To help smokers quit, make them vapers

[catlady60]

The FDA is considering proposals to regulate e-cigarettes that would discourage their use. The Los Angeles City Council has banned them in public places, and the California Legislature may vote on an anti-"vaping" law this week.

Blanket laws discouraging the use of e-cigarettes are the wrong policy move. E-cigarettes have already shown themselves to be an appealing alternative to many smokers who are trying to quit. Because almost 500,000 Americans die annually from tobacco-related diseases, a lot is at stake.

Most smokers want to quit but typically try and fail, often repeatedly. Some successfully stop by using nicotine gum or a nicotine patch or taking drugs that make smoking unappealing. But for most smokers, these strategies have not worked.

To help smokers quit, make them vapers - LA Times

 

[Jman8]

Want to "like" OP post. I really do.

Blanket laws discouraging the use of e-cigarettes are the wrong policy move.

What politically aware vaper disagrees with this? Hence even more reason to like the post.

Because almost 500,000 Americans die annually from tobacco-related diseases, a lot is at stake.

But because of this blurb (or lie), I am unable to like the post, and maintain integrity.

 

[DrMA]

Want to "like" OP post. I really do.



What politically aware vaper disagrees with this? Hence even more reason to like the post.



But because of this blurb (or lie), I am unable to like the post, and maintain integrity.

What? That's only thing you found wrong with that fundamentalist manifesto? What about the part that says to remove the fun stuff from cigarettes but keep the death & disease?
«First, reduce nicotine levels in regular cigarettes.»

And the part that thinks smokers should be further defrauded by the state under the guise of "improving population health"?
«In addition, Congress should pass a new type of $2-a-pack cigarette tax.»

No and NO. The only ethical path forward remains clear. First we must abolish the extremist racket calling itself Tobacco CONtrol. Even their name itself indicates it's a con. And second, all public health must unreservedly promote vaping as a safe and effective alternative to smoking.

 

[AndriaD]

Want to "like" OP post. I really do.



What politically aware vaper disagrees with this? Hence even more reason to like the post.



But because of this blurb (or lie), I am unable to like the post, and maintain integrity.

As soon as I saw that, I thought "where's Jman?"

I guess the only people who actually believe that are the totally ignorant, and the totally gullible who swallow everything from "public health" hook, line, and sinker -- isn't that if you ever smoked 100 cigarettes in your life, and then die of ANYTHING AT ALL, they call it a smoking-related death?

Andria

 

[AndriaD]

What? That's only thing you found wrong with that fundamentalist manifesto? What about the part that says to remove the fun stuff from cigarettes but keep the death & disease?
«First, reduce nicotine levels in regular cigarettes.»

And the part that thinks smokers should be further defrauded by the state under the guise of "improving population health"?
«In addition, Congress should pass a new type of $2-a-pack cigarette tax.»

No and NO. The only ethical path forward remains clear. First we must abolish the extremist racket calling itself Tobacco CONtrol. Even their name itself indicates it's a con. And second, all public health must unreservedly promote vaping as a safe and effective alternative to smoking.

Yeah, I really don't get that crap about reducing the nicotine; it's probably the ONLY chemical in cigarettes that ISN'T terribly dangerous -- but what about the MAOIs (which are the real culprits in the addiction), and all the OUTRIGHT POISONS they ADD to cigarette tobacco???


Andria

 

[nicnik]

I agree with DrMA. I like that the article is supportive of vaping, but it's loaded with bad suggestions.

Stephen D. Sugarman is a professor at the UC Berkeley School of Law whose specialties include torts and public health.

Public health and torts? How about suing California and their public health industry?

 

[rico942]

Reducing the nicotine content in analogs ?

I know what happened when I tried "light" cigarettes 40 years ago ...

I smoked a lot more of them ...

Well, that's one way to bolster the declining tobacco tax revenues ...

 

[nicnik]

Well, that's one way to bolster the declining tobacco tax revenues ...

I've gotten so distrusting of "Public Health" and their Tobacco Control Industry, that I wouldn't put that past them as their intention. After all, more cigarettes sold, more money for them.

 

[navigator2011]

Seems to me the greatest collateral damage of all this tobacco control business is personal freedom and choice. All these various attempts to force people to stop smoking have created a legal instrument that governments can use to pry into the personal lives of formerly free citizens. Gone are the days when most people accept that the price for a free country is tolerating other peoples' freedoms. You can already see that this intrusion won't stop with smoking, or even with vaping.

 

[nicnik]

Seems to me the greatest collateral damage of all this tobacco control business is personal freedom and choice. All these various attempts to force people to stop smoking have created a legal instrument that governments can use to pry into the personal lives of formerly free citizens. Gone are the days when most people accept that the price for a free country is tolerating other peoples' freedoms. You can already see that this intrusion won't stop with smoking, or even with vaping.

Yes, we already see claims of "success" of TC policies being waved about to promote going after other disapproved of people and activities. We're actually seeing the beginning of actually implementing some of it in taxing sugary stuff. Starts small and grows steadily from there, but the plan of steady growth is stealthily there from the beginning among "Public Health's" leading "thinkers".

 

[Jingles]

I think we should cut the caffeine in the author's coffee or make his beer cans smaller!

 

[DC2]

Seems to me the greatest collateral damage of all this tobacco control business is personal freedom and choice. All these various attempts to force people to stop smoking have created a legal instrument that governments can use to pry into the personal lives of formerly free citizens. Gone are the days when most people accept that the price for a free country is tolerating other peoples' freedoms. You can already see that this intrusion won't stop with smoking, or even with vaping.

The blame for all of this lies squarely on the concepts involved in socialist health care.
As others above me have already stated, it's only going to get worse.

I'm sure there are those reading this who are still onboard with socialized medicine.
And it's likely they haven't considered the eventually ramifications.

Or they have, but they don't care.

 

[navigator2011]

The blame for all of this lies squarely on the concepts involved in socialist health care.
As others above me have already stated, it's only going to get worse.

I'm sure there are those reading this who are still onboard with socialized medicine.
And it's likely they haven't considered the eventually ramifications.

Or they have, but they don't care.

Or, worse, maybe they have considered the eventual ramifications, and they like them. I'm sure that for many here, it's only the dwindling freedom to vape that has given rise to a second thought about things beyond vaping.

 

[Jode]

Did anybody happen to read the comments? Oh my the ignorance out there is horrifying!!

 

[TLS01]

Did anybody happen to read the comments? Oh my the ignorance out there is horrifying!!

Ignorance is an understatement.

 

[nicnik]

Did anybody happen to read the comments? Oh my the ignorance out there is horrifying!!

Wow! You're right!

 

[bobwho77]

Did anybody happen to read the comments? Oh my the ignorance out there is horrifying!!

So much BS...
So little time to shovel it

 

[CarolT]

I agree with DrMA. I like that the article is supportive of vaping, but it's loaded with bad suggestions.


Public health and torts? How about suing California and their public health industry?

Stephen D. Sugarman is really just an anti-smoker. Look at his book, Regulating Tobacco: "In addition to Rabin and Sugarman, contributors include Frank Chaloupka, Peter Jacobson, Robert Kagan, Nancy Rigotti, John Slade, and Ken Warner."
http://www.amazon.com/Regulating-Tobacco-Robert-L-Rabin/dp/0195139070

 

[nicnik]

What about the part that says to remove the fun stuff from cigarettes but keep the death & disease?
«First, reduce nicotine levels in regular cigarettes.»

Looks like tobacco growers are worried about this strategy. I guess to them, vaping replacing smoking is a threat:

State Tobacco Research Board Holds Quarterly Meeting | WEKU

“If the FDA does choose to move nicotine down so low below where it’s acceptable to a consumer, then what we will in effect be doing, is driving more people to e-cigarettes,” said Miller.

Miller says with e-cigarettes, smokers can control the amount of nicotine delivery. He maintains that lowering the level of nicotine in regular cigarettes could prove to be counterproductive.

 

[AndriaD]

Looks like tobacco growers are worried about this strategy. I guess to them, vaping replacing smoking is a threat:

State Tobacco Research Board Holds Quarterly Meeting | WEKU

He maintains that lowering the level of nicotine in regular cigarettes could prove to be counterproductive.

Counterproductive in EVERY POSSIBLE way. 1) people will just smoke more; 2) reducing the nicotine in NO WAY reduces the harm from all those other poisons.

Switching to e-cigarettes is the ONLY way to reduce harm from cigarettes. What is so hard to understand about that???

Andria