The difference between caffeine and the chems in e-cigs is that caffeine consumption typically only involves the user. Where-as e-cig consumption too often involves the user, plus all those stuck in the same room/elevator.
If this were a nicotine patch, it wouldn't be such an issue.
The thread is right there for everyone to see. Someone said nicotine has CVD impact. I said, so does caffeine. You responded that e-cigs impact bystanders. Well, they don't impact bystanders with CVD impact from nicotine, which is what the thread's about.
You then say, "they do", and provide 3 links, none of which support that argument with evidence. I point that out. You then flee to the abstraction of whether e-cigs are "safe".
You are selectively using parts of the thread to your advantage, and skipping over the rest.
The thread began with someone making a claim that nicotine usage is linked to CVD. You brought up that so is caffeine (which is a distraction from the core argument). To which I countered with the glaring difference between nicotine and caffeine consumption. You then attempted to make an argument that e-cigs somehow don't effect bystanders (nicotine et al), which is absurd as shown in the links provided.
> Please don't call me names.
I admit, that was a little too far. I meant to say your single sentence arguments are deliberately obtuse and misleading.
