This is far short of an endorsement because I know little about their work and nothing about their finances or their clout, but LCFA - Lung Cancer Foundation of America: seems to be an organization that is interested in dealing rationally with lung cancer, and as such might be more open-minded about harm-reduction strategies. Their chief interest seems to be in lung cancer research, which has traditionally been treated like a stepchild by ACS.
American Lung Association
- Thread starter autumnbreeze
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
You've got to do what feels right to you. At our local Walmart there is always some group or another raising money for Relay for Life by selling hotdogs and sodas. I used to be a big supporter whenever they had a stand set up, but I can't do it anymore. If I see that Relay for Life sign, I opt out. What's horrible is that you often can't see what group they are fundraising for until you're right on top of the stand.
If it makes you feel less awkward, you could just tell your coworkers that you make your charitable contributions directly to the charities for tax purposes. Nobody should question that too much.
Or you could tell them WHY you don't want to contribute. They might not agree, but maybe they will understand your point of view and respect your opinion.
You got step 1 right. Now send a brief letter to ACS telling them what happened and how they can get your $$ in the future.
I just got an email from the ALA subject: Mary Ella's Message, today's date, that states their canned rhetoric discussed here previously. Although I have never donated to the ALA, I certainly won't now. One paragraph that really stuck out at me was this:
"The American Lung Association believes that any claims made about e-cigarettes should be based on good scientific evidence and we dont yet have that evidence. The Lung Association supports efforts to prohibit sales of these products until the FDA has determined that they are safe for use."
You know, this sounds EXACTLY like the cigarette companies campaign in the 70's, only in reverse. They support a total ban on e-cig products even BEFORE there is "scientific evidence that they do not cause cancer". So just like Phillip Morris and all Big tobacco, their stance is "until there is scientific evidence".
I have an account on the ALA stop smoking forum and was thinking about posting some scientific evidence reports for them to stew over.
Can anyone tell me where I can find this evidence? I know the ALA and it's ilk are incapable of drawing logical conclusions in the matter for various reasons, but I'd like to try and agitate them in the least.
"The American Lung Association believes that any claims made about e-cigarettes should be based on good scientific evidence and we dont yet have that evidence. The Lung Association supports efforts to prohibit sales of these products until the FDA has determined that they are safe for use."
You know, this sounds EXACTLY like the cigarette companies campaign in the 70's, only in reverse. They support a total ban on e-cig products even BEFORE there is "scientific evidence that they do not cause cancer". So just like Phillip Morris and all Big tobacco, their stance is "until there is scientific evidence".
I have an account on the ALA stop smoking forum and was thinking about posting some scientific evidence reports for them to stew over.
Can anyone tell me where I can find this evidence? I know the ALA and it's ilk are incapable of drawing logical conclusions in the matter for various reasons, but I'd like to try and agitate them in the least.
Go to the FDA's website, and link them to the data (NOT the press release, but the study data ITSELF) from the FDA testing on PV's. Tell them IF they compare that data to what's in a cigarette, they will find that PV's are orders of magnitude safer than a cig.
Wishin you luck....but don't hold your breath. These people are in an all or nothing campaign mode and WON'T comprimise. They want PV's to be safe as inhaling air or banned, and it's just not gonna happen.
Wishin you luck....but don't hold your breath. These people are in an all or nothing campaign mode and WON'T comprimise. They want PV's to be safe as inhaling air or banned, and it's just not gonna happen.
I wrote them a letter..
Lori Monroe, Kim Norris & David Sturges
Lung Cancer Foundation of America
15 S. Franklin Street
New Ulm, MN 56073
Dear Lori, Kim and David:
My name is George. I am 34 years old and had been a smoker since I was 14 years old. I have tried many times to quit, and honestly think I tried every method out there from chantix, to gum, lozenges, zyban, patches, cold turkey and even acupuncture. Many attempts and many more failures over the years had left me feeling powerless against cigarettes. I am happy to say that I am now smoke free and have finally found something that is keeping me off of cigarettes.
My solution has come through in the form of the electronic cigarette (aka personal vaporizer). This device has been an absolute godsend for me and many other smokers. Since I started using them, I have had no urges to smoke tobacco cigarettes. I did not buy them to be a smoking cessation product or NRT, but merely as an alternative to smoking tobacco cigarettes and all of the tar, chemicals, carcinogens and carbon monoxide they contain. I am writing to you because I feel these devices could be important tools to help people get off tobacco cigarettes and eliminate second-hand smoke exposure dangers to the general public.
I belong to a forum group on the internet (http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com). Through reading many posts from other members, and researching information through The Consumer Advocates for Smoke-Free Alternatives Association (CASAA) website (CASAA | The Consumer Advocates for Smoke-Free Alternatives Association), I have learned that organizations such as the FDA and the American Lung Association are against these products being available to adults freely choosing to use them, and wanting them banned based on questions of safety
The standard response from contacting the ALA directly regarding electronic cigarettes seems to be in the form of a canned e-mail message along the lines of:
Thank you for your email to the American Lung Association. Until the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) determines that e-cigarettes are safe for consumers, the American Lung Association urges consumers not to use these products.
It seems illogical to me that organizations (especially the ALA) would take such a stance on any alternative to smoking tobacco, which we all know causes lung diseases, such as cancer. This kind of statement translates in my mind as the ALA telling me that I should just go back to smoking and the risks associated with smoking, because electronic cigarettes (the only thing that has ever helped me stay off tobacco) havent been proven as safe by the FDA, even though all real-world evidence and users experience proves them to be.
I urge you to visit the websites I have mentioned above, and get the facts about personal vaporizers, as well as how these devices are helping people like me not light up.
Thank you for your time,
Agreed!
So easy to comprehend, only a droid could not ....oh, wait...I had a BF (brain fart) there for a sec.
Why support an organization you don't care for? Better yet, why feel bad for not being a part of the herd? Bravo for thinking for your self.
To be honest, I'm very disheartened that the ALA has taken this stance on PV's given that they are much healthier for your lungs than cigarettes. If they do not have full knowledge of what is in every single drop of e-juice, you would think they would just with-hold judgement until they DO know.
An association for.. lungs? Really? My guess is the founder(s) of this non-profit has high stakes in pharma, medical, or tobacco industries. Can't really be bothered to do the research, as it's not my country.
edit: Oh my bad this is old... I'm pretty tired should have checked the date first I normally would...
edit: Oh my bad this is old... I'm pretty tired should have checked the date first I normally would...
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
