Member since: Fri Nov 12, 2004, 07:52 PM
Number of posts: 191
Number of posts: 191
I'm watching the Senate committee hearing on ecigs right now and I'm so disgusted ...
This is such junk. Whose attracted to flavors like cherry etc? "I'm not" as they drink FLAVORED Canada Dry soda. It goes downhill from there. I'm just hoping there isn't a Sen. Harkin moment were he holds up a USB charger as proof they are marketing to kids.
Why does alcohol, condoms and personal lubricants have flavors? How about NRT gums with flavors? I guess those are to attract kids too.
The fact is that nicotine without combustion is up to 90% safer. NRT products are safer for that reason. In study and study after study, that's not disputed. The FDA / CDC don't dispute that. There is also ZERO evidencce that kids are picking up ecigs! It has risen among kids who are already smoking (the CDC forgot to mention that in their original press release).
I can't watch. They are too stupid to believe.
Posion control calls? <1/100th of the number of calls for TOOTHPASTE. A majority of those calls were for information. Not an incident, largely due to press releases. There was a grand total of 1 er visit in 6 months, which did not result in admission to the hospital or treatment. It's called hysteris. Have you ever tried eliquid? It is nasty. People get sick and throw up before overdosing. Aren't kids attracted to gums which also taste good (unlike eliquid). The percentages of nicotine in both are the same.
I mix my own eliquids. Yes, it's wise to keep out of reach of children and pets. I doubt there's objections to child safety protections, even proactively (unlike nicotine gum). Just as no one objects to restricting sales to minors. I don't even think banning underage from vape shops or limiting ads to "non-kiddie" hours or banning ads althogether would see a serious rise in objections.
Banning ecigs altogether like the FDA deeming regulations are posed to do - yes. That would be crushing the most important public health advancement in this century.
True to form, all these "tobacco acts" really do is to protect Marlboro.
Posted by aikanae | Wed Jun 18, 2014, 09:27 PM (3 replies)
The last 2 years have seen the largest decline in cigarette sales ever - 2010-2011 experienced a 10% decline alone; a recent report from Wells Fargo (repeated by others too) stated that the e-cig market was set to out pace the sale of cigarettes in less than a decade.
Whoopee! A smoke free nation. Can you imagine the savings in public health care costs alone?
Oops. I guess were not in Disneyland anymore. What happened in the 90's was that states co-opted tobacco settlement money, then taxes, to fund public health programs like CHIP. The money didn't go toward cigarette smoking reduction programs or toward health care costs associated with smoking. Now they have to replace it.
RJRenolyds has publicly stated they have mobilized an army of lobbyists in every state to limit and tax e-cigarettes. They consider e-cigarettes unfair competition without the same regulatory overhead that they have.
BTW - RJRenolds recently bought one of the leading cig-look-a-likes, NJoy. I think Phillip Morris just purchased Blu (another look-a-like) and sometime in April, the FDA was to announce new "deeming" regulations for e-cigarettes. According to the "Family Tobacco Act" everything after 2007 would have to go through the FDA for approval - but the FDA never ever approves anything. (> 3,000 new applications pending since then, 0 approvals). Of course, written into that act is an exemption for companies that are grandfathered in, like RJR and Philip Morris.
Another government funded industry is set to become a "too big to fail" monopoly. And Democrats support this.
There is nothing in the tobacco act to protect the health of the public. The FDA is publishing misleading and junk science to get what it wants - and they don't care. The FDA is chaired by industry insiders, including execs from drug companies that are making money on tobacco cessation products (nrt's) who also see e-cigs as competition. The current level of success with NRT's is under 15% at 6 months.
Ironic isn't that the agency in charge of protecting public health is the biggest obstacle to the greatest public health advancement the US has seen in decades.
Sweden reports a 45% reduction in public health spending since using THR (tobacco harm reduction) policies like snus and e-cigs. That's not going to happen here!
This is a bill that will come to every state. That's how it works when corporations write the bills. You can trace every politician sponsoring these bills to industry funding. Democrats (which I'm one) never looked so dirty, so corrupt, so uncaring or so ignorant as they do supporting these bills.
"How stupid can a political party be" -- Frank Zappa
Posted by aikanae | Mon Apr 29, 2013, 12:46 PM (1 replies)
Your son probably knows what he needs. There are so many e-cigs on the market that it's hard to explain all the variations. What I can assure you is that there is no reason for a smoker to smoke cigarettes anymore. But what you son needs for quitting is highly individual and there can be some trial and error involved. Even with an e-cig, some can't "quit" right away. It's not just a matter of will power. E-cigs deliver nicotine, most of which is not asorbed. So there are still some withdrawl effects, it's just much less painful without giving up the psychological addiction and habit similar to smoking. But nicotine is only 1 of up to 10,000 chemicals found in tobacco and it's not the most addictive one (if we knew what they all were).
You might want to see if there's a store in your area that specializes in "vaping" products. That's where he'll get the most help. He can test some flavors, see what nicotine level he's at, get an idea of the vapor he prefers (throat hit, warm vape) etc. and choose what he is most comfortable using.
I was surprised. After a 30 year pack a day habit, when I went into a local vaping store, I was happy with a very low level of nicotine. I almost went with 0 nicotine. What I needed was copious amounts of vapor - the throat hit. I'm addicted to the habit of smoking. Everything made sense to me in that moment - why I had failed, over and over all those years. It had gotten so that I would never try again because I just couldn't handle the disappointment. Even after a cancer scare. Smokers are such outcasts in society anymore that it's hard not to take it personally. Some people can't just "quit" or we would have by now.
But for me, getting the right equipment to deliver a satisfying vape was critical. The little cig-look-a-likes were a joke. I needed a tank, with juice - and the further I stayed away from tobacco flavors worked best for me. Others are the opposite. Big batteries that lasted all day, rechargaeble and reliable, on and on. Without that, I was back to smoking.
It took less than a month to feel better. I didn't like being around cigarette smoke, didn't like the taste of them anymore, but I still need the vapor hit. Whatever works. The vapor is the same thing they use in fog machines at theaters or concerts, it's used in medical inhalors, i.v.'s, food; it's safe with no odor. No one has ever died from e-cigs.
I can't say that with commercial nicotine replacement therapy. Chantix is known for causing hundreds of deaths and none of the nrt's have a very good success rate 6 months later. They were zero help for me. I'm angry I was even prescribed Chantix with it's known risk for cardiac problems and depression. The medicine is worse than the disease. But it's a multi-billion dollar industry.
Anyway, your son needs to pick out what will work best for him. There are as many ways to customize this as there are smokers which is why I say there's little reason for anyone to continue smoking cigarettes anymore. But he's got to do it.
P.S. If he has trouble finding a local store, he should look at e-cigarette-forum.com. They have multiple local meets in every state now and he can get a look at what others use, advice on where they get supplies and most of all, support. There is a big difference with support coming from someone else who's faced the same challenges vs. someone (regardless of intentions) that hasn't had to - either a non-smoker or someone who could "just quit". BIG DIFFERENCE.
Just look at the messages here; "Just quit - I did". That's like hitting someone over the head with a baseball bat when they are already experiencing disappointment and failure from not being able to "just quit". It's not support. It's righteous and judgmental, even if it's well-meaning.
Posted by aikanae | Mon Apr 29, 2013, 11:32 AM (0 replies)
Go to Page: 1