Message from Bill Godshall of Smokefree Pennsylvania

[Bill Godshall]

This is my first posting on this site. I think it helpful for e-cigarette users to contact Senator Lautenberg (Phone: (202) 224-3224, Fax: (202) 228-4054), as well as the DC offices of American Cancer Society, American Lung Association and American Heart Association (which issued a joint press release calling for the FDA to ban e-cigarettes), and let them know how these products helped users quit smoking and/or reduce cigarette consumption.

The folks calling for a ban on e-cigarettes really need to hear from users of the products.

The sensible policy solution for e-cigarettes (and other smokefree nicotine products that aren't sold as smoking cessation aids) is for the US Senate to amend Waxman's FDA tobacco bill with some of the responsible harm reduction provisions in Senator Burr's legislation (including regulating e-cigarettes as tobacco products).

I've been collaborating with Joel Nitzkin in dealing with these issues

Bill Godshall
Executive Director
Smokefree Pennsylvania
PO Box 81570
Pittsburgh, PA 15217
412-351-5880
Fax 351-5881
smokefree@compuserve.com

[Zebra]

Sounds like a plan. I have smoked for 40 years, and have tried all of the "approved" methods to quit. In fact, I have tried the approved methods many times. Nothing has ever worked for me.........until the e-cig. It was a piece of cake to quit real cigs with these devices. I went from high nic to low nic in two weeks time. Do I eventually want to get off e-cigs? Yes. But for now I am just delighted to be off tobacco.

[puff-puff-pass]

Originally Posted by Zebra

Sounds like a plan. I have smoked for 40 years, and have tried all of the "approved" methods to quit. In fact, I have tried the approved methods many times. Nothing has ever worked for me.........until the e-cig. It was a piece of cake to quit real cigs with these devices. I went from high nic to low nic in two weeks time. Do I eventually want to get off e-cigs? Yes. But for now I am just delighted to be off tobacco.

Amen.......

[Jim Davis]

Hi Bill;
Welcome. It's a pleasure to have you here. I must say, when I first saw your post, my eyes were drawn to your sig before I read the actual post. When I saw Director, Smoke Free, I thought - Oh No, here they come. Then I actually *read* your post, and my blood pressure dropped back to normal. It's good that someone in you're position understands this issue.
It's important to get another point across. Many of us, (myself included) will most likely go back to tobacco, if the e-cigs are taken away. I honestly think I'll continue to use the e-cig, even with 0% nicotine, just for its relaxing effect.
And furthermore, this country has more serious problems than a little bit of vapor floating around. They have to get their priorities in order.

[jamie]

Originally Posted by Bill Godshall

The sensible policy solution for e-cigarettes (and other smokefree nicotine products that aren't sold as smoking cessation aids) is for the US Senate to amend Waxman's FDA tobacco bill with some of the responsible harm reduction provisions in Senator Burr's legislation (including regulating e-cigarettes as tobacco products).

Can you please help me understand the implications of regulating them as tobacco products? I'm concerned that this might include:
a) reduction of nicotine to ineffective levels
b) ecigs pulled into tobacco smoking bans
c) ecigs pulled into tobacco taxation
d) ecigs pulled into other tobacco-related policies such as employment

I'm not entirely comfortable promoting this with these outstanding concerns.

Thank you.

[kinabaloo]

I'm with Jamie on this. How will this affect the status of vaping if it's pooled with tobacco like that. Far from convinced that this is a good idea. Perhaps this is a trap.

[KDMickey]

Well, they can't ban tobacco, they can only ban smoking it. No one will try to tell you you cannot chew tobacco on an airplane or in a theatre. So if personal vaporizers are regulated as tobacco, I don't think it would have a major impact except that it would avoid the "drug" regulations.

Really, given our options at the moment, being classified as a tobacco product would be a best-case scenario.

[TropicalBob]

Throw me in with Jamie. Being declared a tobacco product would be fostering a lie. Not a feasible option. Go for a harm reduction via alternative nicotine delivery systems approach.

[katink]

I don't know if this route would lead to the much needed distinction between smoking tobacco and using nicotine (in other ways) either... if that distinction (plus useful meanings of that distinction) would be made right along with doing this, then this might be a solution... but as long as this would, for instance, mean people can loose their job, or be turned down for a job, because they are using a PV... that would mean 'not really a viable solution'.

[jamie]

Originally Posted by KDMickey

Well, they can't ban tobacco, they can only ban smoking it. No one will try to tell you you cannot chew tobacco on an airplane or in a theatre. So if personal vaporizers are regulated as tobacco, I don't think it would have a major impact except that it would avoid the "drug" regulations.

"Indoor smoking is, of course, already prohibited at HHS but the new ban includes even such smokeless tobacco products as chewing tobacco and snuff"

"In Sky Magazine it also says "smoking and the use of smokeless tobacco is prohibited.""

"Buck Tobacco Organization in Oakland suggested that the recreation district expand any potential ban to include smokeless tobacco"

"Medical Staff, visitors, volunteers, consultants, vendors, travelers, and construction workers are prohibited from smoking or using smokeless tobacco products anywhere on the campus"

and etc.