Slightly confused about CASAA

[Jodans]

Based on the board being elected from E-cig users/forum members and the general discussions I had seen regarding E-cigs, I was under the apparently mistaken, impression that CASAA was about PVs.
I thought it was a group being organized to help bring PVs into public view, help dispel rumors, give better PR, maybe arrange some ways of getting PVs tested to improve government outlook on them, and otherwise advocate for PVs. All of these ideas I was and am completely behind, however it seems that it is not PVs that CASAA is advocating/interested in as much as smoking 'alternatives'.
My big question (I have searched and been unable to find the answer to) is what are these OTHER 'alternatives' that are being reference to in the plural of alternative?
My first thought would be snus or other forms of ST? If this is the case, would we not be helping big tobacco whom seems perfectly content letting PVs get shut down? I thought the idea was to get people away from tobacco and the unhealthy lifestyle of tobacco use to the healthier vaping lifestyle? Or at the least, a rally point for vapers that want to do something to be able to come together and fight this possible shutdown/ban that is hovering over the horizon?

Are there other alternatives I am missing or do not know about?
Any calrification on this that can be offered to help me understand what I seem to be missing would be great, thanks!

[Sun Vaporer]

Based on the board being elected from E-cig users/forum members and the general discussions I had seen regarding E-cigs, I was under the apparently mistaken, impression that CASAA was about PVs.
I thought it was a group being organized to help bring PVs into public view, help dispel rumors, give better PR, maybe arrange some ways of getting PVs tested to improve government outlook on them, and otherwise advocate for PVs. All of these ideas I was and am completely behind, however it seems that it is not PVs that CASAA is advocating/interested in as much as smoking 'alternatives'.
My big question (I have searched and been unable to find the answer to) is what are these OTHER 'alternatives' that are being reference to in the plural of alternative?
My first thought would be snus or other forms of ST? If this is the case, would we not be helping big tobacco whom seems perfectly content letting PVs get shut down? I thought the idea was to get people away from tobacco and the unhealthy lifestyle of tobacco use to the healthier vaping lifestyle? Or at the least, a rally point for vapers that want to do something to be able to come together and fight this possible shutdown/ban that is hovering over the horizon?

Are there other alternatives I am missing or do not know about?
Any calrification on this that can be offered to help me understand what I seem to be missing would be great, thanks!

Glad you spoke up Jodans as it shows "error" in marketing that has plenty of time to be corrected. I see what you are saying, as the CAASA is all about PV's yet the plural of alternatives does create an ambiguity--one that can be corrected.

CAASA is just starting out, so give it time to walk before it runs.

Sun

[Jodans]

Glad you spoke up Jodans as it shows "error" in marketing that has plenty of time to be corrected. I see what you are saying, as the CAASA is all about PV's yet the plural of alternatives does create an ambiguity--one that can be corrected.

CAASA is just starting out, so give it time to walk before it runs.

Sun

I can understand that it may be slow starting out. However, I thought one would be safe to assume that a group would know what it is setting out FOR?
My main concern came in when reading the Slogan thread where I saw a few things 'shot down' for being too E-cig specific, which to me seems quite a dangerous maneuver if it is a group set to specifically advocate for E-cigs as my impression was.

[Webby]

CASAA advocates all smoke-free alternatives, not just e-cigarettes.


Of the things we are NOT is a purely e-cig cheerleading group. This is a group that promotes healthier alternatives to sucking tobacco smoke into lungs. Harm reduction is such an obvious cause, yet it's opposed by many in power. Smokers need reduced-risk products -- not one, but many. CASAA’s effort is to pursue knowledge and promote safer ways to exit cigarette smoking. It certainly includes e-cigarettes, but should include all the other available alternatives as well.

Efforts are underway to obtain the proof of safety and efficacy that will be needed for acceptance of our harm reduction practice. Our belief is that when the studies are in, we'll find this is the safest, most effective alternative to cigarette smoking.


But despite what some claim, we do not know that e-Cigs are safe. We do know that they appear to be, From the FDA's own studies, they are at least 99% safer than tobacco cigarettes and there are other studies in accord with this, Based on the data we have, they certainly qualify as an effective reduced harm alternative. Fighting for e-cigs and ONLY e-cigs is an argument lost before it starts. There is simply no hard proof to support them as safe. There IS plenty of misinformation out there and that is one of CASAA’s goals – to provide a repository of substantiated data and studies.


There are a lot of different fronts on which groups are fighting to keep e-cigs legally available. Some are advocating classification of e-cigs as just a variation on tobacco products. (This would certainly moot the drug-dispenser argument) One thing is for certain, there are a number of laws both state and federal waiting in the wings and winding through the courts and none of them are in our favor.

Like it or not, nicotine liquid (what we're really talking about) hit the US by storm and caught everybody by surprise. Users, the government, everybody. The government is not going to continue to allow people to sell something made from a toxic chemical (with as much oversight as bathtub gin) for much longer. That's why we created an FDA in the first place, so ....... couldn't be mixed with turpentine and sold as a cure-all.

So why do we care? because what the FDA says is safe - is safe. Talk to Uncle Sam's hand. It's no conspiracy theory to say some sort of regulation or ban is going to happen. Whether it's the SE case or the dozens of state laws winding through the courts right now. Public opinion is our best tool to sway politicians who will decide just how far that hammer is going to fall. If anyone thinks Judge Leon is going to say we can all just go about our business, they are sadly mistaken.

It does not matter how many white papers and reports and lawyers we have, the FDA has already said they aren't safe. That is what the public currently believes. Outreach, educating the public of the facts and witnessing will help make our argument that will sway the public opinion that will sway politicians. Medical studies are a vital part of that total effort but will not win this battle alone, How many potentially life saving drugs are being held up by the FDA? How many millions and how many years have been expended by others on their behalf?

Armchair debating in the forums and waxing philosophical isn’t going to help us keep e-cigs available. If we’re all truly in agreement about that goal we need to do away with any puritan views on this being all about e-cigs. If CASAA were purely an e-cig-only advocacy group we would fall on our faces. It doesn’t mean we are playing into Big Tobacco's hands, it just means we need to keep an eye on all fronts and not lose sight of the goal on a misguided stance of principal.

Bottom line, we can't continue to say:

They aren't tobacco.
They aren't drugs.
They aren't taxable.
Now leave us alone.

[kristin]

As Webby says.

Additionally, e-cigs don't work for some people. They find something "missing" like an itch they can't scratch - vaping works 100% for me, but my husband has found it lacking something. (There is some interesting work being done on tobacco alkaloids that may help that.) Anyhow, those folks use products like snus - which is also a good alternative to smoking. (My husband now uses snus to augment his e-cig.)

Swedish snus is thought much cleaner than American snus and it is often, mistakenly, assumed it causes mouth cancer like chew. This has been disproven. It is also inexplicably banned in most of Europe and could be banned elsewhere (ironically, chew is legal there.)

[Webby]

Good points.

We're not pro-snus necessarily either, we're pro "anything that keeps e-cigs available while we find out truth". Anything to keep from pulling 4000 chemicals and 60 known carcinogens into our lungs.

[Sun Vaporer]

Good points.

We're not pro-snus necessarily either, we're pro "anything that keeps e-cigs available while we find out truth". Anything to keep from pulling 4000 chemicals and 60 known carcinogens into our lungs.

Glad you clarifed that Webby as even I got a little confused there. As many here, I do not want to be advocating tobacco in any way, form or fashion---that is a whole different came then an E-CiG or PV. As this slogan shows the clear choose to advocate that does not enjoy the santity of tobacco is:





Like it says--An Alernative.


Sun

[kristin]

Right, Webby! Just using snus as an example!

[Webby]

Absolutely old friend...

I just had a terrifying brush with "The Big C" and am not advocating tobacco myself. I am all about keeping e-cigs legal. Judge Leon can classify them are hot shaving cream dispensers for all I care. E-cigs are a different animal and time will prove that. We just have to push to keep them from being brushed under the rug while this plays out.

Glad you clarifed that Webby as even I got a little confused there. As many here, I do not want to be advocating tobacco in any way, form or fashion---that is a whole different came then an E-CiG or PV. As this slogan shows the clear choose to advocate that does not enjoy the santity of tobacco is:





Like it says--An Alernative.


Sun

[Vocalek]

If you haven't already done so, take a look at the web site Tobaccoharmreduction.org

From the entry page, there are links to information about nicotine, smokeless tobacco, electronic cigarettes, and "pharmaceutical nicotine" (aka NRT). The FAQs are very informative. FAQ menu. (tobaccoharmreduction.org)

The biggest hurdle we are up against is that the tobacco control community appears to have as its ultimate goal wiping out all use of nicotine, rather than saving lives. The concept of Tobacco Harm Reduction is based on the public health principle that reducing illness and saving lives should be the top priority.