So I'm walking across the parking lot yesterday, vaping with my trusty ProVari Ti3. The looks I was getting were unbelievable. You'd think I was dragging a puppy by its hind legs. The anti-vape media blitz has successfully achieved its intended purpose. One woman was watching the vapor plums, as though I were releasing cyanide into the atmosphere. A visible visceral reaction. It was quite funny, actually. I wouldn't be surprised if "they" elevate the daily rhetoric; by declaring vaping a public health hazard. I suppose we'll soon need to switch to something safe, like... oh, I don't know... cigarettes?
"
Vaping is supposed to be a form of harm reduction, that is, allow nicotine addicts to have access to the drug without the harmful tars and chemicals in cigarettes that cause cancer, heart disease, and other maladies.
Last year, the Journal of the American Heart Association published a study finding that vaping posed as great a heart risk as smoking itself. That study fueled public policies at all levels of government to stifle the industry. A lot of small business people had their livelihoods destroyed or damaged as a result.
Now, the study has been retracted — which is a very big deal in science — because the editors are “concerned that the study conclusion is unreliable” due to what appears to have been an uncompleted peer review process..........."
Major Anti-Vaping Scientific Study Retracted | National Review
Score one for our side. 'They will not stop until tobacco becomes regulated like a hard drug - 'We will not stop until our rights, especially our right to use a less harmful form of tobacco, such as vaping,
is assured.
I have not seen this on the Forum before - did I miss it ?
From Vapun Magazine 9/24/2019
Pharma Vaporizer Brings Big BILLIONAIRE Names
some quotes from the article...
Hava Health is about to launch Hale – what Tech Crunch referred to as “the first vaporizer designed for smoking cessation"
Hale claims to be different because it will be the first device that uses “4 Pharmaceutical grade ingredients” for “two different oil formulations.”
Hava Health has some big-named backers that include: Village Global, Backstage Capital, Hardware Massive and other angel investors on their website.
One name that stands out listed as part of The Network on Village Global website is none other than Mike Bloomberg. The same Bloomberg who donated $160 million to anti-vaping efforts in New York, as reported by New York Times.
Another is Bill Gates. Both Bloomberg and Gates have donated heavily to the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids (CTFK) and the CDC Foundation. CTFK has been notoriously anti-vape–they were one of the parties that successfully sued the FDA, claiming officials did not have the authority to extend regulatory deadlines for the vapor industry. The CDC Foundation has been previously investigated for allegedly allowing private donations to influence CDC policies, as reported by Roll Call and The Times of India.
So...yea, there is a definite personal interest for Bloomberg to kill vaping - he is INVESTED in a pharma device !!
More...
As e-cigarettes come under fire, Hava Health readies a vape pen to help people quit smoking – TechCrunch
https://www.tryhale.com/
Hava - Quit Nicotine
Holy cow - Evil abounds...PURE EVIL !!
I was pretty upset with the wired article and wrote a lengthy response for my blog. Thought I'd share.
[h=2]Wired: http://www. wired. com/2015/04/war-vapings-health-risks-getting-dirty/"
The War Over Vaping’s Health Risks Is Getting Dirty“ - My Response to this Misleading Article[/h]I was really bothered by how misleading this article was, so I’m gonna break it down.
Before I begin, a clarification: There are many issues regarding ecig or “vaporizer” usage, and on many of them, there’s no disagreement between anti-vapers and pro-vapers. For instance, both groups do not want children getting ecigs. However, many people - like in this wired article - muddle a bunch of the issues together, so I’ll be teasing them apart.
For nicotine enthusiasts, 2015 will be remembered as part of a golden era. Less than 10 years after they were introduced in the United States, e-cigarettes have gone relatively unregulated by health agencies, with companies and users making their own rules in a nicotine-laced Wild West. E-cigarette companies have been advertising their products to adults and children alike, claiming to help smokers quit while simultaneously promoting lollipop-flavored liquids…
Reminiscent of glamorous smoking ads of the last century, many of the ads feature celebrity endorsements; in a Blu ad, Jenny McCarthy flirts with the camera while rejoicing that she can now smoke without scaring guys away with her smell. And many of them seem shockingly child-centric…
1. Advertising to adults: This is a legitimate question. Personally, I’m leaning toward lighter regulations for ecig ads bc numerous studies have shown they are much safer than cigarettes (American Heart Association, x, x, x, x, x ) and can act as an effecting smoking cessation aid, though they are not yet approved for that purpose (American Heart Association, x, x ). But again, a legitimate question.
2. Advertising to kids: No-one wants that. Furthermore, no-one has done that! When critics like the author of the wired article allege that is happening, they almost always are referring to the non-tobacco flavors offered. However, the reason sweet, fruity, and candy flavors are offered is because they are extremely popular amongst adult vapers (x, x). Saying they’re marketed to children is like saying sweet alcoholic drinks are marketed for children because all adults would obviously prefer bourbon. It’s ludicrous. Adults like sweet flavors too.
2b. On a related note: Some have been concerned that ecigs may increase teen use of cigarettes, but the evidence thus far says otherwise. (x, x).
…Last week, the California Department of Public Health launched a anti-vaping campaign called Still Blowing Smoke. And in January, the San Francisco Department of Health launched #CurbIt, pointing out the dangers of e-cigs and their brazen plays to hook kids while warning residents that vaping is only allowed in the same places as smoking.
There’s plenty of evidence behind the campaigns’ claims—studies that link e-cigs to asthma, lung inflammation, MRSA infection risk and exposure to harmful chemicals. But with scant data on the long-term health effects of e-cigarettes and their usefulness as a quitting tool, the ads use a number of classic psychological strategies to help beat back the ire of pro-vapers…
3. The Still Blowing Smoke ads were themselves blowing smoke. I’d like to discuss three of their main tv ads.
3a. One suggested that ecigs are marketed for kids bc of the flavors, as discussed above.
3b. Another suggested (or rather, alleges) that vaping is a “Big Tobacco” conspiracy! While it’s true that Big Tobacco has bought in to some ecig production, the vast majority of vape businesses are small businesses, such as the brick-and-mortar “vape shops” that are emerging. Perhaps more importantly, this is guilt by association. If Big Tobacco owned Chantix, a popular smoking cessation aid, would that automatically mean it’s evil? And unlike the vast, vast majority of small vape businesses, Big Tobacco has an incentive to make cigs fail: Users are more likely to continue smoking! (Not to mention the very impressive revenue that states gain from tobacco sales, which vaping threatens. x, x)
3c. Finally, they aired a commercial with a small toddler reaching for a vape, presenting that as a risk. Which it is, of course - just like with any other chemical left around the house, be it alcohol, cleaning supplies, or whatever! That isn’t a vaping issue; it’s a parenting issue.
More info on those ads here.
4. The #CurbIt campaign (x) similarly suggests that vapes are part of a Big Tobacco conspiracy and marketed to children (sigh).
4a.What bothered me most was the phrasing they used in one particular ad: “We know e-cigarettes are harmful, just like cigarettes.” While one could argue that it merely meant, “ecigs are also harmful”, it seems to me to be implying that they are just as harmful, which is patently false.
4b. And as others have pointed out: One is likely inhaling more toxic fumes from the curb than from vaping!
4c. Of course, that does leave the question of second-hand-vape exposure, which #CurbIt also alerts the public to. However, the evidence for second-hand vpe exposure is still very thin, with many experts thinking it has a minimal effect if any. (x, x ).
5. To be sure, no-one thinks that vaporizers are completely harmless. Almost nothing is! The question is relative harm (as well as harm-reduction). Are ecigs bad for asthmatics - well, how bad? Certainly they’re better than cigarettes. Might ecigs cause some lung inflammation? Very possibly, but are we going to outlaw every activity or product poses any amount of tissue inflammation?! Clearly that’s an absurd approach. We need to look at overall health, relative health, and common standards in other areas. (For instance, caffeine is addictive, but the public has no qualms with allowing people to use it.)
6. I’ll add that in addition to the lack of studies demonstrating long-term adverse affects, the research on short-term affects are mixed, with many indicating that it is very safe in general, and particularly in contrast to cigarettes.
One CDC ad relies on anecdotal evidence to make its point. It features a story from an e-cigarette user, a 35-year-old wife and mother named Kristy from Tennessee who says she started smoking e-cigarettes hoping to quit combustible cigarettes. Instead, she began to smoke both, until her lung collapsed. The American Vaping Association reportedly called the ad “patently dishonest,” saying that it implies vaping led to lung disease, when in reality Kristy had gone back to smoking cigarettes alone in the months before her lung collapsed. California’s anti-vaping campaign lists toxins that humans once thought were safe—arsenic-laced powdered wigs, radium therapy, and of course cigarettes—and compares them to e-cigs, using a deceptive associative tactic that we’ve called out before.
7. This is one of the few points where the piece describes one obvious instance of misleading advertising - and the vaping community’s obvious and necessary response to such deception. (And for what it’s worth, there are thousands and thousands of people who credit ecigs with saving their lives #VapingSavedMyLife). But even here, the article’s authors don’t really take the anti-vaping activists to task for it. In fact, they almost seem to endorse that very same tactic:
The problem is, as in the early days of campaigns against cigarettes, there isn’t definitive evidence that e-cigarettes cause long-term harm—a point that pro-vapers will be quick to remind you of. But there also isn’t definitive evidence that they’re safe. And there are many good reasons to assume they’ll be found in time to increase cancer and heart and lung disease.
The Wired article doesn’t explain what those reasons are… just that it’s a good assumption! (I guess they also think they’re like arsenic-laced powdered wigs.)
What firm science there is to rest on is fairly obvious: E-cigarettes are almost certainly less toxic and carcinogenic than regular cigarettes. But that doesn’t mean that they’re not a health hazard. “We already know you’re breathing in a lot of toxic chemicals, which is bad,” says Glantz. “You’re breathing in a lot of toxic particles, which is bad. You’re taking in nicotine, which is bad. A cigarette is by far and away the most dangerous consumer product ever invented. So to say it’s not as bad as a cigarette is not saying very much.”
8. This was, to me, perhaps the most balanced paragraph in the article, but even here I’d challenge some aspects. In essence, of course breathing anything other than air isn’t going to be good for you, but it’s a matter of degree for the general public, and relative health for smokers. This might be a good time to mention that the studies thus far indicate that 99% of vapers are smokers or ex-smokers (x, x ). That is, they switched from “the most dangerous consumer product ever invented” to something less harmful, perhaps much, much less harmful, for at least part of the time.
In the absence of incontrovertible evidence, then, public health agencies have to continue to play a little dirty themselves to get citizens to pay attention. In a couple of years, researchers will begin to do association studies to pull out long-term health effects. Until that science rolls in, the, prepare to sit back and enjoy the show. These two camps will be hashing it out for a while.
9. This another area where I disagree: If there is a lack of evidence, don’t treat it like a deadly substance. If the evidence suggests that it’s getting many people off of a horribly injurious habit, then definitely don’t treat it like a deadly substance.
All in all, very disappointed in the article. It basically boasted propaganda for a cause that may further harm millions. It presents very little actual information, and seems to ignore the information which extols the virtues of vaping over smoking. To be sure, we need more studies, as many of the study’s done so far have been faulty (like the popularized “formaldehyde” study - x) or contain a conflict of interest. Still, much of the evidence thus far is positive, and legislating as though it were negative is unfair to vapers and the millions suffering from tobacco cigarette addiction.
All Wired really seemed to care about discussing is the social media attention the debate is getting - and probably just trying to cash in on that by stirring the pot.
P.s. Of Interest: List of studies related to ecigs and vaping. (x)
California man dies in 7th vaping-related illness as CDC steps up e-cig probe - CNN
The latest California victim had been sick for several weeks after he suffered a "severe pulmonary injury associated with vaping," Dr. Karen Haught, the Tulare County public health officer, said in a news release.
More links ...
‘It is time to stop vaping’: California man dies in 7th vaping-related illness
7th death linked to vaping reported
A 7th person has died in the U.S. from a vaping-related lung illness
Please check out http://notblowingsmoke.org/ a website dedicated to countering the latest campaign of disinformation in California called Still Blowing Smoke.
Detailed in Grimgreens vlog starting at 07:40
I was surprised by this chart that I recently came across.
It shows that the USA is the biggest market by far for vape products.
There are still over a billion, old fashioned tobacco smokers in the world. Vaping has been around for many years already, yet there are only slightly over 40 million vapers in the world, of which I am proud to call myself a part of that wise group.
With all of the anti-vape propaganda and nonsense taking place, it seems that there is a movement out there to keep those billion+ cig smokers hooked on their cigs and also to deny the 40+ million vapers out there the freedom and the choice to remain cig free.
I guess it's better that millions of people die from cancer, because vaping is just pure evil and the work of satan, or something like that. Oh, and think about the kids. Nevermind the kids who would previously just start smoking plain old regular cigarettes before vaping ever existed. That was never a big deal.
Here is the chart I found showing the top vape markets in the world.
And notice how there are no third world countries on the list? Isn't vaping banned in India? That's insane. That country has a huge population. How stupid of them. Their actions are contributing to the deaths and diseases of an awful lot of people.
And here is a link to the article which the chart came from:
How many people vape?
Okay - I found it very interesting that with all the recent hoopla, hysterics and diatribe & condemnation of E-Cigarettes and "Vaping" (inclusive) on all major Media oulets - that one of the local 3 PBS Stations here in South Florida - WLRN (out of Miami) has actually been showing a very good older educational/documentary program from BBC that I saw a couple of years ago :
"E-Cigarettes: Miracle Or Menace" (2016):
Can't embed video here - So here is the link to video: https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5875ke
(BTW: It is also shown on Netflix: Netflix)
AND - Then online there was a repeat of CBS Sunday Mornings Report last year:
"Clearing the air on e-cigarettes" (Oct 2018)
Besides Canada's Networks: CBC News - 5th Estate:
"Investigating e-cigarettes: a less harmful way to smoke?" (2016)
Also, there is an excellent documentary (mixed languages - sub-titles) :
"Beyond The Cloud - Documentary film about vaping" (2016)
AND - IMHO - While these maybe older videos, i do believe they are still relevant. SO - I hope this info will be enlightening and open the conversation to the general public and "You", your Family & Friends that keep asking you if is Ok / or that "You" NEED to Stop, and can be especially helpful about what "Vaping" is and is not when and if Ya' are ever confronted by others. That is if they are willing to watch and learn . . . Just Sayin' . . .
.
Hey guys and gals,
So I've been vaping for a couple of months after being on the stinkies for about 10 years, but my father has been in it for many years. This has lead to me skipping a great deal of rookie mistakes and learning how things work quite fast. This resulted in having a decent build in a community that has either no or bad opinions on vaping. I'm from a smaller town in Croatia, and if anyone mentions vaping it's what they've heard from the news on how bad it is (mostly the ever present study of old clearomisers fired at 5V).
After a month or two i was so enthusiastic about it i wanted to share it with my smoking friends. Trying to explain the possibilities, the fine tuning, ranging from wicking, atomizer types and coils to DIY juices. Some were interested, others were not.
Lately though, perfect example tonight, unexpected things started happening. I was out in my local pub, tootle puffing on my vamo5 and veritas and somebody i barely know came up to me asking what that was. I gave him a puff at 8W with my DIY 10mg VG chocolate peanut butter and he was thrilled. Friday night and he was like "just tell me what to order and i'm taking it right now".
I feel as if there's about to be an avalanche of vapers in my town and i'm loving it. This is the fifth or sixth person that has fully committed to dropping the analogs and switching to vaping in a very short time period, I'm gonna have to hold a class soon for all the basics
Have you guys from smaller towns had similar experiences? Because i feel that all the bad media regarding vaping is having little to no effect once a smoker takes a puff. Of course the problem is "making" the sceptical ones actually take the first puff due to the propaganda, but in my experience, once they do it's almost always a done deal!
God i hope i'll have someone recommending me flavors and atties in a couple months