35 percent to switch to Ecigs?

[LaceyUnderall]

Below is a press release I found from Smoke51 and I am curious to find out how many people agree with the statement that:

"Electronic cigarette smokers predict that by 2010, thirty-five percent of smokers will switch to e-cigarettes."

The New Year Brings a New Electronic Cigarette- Fifty-One, The Fastest Growing Products On The Mark - PR.com

 

[BiscuitSlayer]

I don't agree with it. I can't see 35% that quickly. I heard recently that there are roughly 41 million smokers in the US. Thirty five percent would be 14 million 350 thousand people to be using the e-cigarettes in a year.

I don't buy it.

 

[surbitonPete]

Actually I could easily believe a far higher percentage would switch if there was enough advertising ..especially if it was advertised on telly.

 

[LaceyUnderall]

Actually I could easily believe a far higher percentage would switch if there was enough advertising ..especially if it was advertised on telly.

Can you imagine? When this hits the tv... you are right... it WILL explode. Every time there is a news release somewhere, the suppliers can tell it.

 

[Frankie]

...and then the politicians start noticing it. Every drag the vapers take deprives them of tax money to be (ab)used at their will, be it for wars, police or building new Hoover Dams. After that there is only one very small step to the proven model of solving the problem. Proven in Australia, that is.

 

[LaceyUnderall]

...and then the politicians start noticing it. Every drag the vapers take deprives them of tax money to be (ab)used at their will, be it for wars, police or building new Hoover Dams. After that there is only one very small step to the proven model of solving the problem. Proven in Australia, that is.

It is so sad that as a whole we have become so far removed from health as our motivator. It would be lovely if Kate's idea to get together and work towards a common goal could change that.

 

[Frankie]

It is very difficult to use health as a motivator on any wider scope or level if you do not have absolutely any acceptable proof our option is healthy. Yes, we feel healtier after weeks or months of vaping. Unfortunately, that does not prove anything.

I am not any official whatever, but I would still hesitate telling a friend this way of smoking is really healthy. The only exception I would personally accept would be lung problems like COPD caused by smoke. Even blood clotting that I always connected with CO2 and resulting thicker blood can be also caused by nicotine only. A forum member had to undergo operation caused by the nic... In that aspect I would say it is way better. Otherwise... We will see after sufficient time has passed. I mean, I felt perfectly healthy in my first years of smoking, too.

So far health is not an argument. It is an opinion, feeling, hope... but not a valid argument. I am sincerely sorry. I would love to be wrong.

 

[surbitonPete]

I certainly don't believe our Health motivates our governments.....it's just greed or power.

 

[LaceyUnderall]

no... and I never make any claims that these are healthier... actually, I am following behind someone right now... ElectricSmoker from Australia who has opened up a blog and website on Jan 24th promoting GreenCig and is plastering all over the web that e-smoking is safe and that Health New Zealand deemed them the safer way to smoke.

I simply wish that health WAS what the FDA was focused on and not on profit.

 

[surbitonPete]

I agree that none of us can be certain e-smoking is any healthier...it just seems to make sense that it must be....it's certainly a risk that I am happy to take and unlike tobacco smoking it is highly unlikely that it can possibly harm anyone else.

 

[TropicalBob]

That estimate will prove way too high. A Wall Street analyst was published saying e-cigarettes would get 1% of future markets.

This forum sees almost exclusively the cheerleader-true believer converts. We do not see those who try, then reject e-smoking. They don't come here to post -- or they're trashed with their first negative word about e-smoking and they leave forever.

Thirty-five percent is pure pipe-dream propaganda. Maybe they think wishful thinking can make something come true. What's next: Smoke51 prayer circles?

 

[leaford]

...and then the politicians start noticing it. Every drag the vapers take deprives them of tax money to be (ab)used at their will, be it for wars, police or building new Hoover Dams. After that there is only one very small step to the proven model of solving the problem. Proven in Australia, that is.

That's what people keep saying. They can't tax it, so they ban it.

How does that even make sense? Why can't they tax it? If that was the only objection, that it isn;t taxed, they could just slap a tax on it. It's not like tobacco is the only thing they can tax. Taxing is what they do. They tax things every day and twice on sundays!

 

[leaford]

no... and I never make any claims that these are healthier... actually, I am following behind someone right now... ElectricSmoker from Australia who has opened up a blog and website on Jan 24th promoting GreenCig and is plastering all over the web that e-smoking is safe and that Health New Zealand deemed them the safer way to smoke.

I simply wish that health WAS what the FDA was focused on and not on profit.

GreenCig? Someone's selling those? I was starting to think they were vaporware!

 

[LaceyUnderall]

GreenCig? Someone's selling those? I was starting to think they were vaporware!

Yes... this is that vapor guy I was telling you about... But wait: Are GreenCig and GreenSmoke the same? So many so hard to tell. Cool logo he has though

His posts look like this:

"One method of quitting smoking (and one of the MOST successful ones..) is electronic cigarettes.

One of the reasons alot of smokers fail, is because they can't handle giving up the actual habit of "smoking" AND the nicotine at the same time. E-cigs allow you to keep smoking while weening off the nicotine by stepping down the nicotine levels through different cartridges. It works great!

The e-cig looks/feels like a real cig and delivers nicotine in a water vapor that looks/feels just like inhaling smoke: albeit without the tar and many chemicals. I have successfully quit with this and so have many others.

It has been found to be safe. See the article on the New Medical Study proving this at:

The Electric Smoker

Get more info on the electronic cigarette at:

Green Smoke Electronic Cigarette

Hope this helps someone! "

They vary, but one even goes on to state that "Health New Zealand Ltd tested them and found them to be a safe alternative to cigarettes. Obviously! They have no tar and no carcinogens."

 

[Frankie]

How does that even make sense? Why can't they tax it?

I believe the problem is they conditioned people to believe the tobacco taxes have something common with fight against smoking. If they taxed the product that leads to decrease in tobacco use in the same way as they do the original harmful product, they would have to admit a big lot of hypocrisy. And no politician will do that just for some people who want to quit smoking. No way. No politician would admit he is nothing better than a local drug lord, who does not sell the stuff himself, but reaps the profits nevertheless. On the other hand, if they tried to avoid the "health" aspect of huge taxes (no other product I can recall at the moment is taxed so heavily), then the rate would have to be much lower - and the tax income would drop, too.

 

[Lithium1330]

I think we are not seeing the big picture, we think that 41 million smoker is a lot of smokers, we also think that China imports tobacco from cuba, but... China has 350 million smokers and China is the world's largest tobacco producer, the goverment makes more than $30 billion per year from tobacco, if we look at these data, we can figure out why they invented an e-cigarette, keep people "healthy" but addict, maybe with the chinese e-smokers a 35% can be achieved.

BBC News | Health | Smoking set to kill millions in China

Ban smoking in China? A state-run industry has objections - International Herald Tribune

 

[Myk]

IF there was testing and some kind of assurances from the testing I could see a quick jump in use.
But I don't see those tests happening that quick.

If China backed off the NRT claims and marketed it as alternative tobacco use and the distributors followed suit I could see it grabbing a fair share to use when smoking isn't allowed, like Stonewall but I doubt if it would be 35%.

 

[DCrist721]

IF there was testing and some kind of assurances from the testing I could see a quick jump in use.
But I don't see those tests happening that quick.

If China backed off the NRT claims and marketed it as alternative tobacco use and the distributors followed suit I could see it grabbing a fair share to use when smoking isn't allowed, like Stonewall but I doubt if it would be 35%.

I don't understand why we need these tests to show that e-cigs are safer then analogs. Smoking tobacco causes cancer, however nicotine itself does not. Therefore a device which vaporizes nicotine for inhalation can only be as harmful as nicotine alone is. There are a dozens of other tars, chemicals, and poisons that you are avoiding by vaping, so by avoiding these compounds aren't you being healthier?

 

[Kate]

Nicotine isn't the only thing we are inhaling. Some food flavourings cause lung disease when inhaled and we are inhaling a lot of unusual stuff http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ion/2202-ingredients-cartridges-e-liquid.html

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...scussion/3992-esmoking-myths-3.html#post63735

Most of us think it probably is safer but without scientific proof traders and other vested interests should not make such claims, it is unethical to imply that everything is ok when really it's unknown.

 

[surbitonPete]

All the different Air fresheners and aerosols we use must contain a fair amount of very strange sounding chemicals that we all inhale......I wonder what safety tests they all have to pass.