Battery-powered Cigarettes? 608
Roland Piquepaille writes "According to Ananova, a Swiss company has developed a totally new type of smoke-free cigarette. You will be able to use it in non-smoking restaurants, and even in airplanes -- if you care for nicotine. But the PRAVDA, from Russia, adds that the product is far from perfect. It looks like a cigarette, it's used as a cigarette, but it's not a cigarette at all. Each pseudo-cigarette consists of a replaceable 'filter' containing the nicotine, and a heating element working on a battery, recharged by the 'pack' of cigarettes. The company, NicStic, says its product is good for smokers because it doesn't contain any tar, and for non-smokers, because there is obviously not passive smoking effect. It plans to introduce the product in Germany in about a year for a price similar as normal cigarettes. This overview contains more details about this pseudo-cigarette which might be sold in the U.S. in the near future."
no for typical smokers (Score:2, Interesting)
Michael Shilling for RR (Score:5, Interesting)
Roland is just using slashdot to direct traffic to his shitty weblog, and now he even has his own domain!
How much is michael getting on the side to plug this guy?
May not work (Score:3, Interesting)
This cannot provide that - maybe people will use this when they fly or in places where they cannot use normal cigarettes, but is definitely not going to be a popular substitue for cigarettes.
Besides, cigarettes have an illusion of being "cheap" and easily available. Not to mention the perceived (albeit ill-placed) "coolness factor".
Cheap as a normal cigarette? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:no for typical smokers (Score:3, Interesting)
Its been tried? (Score:2, Interesting)
This is a bomb. People smoke because its a habitual ticking nerosis.. They like the way smoke feels entering and leaving them, ritual. Not necessarily the direct effect.
Course its all open for debate.
Not new? (Score:3, Interesting)
A cigarette with no tobacco, and with this red glowing thing at the end. Looked like a real cigarette too.
They had high hopes for it, but guess what happened? They weren't allowed to sell it, on the grounds that it was essentially a device to administer dosages of a strong drug.
I don't remember the details, but i'm sure someone could google around and find some.
Still not a safe cigarette (Score:3, Interesting)
Tobacco's toxic properties have been well known. How does Marijuana compare?
Yeah you are missing the taxes (Score:5, Interesting)
Smoking is actually nice... (Score:4, Interesting)
Seriously. It was nice and relaxing. The only reason I stopped was because, obviously, it's not that great for you.
But at least something like this makes it so that if you want the effect of nicotine, you don't have to shell out $40 for a pack of nicotine gum.
Yeah, nicotine isn't GOOD for you, but neither is alcohol and people still do that. At least this isn't nearly as bad as inhaling all that tar and smoke!
There will always be a passive effect... you exhale the nicotine, surely someone near you would inhale a part of it, but still, better than cigarettes themselves.
Good improvement!
Re:Bad idea (Score:5, Interesting)
That's a terrible position to take, unless you think that smokers somehow morally "deserve" the health problems they end up with. Obviously, if we could reduce the health effects of nicotine addiction to insignficant levels, then smoking wouldn't have to be a big deal. Even reducing them slightly might mean that those who are addicted have a better chance of living longer and more happy lives.
How on earth could that be a bad thing?
Re:uhh... (Score:5, Interesting)
Eclipse (Score:4, Interesting)
Generally speaking, innovations made in producing a 'healthy cigarette' usually involve a lot of cost, but these cigarettes are usually sold at the same price as Marborlo Lights. They also come in menthol.
With 80% less additives, I think I'll stick to these unless the new battery-powered cigarettes actually end up cheaper.
These already exist (Score:2, Interesting)
There is no reason why nicotine stuff like this could not be extremely cheap. They even sell nicotine as bug killer. Pure nicotine without the tar and other cancer causing crap in ciggarette smoke would probably be much less damaging to one's health.
The problem is that nicotine addicts are like lab rats that hit a bar for more even if it is killing them. If they are given a cheap painless way to take nicotine, they'll take even more of it.
Think back to the first ciggarette that you ever tried to puff. For me it was in fifth grade. I was given a lit ciggarette by some older kids and dared to puff it. I inhaled deeply 'like a man' and exhaled out my nose as quickly as I could and still 'look cool'. My eyes were watering, and at the end, I couldn't help but cough my guts out, almost puking. The experience was so awful that I didn't touch tobacco again till I was 23.
You need to overcome substantial natural aversion to inhaling smoke in order to get a nicotine fix from smoking. Myself, I learned to smoke by absorbing nicotine from uninhaled cigar smoke held in my mouth. Even that tasted foul at first, until I learned to appreciate it.
And chewing tobacco tastes extremely awful as well. Tobacco is a plant who's flavor says: Don't eat me! If I taste this bad, I MUST be poisonous - and I am!
Of course cigarrettes are the free-base crack form of nicotine. They are all ( maybe not American Spirit, or other 'Eco-health-food' brands of cigarrettes but certainly ordinary brands like Marlboro and Camel ) laced with Urea or Ammonia. The basic additives help the nicotine to affect your brain much more quickly increasing your association of the nicotine pleasure with the ciggarette you are smoking, and hence strengthening your addiction. The difference between ciggarettes and other forms of nicotine is the difference between cocaine and crack.
With the ability to stay perpetually high on nicotine everywhere, the other effects of nicotine - like cardiovascular disease will become more prominant.
I quit smoking about a year ago cold turkey from 3 packs a day and 2 years as an addict. My Mom still smokes, and probably will until it kills her.
Re:no for typical smokers (Score:4, Interesting)
For a while, the cigarette companies experiemnted trying to make a "safer" cigarette. I saw a special on TV about it, and the one I remember involved painting pretty much pure nicotine on the inside of a glass tube along with glycerine or something else that produced harmless smoke when burned. The smoker then would play a lighter underneath the glass tube while inhaling, giving him harmless, high dosages of nicotine. The only real problem with this was you looked like a crackhead.
They make a sort of cig like this in the US (Score:3, Interesting)
They aren't smokeless, but definatly noteworthy. They look like a normal cig, but have a heating element that you initially light with a lighter. I think its a carbon filament, so it burns quite hot for about 4 minutes, and while its hot, you can "smoke" the tobacco in the tube. Note that there are no ashes becuase nothing besides tobacco is burned, and the "cig" never shrinks down like a normal one. Also, when you exhale, it is quite wierd... its like you are exhaling water. The cig pack says its mostly a glycerol mix instead of the normal tar laden smoke.
Re:but (Score:3, Interesting)
Did you notice that the world smells like crap too? It's all a matter of scale & personal preference.
> You want to work on your personal cancer project, fine.
Thanks for your permission, but I suggest you drop the whole "holier-than-thou" attitude if you ever expect to get anywhere in life. Once you are rich, however, you can afford to regain that trait.
> I don't want to be a volunteer in it and you don't have a right to force it on me.
Absolutely. You can choose to go to nonsmoking establishments. However you don't have the right to force smokers to do anything either, unless they are breaking laws/posted rules.
> One of the great pleasures of being a non-smoker
One of the greatest pleasures of being a smoker is blowing it into the face of smokers. Freedoms go both ways. I don't blow smoke into peoples' faces, as long as they don't claim I'm killing them, and they don't try to make what I CHOOSE to do illegal. California banning smoking in all public places is an attack on personal freedoms.
The ultimate test of freedom is standing up for it in the face of that which you don't like.
Re:Bad idea (Score:3, Interesting)
What about....? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:why do we have the right (Score:1, Interesting)
A smoker definitely would fail a smog test just as a car with a bad ring job would. As a society, we tell ourselves to clean it up or shut it down. One smoker in a restaurant is like one oil-burner at a stoplight.
I am rather disappointed they made the faux ciggies look like real ones. Its like making faux guns that look like real ones. You don't wanna be seen in places where the genuine item is verboten with a fake one that looks real.
Personally, I would prefer the fake ciggie look like a baby's pacifier... cause that's what it is.
I know, I spoke my mind here, and I will post AC because I know there are a helluva lot of people I offended by just being honest.
You worried about your job... (Score:3, Interesting)
There is a reason why tobacco is "politically acceptable substance to hate". There still may be some debate as to what second hand smoke does to people, but there is ABSOLUTELY NO DOUBT that the smokers themselves are at increased risk of enphesyma and cancer and that by smoking you shorten your life considerably. As such, more people are quitting smoking and fewer start at all.
Regardless of what science says about health dangers of second hand smoke, you CANNOT DISPUTE that just like most other kinds of smoke, it is an irritant--particularly to non-smokers. Since the majority of the population in North America are now non-smokers, the majority find smoking distasteful. As it is a democratic society, majority rules on most matters. This is leading towards the eventual extinction of smoking in public.
I'm not sure some smokers realise this, but smoking is considered a dirty habit now. Never mind whether second-hand smoke is a health hazard. The smoke smells awful. The smoke makes people's eyes sting. It makes my eczema flare up when I'm in a smokey room. The butts are disguisting to look at. I've also noticed a slowly growing trend in the opinion that smoking is a habit of the low-class. It is about as appealing and sophisticated to many as spitting chewing tobacco. Unapologetic smokers are thought to be more likely low-income, uneducated individuals.
Not only that, smokers present a safety hazard. Insurance companies charge higher premiums to homeowners to permit smoking in their homes because of studies demonstrating an increased fire risk. The grasslands in an urban park within my city catch fire during dry weather, and the last few have ALL been attributed to careless disposal of lit cigarettes. One of the fires out an adjoining neighbourhood in danger as well.
Even as a non-smoker however, I do not agree with excessive government intrusion into private habits. I support the idea of a total ban on smoking in government buildings, schools, hospitals and establishments that permit children. I also support tax incentives for smoke-free businesses (promoting healthy lifestyles reduces the load on government funded medicare). I do NOT think business owners should be FORCED to ban smoking in situations outside the above (age 18+ only, private buildings). Given the state of society today, I think that is a reasonable compromise.
If smokers do not see that as a reasonable compromise, I might suggest to them to make an effort to quit smoking--the increased quality of life is amazing. If you do not believe even now that you have no good reason to quit, use your manners and keep your habit to yourself--smoke in your own home/yard only, or in a space designated as a smoking area. If you light up in public, chances are that the majority of people around you are non-smokers and are bothered by your smoke.
Re:Quit smoking! It stinks! (Score:2, Interesting)
As far as death penalty for selling tobacco... you're just a sad sad person.
Re:It depends (Score:3, Interesting)
It is also possible that the reason poisonous items are mostly harmful to the inhaler is that they are more water soluable and dissolve in the lungs easier. As such, the smoke they exhale would be "purified". The not-as-easy to dissolve items would stand just as small a chance to be dissolved in anyone else's lungs as well (more if they weren't dissolved because of saturation, less because of reduced gas temperature)
Just my $0.02. Sorry for playing devil's advocate...
Re:Not really (Score:3, Interesting)
Nicotine is a peculiar drug/poison. It's toxicity is extremely high. A single drop of pure nicotine place in the palm of an average adult will cause convulsions and death in minutes (the amount absorbed through the skin is more than sufficient to kill.)
Nicotine acts as others have said, in some ways like a stimulant and in other ways like a depressant. It has been noted by neurochemists and brain physiologist to "Tune" certain brain functions and increase mental productivity (improving mood and mental agility.) These are among the more subtle, long lasting. and addictive effects that are strongly compelling even after the direct chemical effects wear off.
The reason one becomes calm after taking any substance one is addicted to (including stimulants) is that the hunger for the substance is being fed. This has nothing to do with the physiological nature of the substance itself.
A recent study suggests the combination of coffee and cigarettes is particularly bad, because they both cause increases in blood pressure and ultimatly damage the small blood vessels that feed the heart. People who consume both, significantly increase their probablity of having heart desease.
The physical habit is also a major problem in quitting. People associate behavior and lifestyle with their smoking and as these behaviors become ritualized, removing the smoking has the effect of destabalizing the normality of their routines and habits. This is as hard a habituation to break as the smoking itself.
A truly sucessful nicotine delivery would have as close to zero impact on the smoker as possible. It would allow them to consume a heated, smoke flavored, fog containing nicotine but no tar. It would look and feel like a cigarette. It could also contain other drugs to improve health and vitality. Making it a positive behavior as opposed to a negative one.
It seems to me that a cigarette company that noticed the HUGE potential for a health giving product, that allowed smokers to migrate to a new habit that replaced the old, while extending and improving the quality of their lives, could effectively CLEAN UP. There would have to be billions of dollars in such a product. Anybody want to go in for a new startup with a virtually guaranteed customer base???
Genda