Ontario qualms

[TropicalBob]

From a Canadian paper:

"I think people need to be cautious," warns Dr Roberta Ferrence, director of the Ontario Tobacco Research Unit. "It's an unknown."

"The concern is that the product will probably be promoted as something that's safer than smoking," she adds.

Dr Ferrence doesn't think they're safe at all.

In an interview with CityNews Medical Specialist Dr Karl Kabasele, she pointed out the many disadvantages of this "smokeless" cigarette:

• We don't know for certain that they are less harmful than regular cigarettes. They're not regulated, and because they're available in different strengths, it's difficult to gauge the danger.
• It keeps smoking visible, and therefore increases its social acceptance, at a time when the Ontario government is working to make smoking "uncool."
• Kids will have easier access to the gadget, and it may act as a gateway to the real thing.
• It's not a tool to help you quit smoking; it's just a way to get around the smoking ban laws. There's no evidence that it can help with smoking cessation.
• Finally, inhaling nicotine is the most addictive of all delivery modes.

One blog response to the story:

“What needs to happen to make the dangers of smoking clear is for the product to be fitted with an electronic voice, perhaps one possessed of a piercing Mexican accent and a series of warning phrases such as “No no Senor Slade! Thees ees madness!”" .

[CaSHMeRe]

what makes no sense is this statement ...

"Dr Ferrence doesn't think they're safe at all."

and gave no viable reason besides the "unknown" ... sigh ...

Death is unknown, does that make it not safe at all? Driving down the street is unknown, does that make driving not safe at all?

I would rather trust an "unknown" than a cancer stick we know KILLS!

just my $.02 cents ...

[dnakr]

She doesn't have to give a reason - she is the director of the Ontario Tobacco Research Unit.

I agree - what she said is unfair. No major research has been done. No one can say if it is safe or unsafe yet. I just wish they would play fair and find out for sure.

[TheEmperorOfIceCream]

Originally Posted by TropicalBob

One blog response to the story:

“What needs to happen to make the dangers of smoking clear is for the product to be fitted with an electronic voice, perhaps one possessed of a piercing Mexican accent and a series of warning phrases such as “No no Senor Slade! Thees ees madness!”" .

That's my old avatar, Stogie the robo-cigar from 200AD comic! Little sucker never told Sam to pack it in, though.

That blog's the only laugh I got out of the post though. Otherwise, it's the usual chorus from the antis


It's difficult to gauge the danger (you sneaky b*stards have outflanked us - the secondhand smoke knockout punch won't work with this)

We can see you doing it (and we don't like it)

Think of the kids!!! (hell, worked last time...)

You're cheating the ban (hey, no fair! It took years to get that ban in place - you buggers walked round it in months...)

If you're not at least trying to quit, you can't have it. (Suffer, dammit! It builds character)

You're still inhaling! STOP THAT! (We can't stand to see you people enjoying yourself)


Forget what I said in the Nevada thread, Bob...

[jarvis]

I have to admit, it's a bit unrelated to the topic, but browsing the web for loongtotem e-cigs, I found some on a ruyan seller website. Right under the v9 they were selling those "Green Tea health pads" that are supposed to suck out all your body's toxins from your feet (they compare it to a tree roots in the infomercial!) and I can't say it didn't make me a little nervous that these products are in the same context.

[Mr.Darcy]

Originally Posted by TheEmperorOfIceCream

That's my old avatar, Stogie the robo-cigar from 200AD comic! Little sucker never told Sam to pack it in, though.

That blog's the only laugh I got out of the post though. Otherwise, it's the usual chorus from the antis


It's difficult to gauge the danger (you sneaky b*stards have outflanked us - the secondhand smoke knockout punch won't work with this)

We can see you doing it (and we don't like it)

Think of the kids!!! (hell, worked last time...)

You're cheating the ban (hey, no fair! It took years to get that ban in place - you buggers walked round it in months...)

If you're not at least trying to quit, you can't have it. (Suffer, dammit! It builds character)

You're still inhaling! STOP THAT! (We can't stand to see you people enjoying yourself)


Forget what I said in the Nevada thread, Bob...

man i always wanted a stogie of my own...i loved 2000ad.

[Nazareth]

We don't know for certain that they are less harmful than regular cigarettes. They're not regulated, and because they're available in different strengths, it's difficult to gauge the danger.

Yet we do know smoking real cigarettes is incredibly dangerous. Difficult to guage the nicotine? Nope- not difficult at all- these devices are abotu 1/5 that of a real cigarette- Next nonsensicle objection Dr.?

It keeps smoking visible, and therefore increases its social acceptance, at a time when the Ontario government is working to make smoking "uncool."

We smokers could care less- We want somethign to help us cut down on smoking, and this self-righteous doctor doesn't want to give us that chance? Shame on her!

Kids will have easier access to the gadget, and it may act as a gateway to the real thing.

Gateway? Yep- much better to ban htese devices and have htem go striaght for hte real thing rather than possibly get hooked on somethign much much safer than real cigarettes- Brilliant thinkign doctor

It's not a tool to help you quit smoking; it's just a way to get around the smoking ban laws. There's no evidence that it can help with smoking cessation.

No evidence? Ever been to e-cigarette-forum.com doctor? Didn't htink so- Besides, noone is claimign they are specifically for quitting- just as noone claimed Near-Bear was for quitting- has it ever occured to you doctor that peopel just want a safer product & don't really want to quit? Ah- I forgot- you're a Nazi-like control-freak that loves runnign other people's lives- my mistake!

Finally, inhaling nicotine is the most addictive of all delivery modes.

Think that oen up al by your lonesome Doc? Or did you have help from you're other rabid, self-loathign, bitter, anti-smoking, agendist friends?

[Spider]

I find that utterly preposterous! We have to agree that, yes, it is still an unknown. But all of the other statements are just whinging, Emp showed them for what they are!

The line that's really annoying me is:

The concern is that the product will probably be promoted as something that's safer than smoking

They make it sound like even if it is safer it still shouldn't be allowed. It's so ridiculously biased.

We know that it doesn't kill people instantly, and wouldn't we have noticed by now if it wasn't at least a tiny bit safer than smoking? I mean what's worse than something that kills you slowly and gives you cancer?

If someone gave you the choice to drink vial 'a' or vial 'b', each containing a liquid - but they said vial 'a' will definitely kill you, and vial 'b' might not, which one would you choose?

Edit: Silly question! We've already chosen...