Probably shouldn’t inhale vaporised flourides.
Fluorine is really really bad for your lungs.
Well, never mind then.
If it’s not oxygen it shouldn’t go in the lungs. Full stop.
The 78% nitrogen hanging out in the atmosphere begs to differ
You can also breathe in smoke, that doesn’t mean that you should. Can and should are the keywords here.
So you’re saying that I shouldn’t breathe in nitrogen? There’s a thing called “oxygen toxicity” which can be caused by breathing pure oxygen and so actually breathing things other than oxygen is vital to our health.
Ok.
My two concerns are that, you wouldn’t hold the vapor in your mouth long enough for it to actually be helpful, and with some people vaping occasionally, and others doing it constantly, it would be difficult to keep the fluoride levels high enough for casual users to get a benefit, but low enough that all-day every-day folks don’t OD.
Or you know, make vapes illegal
Your comment reminds me of a dog that barks every time someone walks past the house.
Why make them illegal? I used a vape to limit my nicotine intake and weaned myself off of smoking (and vaping) completely. It still sucked for the first 6 months and the occasional random craving that comes from being a smoker for over a decade, but at least I fought each part of the smoking addictions separately which made it bearable.
For clarity, I got 0% nicotine vape juice for a month or so before I quit puffing completely so let the withdrawal from the substance run its course, and then had to deal with the psychological side of things. Which was VERY annoying. Everytime I’d do anything where I’d normally smoke triggered a craving.
What we REALLY need to do is limit the concentration of nicotine in vape juices to no higher than that found in a “standard” cigarette. Part of the problem right now is that you can easily buy vape juice with waaaay more nicotine per puff than any tobacco product so it’s much easier to get addicted.
Vaping was integral to me quitting smoking. Vaping isn’t the problem, advertising and accessibility of nicotine to youths is the real issue.
Both of those apply to tap water too but municipal governments still spend millions every year buying industrial byproducts for “public health”
name one person who died of fluorine poisoning from drinking too much tap water.
I can tell you of one adult guy who went to Germany with no cavities, lived there for two years, and came back with several cavities. Not, like, a couple cavities, but several. Germany doesn’t flouridate their tap water.
That guy was me, and now whenever I hear fucknuts complaining about flouride in tap water in the US, I stick 'em in the mental “dumb-asses not worth listening to” bin.
I don’t think the claim is that it’s deadly; I believe the concern it’s that there’s little to no proven benefits when used topically and at least a few proven detriments when ingested. I haven’t done much reading on the subject, so I’m not sure.
Regardless of the veracity of the aforementioned claims, I believe it’s immoral for a government to add unnecessary chemicals to public water supply.
I think anything with nicotine in it is bad for you
Nitpick, but it doesn’t always have nicotine. Not to say it isn’t harmful.
Well its not good for you so I can’t say I’d recommend.
What concerns me is any positive publicity on sm***** or va******. We don’t need more people hopeless addicted.
Smoking or vaping*
It’s the Internet, it’s ok to use the whole word.
I don’t as it promotes those products
No it doesn’t. It’s an act that literally every person on this platform has heard of. Saying smoking, drinking, drugs, etc, does not promote the action or product. What trying to censor it does is make what you’re saying, confusing. Your message has a lack of information and seriousness, so the effects of what you’re trying to express are going to be lost on a lot of readers.
I get what you’re saying and empathize with your beliefs, but if you’re dealing with adults, you need to use the language to adequately articulate your point. While I may agree with your sentiment, the censor immediately puts your comment at a disadvantage and, at least personally, I write off the subject of it almost immediately.
Just don’t go out and say, “go smoke and drink” when discussing those topics, and I think that’s good enough to qualify as not promoting those things. Just my two cents. Not trying to be a dick if it comes off that way, just trying to give some outside perspective.
Don’t smoke and drink, it’s bad.
Pointing out that something exists doesn’t mean condoning its usage.
Interesting. Do aerosolized fluoridates adhere to teeth?
No.
