Nicotine Science And Policy Q & A

I have a 20 year term policy that has hit the halfway mark and per the policy, my premium went up a fair bit. So I approached a friend of mine who is an agent for New York Life to see what he might be able to do for me. He asked me if I was still vaping and I told him yes. He said the insurance companies have lumped all nicotine delivery systems together. He gave me two quotes. The nicotine user quote was double the non-nicotine user quote. He said if I could quit vaping for three weeks, to get it out of my system I could get the testing and get the non-nicotine rate.

Not sure I can do that.

Maybe I could try vaping zero nic...I don't know. Maybe I'll just stick with the policy I already have.  

Our fight really isn't about facts or science but about public perception at this point. To that end a friend of mine has been putting together factoids for use in advocating, so far he has made some for WA State, however he will be adding more as he gets them made.

His blog for this is Vaping Calls To Action | Repository of images for use in advocating for ecigs and against their over regulation on social media

Ones for WA so far a






















These images are free to use and are intended to provoke thought and promote debate by the general public amongst themselves and with their elected representatives. No link back to their origin is required in using them nor credit sought for the creation of them. Any suggestions for wording of more is welcomed. Please use and distribute openly in whatever forum or social media setting you desire.  

This is part of an newsletter email:
Q: Do the words used to describe vaping alter perceptions of risk?

A: At first sight, the two headlines appear very similar: “Labeling e-cigarette emissions as ‘chemicals’ or ‘aerosols’ increases the perceived risk of exposure” and “Accurate labels like ‘aerosol’ or ‘chemicals’ increase perceived risks of e-cigarette use”. The ironic thing is that while both fairly accurately reflect the study being reported, one – the one that uses the word “Accurate” – is not quite so, well... accurate.

As any chemistry teacher will tell you, everything is composed of chemicals – you are, your food is, the screen you’re reading this on is made up entirely of chemicals. Which makes the labelling of e-cig vapour as “chemicals” self-evidently true at one level, but deliberately misleading at another. (Don’t drink that water, it’s nothing but chemicals!)

As it turns out, those headlines – one from News-Medical.net, the other from Medical Xpress – are placed over identical reports (i.e. an uncritically reproduced press release) of a study published this week in the Journal of American College Health. And the very title of that study, “Aerosol, vapor, or chemicals? College student perceptions of harm from electronic cigarettes and support for a tobacco-free campus policy”, tells you at once that this is hardly unbiased science, seeking answers not yet known, but rather that sadly common form of pseudo-science that starts out with its conclusion in place and sets out to “prove” it.

The study of college students in 2018 and 2019 found – not altogether surprisingly – that those asked to assess the harmfulness of secondhand “aerosol” or “chemicals” emitted by e-cigarettes were more inclined to see them as dangerous than those who were asked to assess “vapor”.

It also found, unsurprisingly, that they were around twice as likely to support a tobacco-free campus policy. This being the US, where authority routinely seems to miss the point that e-cigarettes don’t contain tobacco, we can take that to mean a vape-free campus policy too. Which, it is not hard to assume, is exactly what the researchers wanted them to support.

The study’s conclusion is itself a masterpiece of deception (perhaps self-deception). It is this: “Health campaigns should use accurate terminology to describe e-cigarette emissions, rather than jargon that conveys lower risk.”

Just how the term “chemicals” – which, after all, encompasses every breath you take – is more “accurate” than “vapor” the authors make no attempt to explain.

Now it may be true that much research which purports to support e-cigarette use is equally tendentious, setting out with its conclusion already prepared. But to respond with such blatantly bad science is no help to anyone who really wants to discover facts as yet unknown. And there are plenty of those yet to be discovered in the field of vaping.

Oh, and the answer to the question posed above is: “Yes, of course”.
Click to expand...

This is a link to the study mentioned.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07448481.2020.1819293  

I'd like to air a grievance here against CASAA.. all of us are concerned with advocacy, a united
front and support for fellow vaper's rights, regardless of where they live.
I live in Nova Scotia, Canada. There are thousands of Canadians concerned with the uninformed
and misdirected legislation being aimed at the vaping community and small business owners who
make a living by providing effective non-cigalite alternatives to those who wish to better their lives and quit smoking.
Wherever they live!
I find it ironic therefore that as a Canadian it is apparently impossible to join CASAA, despite the pleas and suggestions
that all vapers should do so.
The application form will only accept Americans with a valid State and ZIP code.

My sincere retraction if I'm missing something and incorrect, but this appears to be the case.

I have emailed CASAA with my concerns, but have received no reply.
Seems a bit hypocritical to claim to be the voice of smoking-alternative advocacy, but to exclude
everyone who doesn't fit a zip code criteria.  

I agree thats its not fair we are being attacked from pretty much all sides.
But fact of the matter is we are.
So what are you doing about it?

Do you answer calls to action from Casaa, and or are you a member?

Do you wright rebuttals to editors of news channels and papers who spread antivape propaganda?

Do you donate money to Casaa?
Every little bit helps if 5$ a month is all you can afford thats awesome! Well its not awesome you only have 5$ free dollars a month but awesome you will donate 5$ when you are on a tight budget.

I deserve to be a vapor and I pledege to my fellow vapors to continue to answer calls of actions from Casaa, wright letters to those who print or pass on antivaping propaganda, and continue to donate funds to Casaa so they can continue to fight for us.

What are you going to do, to deserve to be a Vapor?

I hope all who read this will get involved and do something about the situation we are facing. No matter what you do grate or small at least do SOMETHING!

Also big big ATTA BOYS all around for all of those already involved and taking action.  

I've observed various threads being moved here and there shortly after being posted. I've posted stuff in specific locations and waited for ever for an answer, if at all. Kinda afraid to post anything without looking for a specific section. So,my question is: What is considered General Vaping Discussion. Not trying to make wise, but if you have a question you need answered ASAP, I would think that more exposure would render more responses. I gotta wonder how many folks really monitor the more remote categories.

Don't get me wrong...I love ECF, and in my early days, pulled me through a couple of tough spots.  

You can download all 499 pages of the regulations he https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2016-10685.pdf

We liveblogged the reaction: Deeming Live blog | vaping.com

Clive Bates on Stanton Glantz and the junk science which got us he Professor Glantz brings his anti-vaping crusade to Europe – I review his presentation

Here's the reaction from US vaping organisations:

SFATA:SFATA ISSUES STATEMENT ON FDA’S FINAL DEEMING RULE - SFATA | Smoke Free Alternatives Trade Association
VTA: (via Phil Busardo) - http://www.tasteyourjuice.com/wordpress/archives/12809
AVA: Not yet
TVECA: Not yet

And from ECITA, UK org: FDA ‘Deeming’ of e-cigs – designed to destroy? | ECITA - Electronic Cigarette Industry Trade Association

Individual commentors

Mike Siegel: The Rest of the Story: Tobacco News Analysis and Commentary: My Op-Ed in Wall Street Journal Points Out Folly of FDA E-Cigarette Deeming Regulations & The Rest of the Story: Tobacco News Analysis and Commentary: FDA E-Cigarette Deeming Regulations are a Disaster for Public Health

Carl Phillips: Ecig deeming regulation — nothing new to see here

Rich Lowry: http://nypost.com/2016/05/09/uncle-sams-crackdown-on-e-cigs-will-make-it-harder-to-quit-smoking/

Sally Satel: What the US should learn from the UK's wisdom on e-cigarettes - AEI

Consumer organisations:

CASAA: CASAA: FDA Deeming Regulations: Release and Next Steps

Various articles
Washington Post: Why the FDA’s new e-cigarette regulations are a gift to Big Tobacco (and could actually harm public health)

Economics21: FDA’s New E-Cig Regs Will Kill

US News: What the E-Cigarette Black Market Will Look Like if FDA Stomps Industry

Reason: Government Officials Are Determined to Turn Vapers Into Scofflaws

PBS interview with Mitch Zeller: Skyrocketing teen use of e-cigarettes leads to new regulations

Clarityse: When two tribes go to war

Stock Transcript: The government crackdown is he What the FDA regulations mean for e-cigarettes | Stock Transcript

Science Explorer: FDA Announces That E-Cigarette Products Will Now Be Regulated Like Regular Cigarettes

NYT Health: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/11/upshot/e-cigarettes-are-safer-but-not-exactly-safe.html

Weekly Standard: FDA Moves to Kill E-Cigarettes

Think Tanks:

FEE: How the FDA Is Helping Big Tobacco and Encouraging Teen Smoking | Jonathan H. Adler

See also Sally Satel at AEI above
Videos

Brent Stafford (regulator watch): NO MORE CASUALTIES - VAPING BECOMES COLLATERAL DAMAGE IN WAR ON SMOKING - REG WATCH (E28) from Brent Stafford on Vimeo  

Was all set to play cards with friends tonight. A tradition in our group for over 20 years now. For at least the last 8 years, I'd be vaping at the table. Occasionally a (liberal) friend would want to have a discussion on the politics of vaping. That usually didn't end well. Kinda easy to win a discussion when you're holding a winning hand (metaphorically speaking).

We change off on who hosts, and everywhere we've ever played, I've always been allowed to vape, at the table. Tonight, I asked the host (just to be sure) if he is okay with me vaping. He said, he'd prefer I didn't. We discussed it a short while, and while I could possibly still enjoy myself with the updated policy (literally changed as of today), I decided it's not worth it. Part of me is lashing out at the societal changes of late.

Literally nothing (at all) has changed with vaping nicotine in the last 3+ months, yet as most of you all know, we are now in a societal phase where people truly believe both vaping (nic) is harmful to the user (as in you might die tonight) and harmful to all those around the vaper.

Given how idiotic society has become with 'knowledge of smoking,' I'm quite certain we will be in this phase indefinitely, or for a very long while. Probably won't be too long that we have statistics saying 300,000 people die annually from vaping related diseases. Sad if anyone reading this falls in line with that false information.  

I was in a bar / restaurant a couple of days ago and noticed another person vaping (guy looked to be in his late 60s). The guy was using what looked like a non-adjustable EGO style stick battery with what looked like an 'old-school' Kanger T3 clearomizer on top.

I struck up a conversation with him for just a moment and asked him what type of juice he was vaping ... The guy never told me the brand or flavor, but said it was 0mg Nic when I asked him.

That was basically the end of our conversation.

My question to you folks is this .... Why would anyone keep vaping if they had no nicotine in there juice? For me, the reason I vape in the first place is to keep off cigarettes. I am obviously addicted to nicotine, and have replaced the nicotine from cigarettes for the nicotine found in my juice.

If I could wean myself completely off nicotine, I think at that point I would just give up on vaping altogether. Someday I would like to be nicotine free, but for now, I just can't see it in my future.

BTW .... I have not smoked a cigarette for 15 months, but I am still vaping on my fairly strong 16mg Nic DIY juice.  

I'm in the process of taking steps (starting with all my PM's) to make this new change be as painless as possible for me.

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/announcements-news/665813-moving-new-forum-software.html

Per Rolygate posted on 04/09:

Next week we are moving from our old faithful forum software, vBulletin, to a newer application called XenForo.

The changeover day will be late in the week and most likely on or before Saturday 18th. We'll post a Notice just before it happens.

You can expect pretty much everything to be different, so there will be lots of fun

This has been in the planning for over a year now, and is finally going live. It isn't easy moving a giant forum to a new application, so it's taken some time to do.
Click to expand...