reece said:
Do you really think calling someone a hypocrite is productive?
Hmm........I don't recall calling anyone a hypocrite, although my analogies may have implied that.
I just feel that dietitians should eat well, that personal trainers should be in good shape, that doctors should not smoke, and that people who make things actually use the products that they make.
If a dietitian does not eat well, I believe that it's safe to assume that they don't believe in the advice that they give others. Assumption? Yes, but I think a fairly safe assumption to make. Same thing with a doctor who smokes.
Vaporizers are a healthier way to consume our bud, and when a vaporizer manufacturer states that he doesn't vape, but smokes instead, than I think it would also be a safe assumption that he doesn't believe that smoking poses more of a health risk than vaping or that he does believe it, but just doesn't give a shit.
Are my assumptions way off base here? I don't think so.
Edit: After just reading Ricks post above, I think my above assumption is correct regarding the health issue and just not giving a shit about it regarding the advantages of vapor over smoke.
For me, I would just rather go to a doctor who takes care of himself, to a personal trainer who is in good shape, to a dietitian who eats well, and to buy a vaporizer from a manufacturer who believes in the health benefits of the product that he is manufacturing.
This is a quote from Ricks site:
"What is vapor and why is it better than smoke?
In a word, the answer is HEALTH! Healthy lungs, healthy body and healthy mind. In a perfect world we would not introduce anything into our bodies except healthy food, pure water and pure air. BUT, since we are all living in the real world, some of us choose to introduce *other* substances into our bodies for one reason or another. Many of us choose to smoke those substances. Smoking requires combustion. Combustion produces tars, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides and other harmful by-products. Smoke is not good for us, even if that smoke contains a small amount of something that IS good for us. VAPOR provides a healthier alternative than smoke. With Aromazap, warm air is passed through and around the herbal material, gently volatizing all essential oils into a fine vapor. All combustion by-products are eliminated with our vaporizer as temperatures are not high enough for combustion. Vapor does have an odor but not the familiar 'smoke' odor. Rather, the smell is very similar to that of the fresh herb being vaporized. Vapor also has a different effect than smoke on the user. Vapor is cleaner and more 'medicinal' in it's effects than smoke. Since there are no tars in vapor, the taste is different too. Some people, when first experiencing vapor, think they are getting only air as the normal 'taste' of smoke is missing. They soon find out they got what they bargained for though as the familiar *expansion effect* associated with smoke will still happen.....albeit a bit sneaky as one is not expecting it. The real truth about vapor comes after a week or so of using vapor only and then giving smoke a try. The smoke will taste like hot thick tar. "
So this marketing blurb is an attempt to convince potential customers that vapor is better than smoke, and yet the person who, in effect, wrote it, and more importantly, endorses it, does not vape, but in fact, smokes ?
Is this not a bit odd, or am I out in left field somewhere.