long term than a cigarette? What are the chances that there are significant enough quantities to render electronic cigarettes *more* dangerous than cigarettes? If the chances are lower, as far as I'm concerned, we're on to a winner. I'm not qualified to answer these questions, but I don't believe that dismissing this technology on the strength of a single study which may or may not be consequential is a very good idea.

      Here is said study, by the way:

      1. Steven Raith

        Re: Oh Christ, not another one...

        An interesting commment from the end of that article:

        "Table 1 lists a range of alarming health effects of the detected exposures, but this seems to be just made up. E.g. 0.2 micrograms of copper inhaled from 10 puffs of e-cigarette are presented as causing 'respiratory irritation, coughing, sneezing, thoracic pain, runny nose and vineyard sprayer’s lung'. Looking this up shows that ACGIH allows that workers can be exposed chronically to an environment containing 0.4 mg/m3 of a respirable aerosol of copper without health effects. Assuming a workday inhalation of 10 m3 and correcting for a 5 day work week, the expected daily copper inhaled dose would be 2860 micrograms. I.e. inhaling over 10,000 times the amount of copper released by this e-cigarette has no ill effects. "

        And a response to it from another commenter:

        The authors should respond to this rather serious criticism, and place their findings in an appropriate risk framework. It is not adequate simply to detect substances and then argue that these substances are known to have health effects. What matters is exposure, the risks that arise from that exposure, and what level of risk should attract the concern or otherwise of users and regulators - especially in comparison to the very harmful dominant nicotine products, cigarettes, that these products aim to replace.

        Clive Bates is one of the people who are pushing for better quality research on this subject, for reference, and he made the second comment in response to the first.

        Draw your own conclusions. This is the sort of 'flaky' research I was referring to earlier in the comments section....high on data, poor on process and conclusions.

        I'll be honest - I don't want 'positive' research, I want better research.

        1. This post has been deleted by its author

          1. Shinku

            Re: Oh Christ, not another one...

            Well, quite.

            Here is another response to that study, response by Dr Michael Siegel:


            I absolutely agree though, I want *good* research, I don't want either side to be making things up, implying things which aren't true or are overblown or using numbers to prove a point, I simply want to know that what I am inhaling is considerably safer than cigarettes. At this point in time, however, I have no reason to believe that there is a significant risk based on my own judgement of the information I've read/seen/heard thus far.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Oh Christ, not another one...

      "e-cigs are a time bomb... Like asbestos and thalidomide, this is another tragedy-in-waiting."

      It is also true that harmful nanoparticles, especially combustion-derived nanoparticles, are globally ubiquitous and are produced by many of our daily activities.

      Within the scope of normal daily life, nickel nano-particles from e-cigs present a trivially minuscule risk to health in comparison to the (combustion-derived) nanoparticles that you inhale with each and every single breath you take.

      Sure, there's a risk. But please, keep it in perspective.

    3. Soap Distant

      Re: Oh Christ, not another one...

      I wasn't going to post here... I really tried hard. Reading the number of posts from sanctimonious, smug, ignorant morons here is truly stultifying. Which kicks in my urge to retaliate.

      Really - we now see a post where the nickel from nichrome wire in the vapouriser will cause a health timebomb. You may be a troll but go suck on some UK 5 pence pieces eh? You knob.

      Vaping is working for me, Amaretto flavour at 24mg - it's addictive ;) I don't do it in public or at the workplace (as they're all sanctimonious twats there) thumbs up and a pint of whatever you like to all those who've kicked the weed - I know how hard it is.


  29. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Gave up for 8 months using jacvapour ecigs with clear tanks. Beat any other technique I've tried (and that's about all of them). They don't defeat the nicotine addiction but they can defeat hot-as smoking.

  30. Tom Jasper

    For Heavens Sake, Regulate.

    Alas, this article and conversation is proposed to be outlawed.

    Please see proposed section 5 (control and restrictions of information to consumers)

    This includes

    d) any form of public or private contribution to radio programmes with the aim or direct or indirect effect of promoting electronic cigarettes is prohibited;

    Anyone feeling just a little bit sick yet?

    These proposals were recently rejected by the European Parliament , much to the commissions disappointment (but don't worry, Big Phama, they are still pursuing it.

    Rebecca Taylor (MEP) has a buzzfeed which puts things in layman's terms

    But if folks really want to discover more, please walk over to

  31. Rabbit80

    Been using e-cigs since June

    Started out with a cigalike - which was crap. Moved on to a cheap battery/clearo which got me off the fags, but was poor build quality (like in the article the threads went very quickly) then finally moved on to an eVic with a Kanger ProTank - which is awesome.

    Since then, I have not looked back - I stopped smoking without even intending to. My first experience with an e-cig was simply an experiment to see what the hype was all about.

    I love some of the many flavours that are available and find the eVic is great in that I can adjust the strength of the hit. I also love the fact I can download my "smoking" history to my computer and see when I use it the most. Battery life is awesome on this device as well easily lasting a couple of days.

    The ProTank (as featured in the article) does have its issues though. It is very prone to flooding, in which the coil / wick becomes too saturated. This results in a gurgling when you inhale and the occasional bit of unvapourised liquid getting into the mouth - thats a bit unpleasant.

    Most of my friends and family don't mind me using it in front of them - my parents (who hate smoking) even let me use it in their house. I am also one of the lucky few that can use it in the office. The only objections I have had have been when smoking some of the stronger flavours which do produce a noticeable odour.

    To date, I have converted 9 smokers to vapers. Every single one of them (and myself included) has seen health benefits from quitting the stinkies. In my case, I had a persistent wheeze and cough whilst I was smoking - that has completely disappeared. I also have more energy and my blood pressure has gone down.

    Also worth noting - my wallet is MUCH better off.. Now I have discovered mixing my own liquids and I have some favourite flavours the habit is only costing me around £5-10 / month. Compared to £7-8 / day.

    Anyone interested in trying to quit smoking should give vaping a go - get a cheap kit (they can be picked up for £10-20) and try it for a couple of weeks. After that - if your actual smoking is reduced it is worth investing in a kit that features variable volt / variable watt so you can get the most out of it.

    As for the risks - much less than staying on the cigarettes so there is nothing to lose.

    1. This post has been deleted by its author

    2. Tridac

      Re: Been using e-cigs since June

      Agreed, I bought a starter kit last December (Jac Vapor) after doing the research and haven't smoked tobacco since. I was smoking 6 or 7 a day previously, years ago, a pack a day, but it was affecting health and lung function. The thing smokers have to understand is that it's not just the drug, but other factors, such as something to do with the hands, oral stimulation and social. Anyway, haven't convinced my other half yet, but feel no temptation at all to smoke cigs, even in the same room as a smoker. Better sense of smell, taste and stamina + save a load of money are good enough reasons for me, not to mention decreased risk of serious disease.

      Tis link is the sort of site I looked at to get more info:

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Been using e-cigs since June

      I'm a big fan of Kanger's kit. They're really one of the only manufacturers bothering to build a brand based on quality. Everyone else just seems to flog rebranded chinese stuff they're buying in wholesale from (and I can't blame them - the profit margins are fantastic).

      I also had a problem with flooding in the ProTank; I was seduced by the damned capacity. I switched to the Kanger Evods a couple of weeks ago and they're the best tanks I've used as of yet. They come in some lovely spangly colours, are built very solidly, and i've had no bubbling or flooding so far. They do however seem to absolutely drink juice - I've dialled down the nicotine content a bit to compensate. I don't think you can find a better tank without customising.

  32. unwarranted triumphalism

    Aren't e-cigs the same as... ?

    They claim it to be 'clinically proven'.

    So do the Puritan Brigade find this more, or less, objectionable than the other e-cigs on the market?

    1. Shinku

      Re: Aren't e-cigs the same as...

      I've never used one of those "Inhalaters", but as I understand it those don't produce any visible product in the way that an ecig (or indeed a cigarette) does, it's also not electronic.

      But leaving aside potential lobbying from various groups, there are a few points to consider: it doesn't look like a cigarette, it looks like a medical device, it has a stigma to it, people know it's a medical device, it's a statement that you're quitting cigarettes, a statement that smoking (and nicotine, if we're to believe the anti-nicotine zealots) is bad and a public demonstration that you, for whatever reason, endorse that statement. This reinforces the message to other people who see you using it that cigarettes and nicotine are bad, a disease which requires medicine.

      Compare with e-cigs, some of which look like cigarettes (but by no means all, very far from it - however this isn't necessarily widely known to some circles). They emit something which looks, to the untrained eye, like smoke. Yet they are enjoyable, lack the downsides of smoking and are usually pleasantly flavoured. Responsible vendors make no claims that they help you quit smoking or nicotine so there's no reinforcement that nicotine is something to be eradicated. They have no association with either a) evil dirty filthy cigarettes with fatty deposits dripping off the end and horrendously blackened lungs, nor b) a clinical device which screams "I am quitting smoking, smoking is bad, you should not do it, this is my medicine to make sure that I don't do it".

      This, to many anti-tobacco, anti-smoking and anti-nicotine campaigners is a very bad thing. They do not consider that a less harmful alternative (which isn't also a medicine) is a good thing, they perceive it as perpetuating a belief that smoking or consuming nicotine is an OK thing to do and as providing a gateway for current non-smokers (including children) to find themselves addicted to nicotine and to progress onto cigarettes.

  33. Maharg

    Quitting smoking is easy

    I’ve done it hundreds of times

  34. Mike Moyle

    One OTHER point that is often conveniently forgotten ...

    I've been using these things for a couple of years now -- I'm lazy, I don't do the "roll (refill) your own" but have the fake-cigarette looking kind with the disposable/replaceable juice/atomizer unit.

    The best thing about these, for me, is that using them VERY occasionally has kept me from "falling off the wagon".

    I have been off cigarettes, at various times, for as much as 2-1/2 years and in those periods, I don't think that a day went by that I didn't want one. Eventually, I would reach that point where I was either going to give a beating upside the head to someone who apparently greatly desired one or I was going to have a cigarette (This would be AFTER I had exhausted the cathartic/distracting effects of slamming my head against a wall, etc...). And I knew that, if I bought a pack of cigarettes, I WAS going to smoke the entire pack. And probably, then, another. And another after that...

    Nowadays, I can go away, have a hit or two off of my e-cig, and get back to ignoring the people lining up begging to be punched up the conk.

    Frankly, if my experience is anything to go by then I think that the number of lives that have been saved by e-cigs is VASTLY underestimated.

    As a side note to Richard Chirgwin: I'm apparently not a user the same way that you are -- I'm more a "have a puff or two and put it away" person than a "keep it in my mouth all the time" user. That said, the way that I've found that works best with the puff-activated e-cigs is to take a couple of short "mouth-sucks" -- rather like the ones one takes when lighting a pipe -- before actually inhaling. It seems to heat the vaporizer to optimal temperature for that first inhalation. After that, assuming that you're not waiting a minute between puffs, you should be good to go.

  35. Shinku

    Most recent EU developments:

    The most recent proposals for the future of electronic cigarettes within the EU are outlined in this article, with links to the relevant documentation:

    From the article:

    "The main troubling features include:

    Allows only single-use cartridges. No refillable units or tanks will be permitted and so the most effective devices will be removed from the market.

    Allows only flavours already approved for use in NRT. Hands control to pharma companies and against the view of the Parliament that recognised the importance of flavours.

    Limits nicotine density to 20mg/ml maximum with no justification, cutting out the stronger liquids that appeal more to heavily addicted smokers and those just switching

    Limits nicotine content of any container to just 10mg/unit – this is extremely low and arbitrary (see new paper on lethal doses for nicotine) and makes no sense

    Allows only devices that “deliver nicotine doses consistently and uniformly” – a completely unnecessary, severe and limiting technical challenge derived from medicines regulation – unlike with medicines, e-cigarette users control the dose.

    Bans advertising in press or printed publications (except trade), on radio, TV and other audiovisual services and the internet (through “information society services“) – this just protects incumbents (tobacco industry) and those who can rely on established distribution channels (tobacco industry)

    Bans e-cigarette sponsorships that have cross border impact (e.g. anything that might be shown on TV) – reduces competitiveness of disruptive technology

    Applies onerous and unnecessary warning, labelling and leaflet requirements that may be impractical and are disproportionate to risk deterring smokers who may wish to switch

    Bans cross border distance sales (internet etc) in clear contravention of the aims of the internal market

    Requires manufacturers to track so-called ‘adverse effects’ even though nicotine is widely used and understood

    Requires the submission of large quantities of seemingly irrelevant technical and commercial data despite recent high level commitments to reduce red tape

    Asserts (against the evidence) that e-cigarettes “simulate smoking behaviour and are increasingly used and marketed to young people and non-smokers” continuing the European tradition of smearing valuable harm-reduction option, notably snus, to the detriment of health in Europe."

    1. Steven Raith

      Re: Most recent EU developments:

      Hopefully the above tat will (to quote futurama) get slapped down like the last ones.

      I'm struggling to understand why certain parts of the EC seem to fail to see the bigger picture here - which is that with sensibly controlled e-liquids (flavours shouldn't be relevant unless it affects the vapour/effect on the lungs) and good quality, sensibly regulated atomisers, there is an extremely high chance that deaths due to tar, benzine, and the other hundreds of known toxic chemicals in cigarettes aught to drop like a stone. Because e-cigs don't have 'em.

      Simple fact is, addictiveness aside low doses of nicotine don't pose a significant health threat. No reputable research says otherwise.

      If the EC can bring up some reputable research that does say otherwise, they can propose regulation. But just trying to severely restrict an emerging market because THINK OF THE CHILDREN just strikes me as rampant, DailyMail level fuckwittery.

      Steven R

  36. HippyFreetard

    I like nicotine.

    I use nicotine, and I enjoy it. I just don't want it to kill me. That should be reserved for something cool like a rocket-powered skateboard or something. When I'm 80.

    I was a chain-smoker, and now I'm a chain-vaper. Not much has changed, but I'm fitter and healthier for it. They're also satisfyingly cyberpunk.

  37. Potemkine Silver badge

    Non Cancerous?

    "research over the last decade has identified nicotine's carcinogenic potential in animal models and cell culture. Nicotine has been noted to directly cause cancer through a number of different mechanisms such as the activation of MAP Kinases. Indirectly, nicotine increases cholinergic signalling (and adrenergic signalling in the case of colon cancer), thereby impeding apoptosis (programmed cell death), promoting tumor growth, and activating growth factors and cellular mitogenic factors such as 5-LOX, and EGF. Nicotine also promotes cancer growth by stimulating angiogenesis and neovascularization.In one study, nicotine administered to mice with tumors caused increases in tumor size (twofold increase), metastasis (nine-fold increase), and tumor recurrence (threefold increase).N-Nitrosonornicotine (NNN), classified by the IARC as a Group 1 carcinogen, is produced endogenously from nitrite in saliva and nicotine."


    1. Steven Raith

      Re: Non Cancerous?

      If you're going to selectively quote to support your own agenda, it's a good idea not to include the source.

      "Historically, nicotine has not been regarded as a carcinogen and the IARC has not evaluated nicotine in its standalone form or assigned it to an official carcinogen group. While no epidemiological evidence supports that nicotine alone acts as a carcinogen in the formation of human cancer, research over the last decade has identified nicotine's carcinogenic potential in animal models and cell culture."

      There are no reputable human studies that show nicotine causes cancer in humans, period.

      I roll my eyes at thee.

      Steven R

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Non Cancerous?

        you can stop trolling now Steven and go grab a vape.

        1. Steven Raith

          Re: Non Cancerous?

          Yes boss :-(

  38. Maharg

    physiological aspect

    I agree a lot has to do with the physiological aspect of the feeling of having the ‘cig’ between your fingers, the action of breathing it in and out etc, in the same way you see people who are driving or have quit drinking sitting in pubs with pints of OJ and Lemonade, because its still a ‘pint’

  39. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    It's Kanger not Kanga

    Just saying because if you search for Kanga you're likely going to end up with a cheap Chinese knock off. In my opinion there are 4 good manufacturers of ecigs out there that I would trust to make reliable quality products that should last many months and not a few weeks, they are Joytech, Kanger, Innokin and Vision, many decent companies resell their products. The thing with the ecig market is that you either get good quality or complete rubbish. As for the liquid PLEASE make sure that you buy from a reputable vendor who should publish a safety data sheet listing all ingredients used and will ALWAYS be happy to answer questions relating to their products, personally I wouldn't touch anything with a purity of less than 99.6%. I have been using these things for years, I am a nerd when it comes to ecigs and I do know what I am talkng about. Ecigs aren't healthy but they are in the order of 99% less harmful that tobacco cigarettes. If you are unsure and want clear unbiased scientific opinion please google information from Professor Michael Siegel - Boston Univerity, Dr Konstantinos Farsalinos - research fellow at Onassis Cardiac centre, Dr Jacques Le Houezec - consultant in public health specialising in tobacco dependence also Clive Bates, Gerry Stimson and Dave Dorn to name but a few.

This topic is closed for new posts.