FTJoe

If you do some searches you'll find a bunch of discussion on nicotine addiction (speakeasy was the biggest contributor). Bottom line is we "believe" the most harmful effects of smoking is the act of burning the tobacco and inhaling the smoke along with the rest of the chemicals and carcinogens the companies put in there. Nicotine is addictive, but so is caffeine. So they hook you with the nicotine, and as we know, there is no provision for reducing the nicotine in a cigarette which means your stuck unless you have an alternative. Okay - preaching to the choir, I know but many here believe as long as they're not smoking, and can get their nicotine "safely", that's all they need and I believe that's true. So having said that, I did want to quit the nicotine as it is a monkey on my back. I started with a strength of 24mg, kept to my routine as if I was smoking and after a few weeks of getting used to vaping I started cutting down. Probably an average of 2mg-4mg a week or so. I went to zero, vaping like a fiend. Then all of a sudden, the mental queue disappeared. No more morning vape, after eating, pretty much only when I drank and even that's gone now. I went outside once with a smoker on Sunday at a superbowl party. I did make the mistake in the beginning of going 0 nic real quick. I believe for me much of the smoking desire is the mental association. My brain knows in the past if I smoked, I would get nicotine and it would feel good. When I dropped to 0 nic, it was fine for me as my brain still associated the act of vaping with the gratification of getting nicotine. I wasn't getting it, but the addictive part of my brain that made that association was fooled. Unfortunately the part of my brain that was going through nicotine withdrawal was not fooled and I became quite foul tempered. Back I went and reduced it slowly. Why my mental association has dropped off I don't know. I do know I am struggling with weight (a little) so forcing myself to vape here and there to see if that is still necessary to satisfy some hand to mouth urge. I've seen others here vary their nic during the day, big does in the morning and/or at night, then bring it down when they really just don't need it. But again, if you look up the nicotine discussion, you'll see there's a great argument for it not being a big deal.

I found them in the local A&P...I got a box there then stupidly ordered these from Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Lipton-Pyramid-Tuscan-Lemon-20-Count/dp/B000V9LQG2/ref=sr_1_16?ie=UTF8&s=grocery&qid=1265727116&sr=1-16 Stupid because it's a 120 bags in total...

Excellent, not the end of the world using an analogue as a backup, the fact you do not want to go back means your head is in a good place. Which means cigarettes are the alternative (and a poor ne) to your primary method of inhalation, vaping.

You should probably post another question on the juice but I think you got a good answer (I'm not a dripper). I'm posting to say congrats, weird isn't it not having a cig? I tried everything over thirty plus years of smoking this was easy. Be prepared for some of the symptoms of vaping/not smoking, cough, sore throat, other things. Some get them some don't, it's all good though. Again, congrats.

Cool - so my question, and I'm really not trying to be a -!@#$, is how do you know that's exactly what is was written for? I see lots of different opinions on the matter. My opinion is based on the fact they did not separate the phrase, a well regulated militia from the phrase a right to bear arms. They are contained in the same sentence. I would have thought if they were saying every grab a gun, they would have made that a separate sentence. I believe instead they are pointing out each state can have a militia to defend that state and yes, possibly against the federal government. But I'll be the first to admit I don't know... Personally I find it kind of a scary thought that people think they are given the right to bear arms so they have the ability to rise up against the government. Agreed - the direction right now is aimless at best, and sinister at worst.

Hey cool - thanx for the reference..browsing for a copy now.

Tough to do from zero...but I think I really need to vape more even at zero nic. My brain says I don't need to but my weight says I better do something, wonder if it makes me feel crabby as well, or maybe the weight gain is doing it, or maybe I'm just naturally getting a start on the grumpy old man bit...

Too true - it is the wild west out there still...

That is funny by the way, I just REALLY did not like the power behind the throne, he creeped me out. Just in case you couldn't tell from my rant. ;-) And yes - still a bucket of sunshine Dave. I really am crabby lately...

I just noticed I left off the winky face. My lack of an eclectic appreciation for music is the actual joke, sorry.

uh oh - sorry Dave, I have to disagree. I don't think there should be any reason an intellectual discussion about the intentions of the founding fathers needs to get out of hand. I understand many people feel strongly about it, but regardless of how much they want to believe in their interpretation of, my point is, it is just an interpretation. The reality is its intentions have been argued for a very long time and will be into the future. Based on all the versions I see in the wiki before being ratified, they were doing some serious arguing as well back then. I can also see the possibility that they were stating the belief that everyone does have a right to carry firearms, hunt food, protect themselves, keep the slaves in line, etc. as there was an embargo of firearms before the revolution. People not loyal to Britain (patriots) were stockpiling weapons so the Brits placed an embargo on the. So I could see the possibility the authors were saying we'll let you keep arms in case we stink at governing as badly as the Brits did.

You are absolutely correct, rights can not be given, they are simply being recognized and therefore protected. But people still argue that whether the right being detailed here is the right for every single person to have a gun for whatever reason, or what I believe, is the right for the "state" to have militia, something that was obviously denied them under British rule. The text reads: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Obviously the first part is recognizing an army, the second part some people believe recognizes the right for all to have carry firearms. My take is since they kept those two statements together with a comma, I don't believe the founding fathers meant these two items to be separate. On the other side of the argument, if you look at the wiki, you'll see there was very early on in English history a requirement for citizens to bear arms by the king because there was no army or police force. Anyway, I'm not rallying against someone legally having a gun, I will probably get one soon myself. I just don't happen to believe it was detailed as a right by the authors. JMHO

Blues, R&B, those are my roots. I go back to muddy waters, howlin wolf (and I'm not actually that old), sam and dave, john lee hooker, ray charles. Favorite band is Pink Floyd, then The Who, the Stones, the Beatles.

Sorry - F heavy metal, classic all the way...

And this is what I love about the second amendment argument. There are so many opinions. And the problem is neither I nor you know what the founding fathers meant for sure. My point was, modern day historians believe that a militia was not every farmer. Check out the history in the wiki of what the final wording eventually was and the process it went through, they were struggling with these very concepts. Here are the most interesting (IMO) areas: 6 Scholarly commentary 6.1 Early commentary 6.2 Later commentary 6.3 Meaning of "to keep and bear arms" 6.4 Meaning of "well regulated militia" Regardless, it reads: A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. IMO - on what planet does "well regulated" not mean an army and not a couple of farmers running around with his turkey gun? Was every able bodied adult expected to join the militia, yes, were they a defacto member of it, no.

That and order the deaths of many americans in the search of WMDs in Iraq, yeah right. Sorry, the guy was a douc- and was only successful because GWB is a moron. JMHO!!!

I love it - unplugged most of the time, but when it's the weekend, and we're seriously vaping, I jam the two regular and two mega batts in, juice up and me and the missus go out!!!!

Yeah - who would have thought inhaling smoke, burning vegetation and chemicals, would be bad for you. Go figure!! ;-)

Please - I do it all the time!!!! I think that's why Dave has such nice things to say about me, kind of like patting me on the head!!! ;-)

yeah but how many people do the cruddy route then give up thinking it's all like that? Glad you didn't give up.

Thanx much. Looks pretty good actually...and then it's similar to what they would get if they pick up on vaping. Might have to try one out to see. I will probably end up still filling carts for different flavors/strengths and little test bottles, that's where all my time goes. Write ups, explanations, etc. I figure each person could fool around with it, see if they can do it then order one and whatever juice they like. Then I can redo some carts, refill some bottles and move on. Well three weeks later and I finally heard something. Is it me, or should a habitual smoker be able to play around with this and get back to me within a day or so? I had someone else tell me after three weeks they hadn't tried it yet and needed another refresher course. They wanted to get in the right frame of mind!! Sorry, still frustrated, getting some Orange Stoli on the way home, will be much nicer later...

I hear you but this way I can flip it at them, mention it's the worst solution but see if they think it would help, then we'll hook you up with a sample kit. Which then will go unused, etc. I don't know, see above post, I'm getting frustrated.

Problem is they aren't that slick on the net nor patient in regards to playing with something like a 510. In truth, I've lost interest in helping as they said they were interested, I'm putting my time into it, the least they can do is give it a try or tell me it's no good, at least respond to my emails. Also, I'm really doing it for someone else who asked me to see what I could do for this particular person. Whatever, I'm learning to keep my mouth shut when people seem interested, as it seems to be a common theme, they really have to want to stop, not just be "interested".

I was going to hijack another thread but figured I do that enough so was wondering about disposable e-cigs. http://www.shop.wordupecig.com/Disposable-electronic-cigarette-Disposable-electronic-cigarette.htm I see the above ones but I saw mention of $10 510s? My issue is I'm struggling with people who want to try e-cigs. I set up a package, 10 or so carts, flavors, strengths, extra bottles usually 3 batts, 2 attys all just to see if they might like it before they invest and let them figure out what juice they like. I've now run across the third person who is not getting back to me, finally tells me after I got someone else involved the nic was too high (harsh) and they like Dulcis. So I'm kind of getting frustrated, I have a saying "no good deed goes unpunished". So I got them some 10mg Dulcis and leaving it up to the other person to keep on them. So my point is, disposable sounds good. I've invested way more in juices for these idiots that I'll never use (they have nic) than a couple of disposables would have been. And yes they are my friends so I can call them idiots. I think one of the issues is the cheaper method of a 510 over the pre-packaged is it takes a little more effort than just lighting an analogue. Any pointers to decent disposables or advice (constructive please) is appreciated.

Gotcha - agreed. My belief is apathy, then anarchy. Things are going to start getting real ugly over the next few years.