purplebox vapours sells vaping products and e-liquids that are for adults only. You must be 18+ to enter our site. Please confirm you are over 18 by clicking 'Enter' below. If you are under 18 years of age please click 'exit' below.or Exit
Nicotine – exposing the myth
Nicotine is intrinsically associated with cigarette smoking. – and confusion reigns supreme.
Whilst nicotine is a highly addictive substance it has been proven that when inhaled in moderate quantities it has no adverse effects on the body – resulting in similar neurological and physiological effects as its nearest neighbour – caffeine.
In fact, flippant though it may sound, had the two industries evolved differently we may well have been smoking caffeine and enjoying a morning Nicotine Americano.
However, with the advent of vaping the nicotine debate seems to have intensified more so than when nicotine patches and nicotine gum were released on to the market. Why? Well, part of the answer is financial - the pharmaceutical sector pays enormous amounts of licensing money to have these products approved and endorsed by health bodies.
Secondly, because vaping devices are hand held, inhaled and produce a vapour, essentially mimicking the act of smoking, they have been tarnished with the ‘tobacco’ brush and the public conscious is reluctant to see them differently than smoking.
Education from Cancer Research UK
With this in mind Cancer Research UK is now initiating a campaign to separate nicotine from smoking and to debunk the myths surrounding nicotine and endorse vaping and e-cigarettes as a much healthier and successful alternative to smoking.
Their stance will hopefully resonate with the various health bodies and law making authorities that are looking to, in many ways, stifle the growing vaping market and allow the exorbitantly rich tobacco industry to dominate the market.
Linda Bauld, Chair, Behavioural Research, Cancer Research UK and Dep. Director UK Centre for Tobacco & Alcohol Policy, in her recent interview with Regulator Watch presents an intelligent and balanced view of vaping and their objectives for the educational strategy.
We can’t live in a ‘nanny’ state
Smoking is one of the most preventable causes of death in society. You would think that anybody in a position to encourage an alternative to smoking would endorse a proven healthier alternative. However, whilst opponents to vaping state that it is too similar to smoking, its advocates understand that it offers psychological benefits not satisfied by other nicotine replacement therapies.
We all need a bit of a lift
Human nature craves stimulus – from the effects on our bodies of a coffee or nicotine hit to the calculated risk of a bungee jump or driving at full speed on a racetrack. The exhilaration and adrenalin rush we feel from taking, what we perceive, as a premeditated risk enhances our pleasure in experiencing life.
Life is full of risk. We all take many risks every single day. Whilst authoritative bodies advise us on risk and its consequences – risks cannot be banned per se. We would not be able to drive cars, ride motorbikes, cross roads, fly in planes, drink alcohol or eat sugar if we were to live in a society that banned risk.
It is our self-preservation instinct that ensures we, in most cases, moderate the level of risk we take – e.g. putting on a seat belt, not drinking too much or exercising to counteract our sugar intake.
For many, nicotine is a simple pleasure and if people can get this pleasure relatively toxin free by vaping then a system of regulation should endorse those looking to educate on the switch to vaping from smoking.
For those who don’t understand the nicotine attraction but may enjoy their expressos, cakes or bungee jumps do not be too quick to judge or the government may just ban your morning cappuccino.
(Any opinions expressed are those of purplebox vapours)
Our video looks at how scientific research has debunked some of the most common misconceptions about e-cigarettes to give you a clearer picture of the difference between vaping and smoking.
Oxford Academic - a renowned scholastic journal will no longer allow authors to call vaping devices tobacco products. In an editorial entitled “Are e-cigarettes tobacco products?”, editor-in-chief Marcus Munafò explains that the journal will only use the term “tobacco products” to describe items that contain actual leaf tobacco.