IVAQS Project Briefing

[yvilla]

To suggest that concerns associated with IVAQS are primarily driven by petty personal differences does the community a grave disservice, imo.

Sure, mistakes have been made. People do make mistakes. But to blow them up all out of proportion, mixed in with relentless character assasination and other attacks, many unwarranted, all over the ecig internet community, has long gone past "petty" personal differences.

We are at the point now where people who know nothing at all are publicly proclaiming that IVAQS donors were "taken for a ride".

Yeah, attempting to destroy any chance of the study ever being completed is real helpful to the community.

What we have here, far past "petty" personal differences, is an all out, obsessive, determined, nasty, destructive and internecine war. And I am sickened by it.

[JustJulie]

Sure, mistakes have been made. People do make mistakes. But to blow them up all out of proportion, mixed in with relentless character assasination and other attacks, many unwarranted, all over the ecig internet community, has long gone past "petty" personal differences.

We are at the point now where people who know nothing at all are publicly proclaiming that IVAQS donors were "taken for a ride".

Yeah, attempting to destroy any chance of the study ever being completed is real helpful to the community.

What we have here, far past "petty" personal differences, is an all out, obsessive, determined, nasty, destructive and internecine war. And I am sickened by it.

This is not a war, Yolanda. This is people expressing opinions about about IVAQS. Opinions are just that . . . opinions.

The way I see it, reasonable minds can disagree about the value of IVAQS. Reasonable minds can also disagree about whether the "mistakes" that have been made along the way are significant enough so as to substantially undermine the credibility of the project.

But suggesting that this is an "all out, obsessive, determined, nasty, destructive and internecine war" is a bit over the top, don't you think?

[yvilla]

The way I see it, reasonable minds can disagree about the value of IVAQS. Reasonable minds can also disagree about whether the "mistakes" that have been made along the way are significant enough so as to substantially undermine the credibility of the project.

I've never disputed that. But what I'm referring to, and reacting to, is not a matter of reasonable differences in opinion.

But suggesting that this is an "all out, obsessive, determined, nasty, destructive and internecine war" is a bit over the top, don't you think?

No Julie, I don't. I've personally and directly witnessed it for far too long. And that is what I'm finally so sickened by that I cannot keep it in any longer. And what I won't allow myself to be a silent, unwilling party to any longer.

[SudokuGal]

Sure, mistakes have been made. People do make mistakes. But to blow them up all out of proportion, mixed in with relentless character assasination and other attacks, many unwarranted, all over the ecig internet community, has long gone past "petty" personal differences.

We are at the point now where people who know nothing at all are publicly proclaiming that IVAQS donors were "taken for a ride".

Yeah, attempting to destroy any chance of the study ever being completed is real helpful to the community.

What we have here, far past "petty" personal differences, is an all out, obsessive, determined, nasty, destructive and internecine war. And I am sickened by it.

There certainly has been "pettiness" (in fact, down right ugliness) but the bottom line is that this thing has turned into an expensive debacle. I've followed it from the start. At some point the person at the center of the storm should have had enough common sense to step away.

[Motivaper]

CASAA took a close look at our own organization's finances late last fall and decided that we might be trying to accomplish too much with too little. The board voted to set aside the pursuit of any research efforts at this point and focus our efforts on working to keep the sale and indoor use of e-cigarettes legal.

Fair enough, but maybe the board could reconsider its current position given the relative importance of such a study, specifically as it relates to indoor use. With the support of CASAA, I would be very motivated develop a program to raise the necessary funding to complete, or redo the study. If CASAA were involved, even if just by association, the project could move ahead more quickly. Time seems relevant because the more time that passes without our having credible evidence of our "beliefs" about second hand vapor, the more time opponents and critics have to create their own rules.

[JW50]

I'm an outsider who really, probably, "doesn't understand". My interest is really in knowing some scientific facts. Is there some nic stuff in that vape that some exhale? Is it really something to worry about even if there? Do we have to rely on Phillip Morris paid for research to tell us e-cigs are a fraud and you've addicted your children and caused all your friends to have cancer. Personally, I willing to give some more money to know what the real fact are. But it seems pointless (and unproductive) to give more money with the counter winds seemingly equally determined that this research effort is a failure.

[laurel099]

I think most of us agree that GOOD research is needed! We get enough junk research from FDA lol.

I personally think it starts with vendors getting their liquids tested but that's just my 2 cents.

Testing on American Made Instead E-Liquid | The Electronic Cigarette & E-Cigarettes by Instead

http://www.e-cig.org/pdfs/Instead-ELiquid-Report.pdf

[taz3cat]

CASAA took a close look at our own organization's finances late last fall and decided that we might be trying to accomplish too much with too little. The board voted to set aside the pursuit of any research efforts at this point and focus our efforts on working to keep the sale and indoor use of e-cigarettes legal.

I think CASAA made a wise decision. I have watched this since the beginning, and CASAA really don't have the experts need to support the IVAQS. Also, CASAA has done a great job of fighting the bans on e-cigarette around the country. We need CASAA to continue this work and they need all their resources to keep up with the bans.

[JW50]

I think CASAA made a wise decision. I have watched this since the beginning, and CASAA really don't have the experts need to support the IVAQS. Also, CASAA has done a great job of fighting the bans on e-cigarette around the country. We need CASAA to continue this work and they need all their resources to keep up with the bans.

I tend to disagree on the "wise decision". That research could have contributed to CASAA's ability to fight the bans. Many e-cig ban efforts seem to arise from misinformation or, perhaps more importantly, lack of information. There seems to be the mentality in some of the hardcore antis that if it looks like smoking, it must be smoking, and therefore it must be evil. That research seemed to me to have the real possibilities of establishing that if the "evil" existed it was an evil only to the adult who made the choice and was not an evil forced upon some bystander or onlooker, a situation that many bystanders in the past history of smoking had to endure for many, many years. And, based upon many posts I have seen on this forum, I think many e-ciggers would like the comfort of knowing, with reasonable certainty or at least with greater certainty, that what they do does not jeopardize the health of others. Hopefully the CASAA choice was not made because of belief the facts would be detrimental to their efforts. For me, I prefer knowing that I am not harming others over forcing harm upon others so that I might vape without public ban. When it is said "decided to set aside the pursuit of any research efforts" that suggests to me facts are not important - it is all politics no matter what the facts are. Pursuit of research by CASSAA is not limited to just money and donations - it might be "encouragement". "Set aside the pursuit of any research" sounds of discouragement for facts.

[DC2]

Nvermind... I misunderstood the context of the comment I was responding to.