Also need to stop these fools!

[sherid]

Jeez...! If nicotine users can't get a job, or pay more for their insurance once they get a job, it is the equivalent of assigning a nice big yellow star to their chest. They have ways of making you comply. Drug tests for nicotine...what a wonderful world we live in.

Here are my questions to the b**ch who sent the note. Two separate replies
I find this discriminatory and based upon fallacy. Interesting, since I have not even met the $500 deductible for my insurance due to my lack of use of medical insurance. That has been so for the past 16 years since the birth of my son. I can provide evidence of that. I have no medical issues, take no prescriptions, and cost the non-tobacco users at ***** NOTHING. I, in fact, am subsidizing other employees who do use this coverage more than is probably necessary. I was forced to change from State Teachers' Retirement coverage last year due to their change in policy for those teachers who have retired and are now working. Otherwise, I would not be included in this. Please send me evidence that I have cost your organization ANY extra money because I happen to be a smoker.

I am assuming then that those who work with us who drink too much or are obese will also bear these costs. To not include these people would be discriminatory and not a fair evaluation of who is costing the health system the most money. You mention nicotine testing, so that of course will include those smokers who use nicotine replacement products, including the patch and gum, correct? Will there be weight requirements as well as regular alcohol testing?
Pierre Lemieux, The Economics of Smoking | Library of Economics and Liberty

 

[TropicalBob]

Despite some of our disagreements on ways to get e-smoking recognized, I feel for you, Sherid. I really do. Sort of "been there, done that."

First, my company went to higher insurance premium costs for smokers. Much higher! I paid. Then it was announced that all "designated smoking areas" on the property were being removed and the entire property would be non-smoking. Then we were told that each smoke break required clocking out, so no one would be paid to smoke, and time lost that way must be made up.

I had it made. North of me, the drug tests include cotinine for nicotine use. Our drug tests -- several each year courtesy of insurance requirements -- did not test for that.

That's when I decided to quit, and began using Stonewall and snus. I made it, but was going crazy at five months when I found e-smoking. Now, all three keep me from the yielding to the daily craving to smoke again.

I smoked for 50 years. I loved cigarettes. I felt I was "born to smoke." But I watched a world I could challenge but not change turn against me, not because of who I am, but the group I belonged to -- smokers. You now feel that world closing in. It does make you want to throw up. I agree.

I protested, too, by the way. I was assured there were stacks of eager applicants who wanted my job, and didn't present problems. I stayed right up the moment I could take a buyout and dump that crappy company.

 

[sherid]

My school though is a more blanket policy since it requires no nicotine use to avoid the higher fees. Thanks though for the words.

 

[webtaxman]

Seriously im on both sides of this idealistic battle. I agree with Bob on educating and being a courteous vaper "TO A POINT". I will vape in non-smoking areas freely(Walmart etc) but exhale into my shirt. I will ask if it is an eating place or non-smoking bar. I have never been told no and always demonstrate when asked about my device(cannot wait for my Prodigy). Yet i am ANGRY when someone is wearing too much cologne or perfume and im sneezing,yet i feel powerless to criticize them. I get angry at doorways to eating establishments when 50 smokers are powerbaking in my childs face as we walk in. So in the interest of keeping my sanity, i guess i agree with both of you.

Sorry so long, can't make links:

Ruyan Group Holdings Limited
(0329:Stock Exchange of Hong Kong Limited)

Lik Hon (Inventor and Pharmacist) has been Chief executive officer of Golden Dragon Group Holdings Ltd. since October 15, 2005 and serves as Executive Director. Mr. Hon is a senior pharmacist and one of the co-founders of the Golden Dragon Group Holdings Ltd. and its Executive Vice-Chairman. Mr. Hon has approximately 20 years of experience in the medical field and invented and patented the technology used in Chenlong Baoling Longevity Ginseng products. Mr. Hon was promoted to the position of vice-superintendent of Liaoning Academy of Traditional Chinese Medicine in 1990, and was responsible for the technology development. He has been Director of Weston Technologies Corp. since October 15, 2003. In 1982, Mr. Hon graduated from the Liaoning College of Traditional Chinese Medicine, majoring in pharmacology. Upon graduation he joined Liaoning Academy of Traditional Chinese Medicine.

Read more here:
w w w.r u y a n gr o u p . c o m/epage.php?frameid=6000&pageid=9
(Del the spaces)

Mr. Lik Hon promotes them as:

RUYAN® series products represent a revolutionary breakthrough in safe smoking alternatives. Better than other alternatives currently available in the market, RUYAN® series products fully simulate the entire smoking experience. In China, nearly one million smokers have used RUYAN® and even more have benefited from a reduction in second-hand smoke. RUYAN® is currently sold through partners in countries around the world. And:

"RUYAN PREVAILS IN 2ND LAWSUIT AGAINST COPYCAT MANUFACTURER"
----
I think there is a little rebel in most all of us vapers. Beat the ban” was the initial assertion from the manufacturers. We liked that marketing. I think using the “beat the ban issue” along with “an alternative to smoking” viewpoint are where it should have stopped, and this is where our focus should remain. Using “health” claims” such as “The Healthier Alternative” and any other health related claim obviously was the culprit. If that is the case, the FTC should shut down companies for false advertising, and those only making the 2 legitimate claims above should remain.

The tobaccophobes should fight these devices on the local, even municipal level. Sure, any new state or local law can be passed to prohibit the use of PVs in Bars, restaurants, workplace, etc.
However, this was never done at such a level. It SHOULD have IMHO. Every locality is different, and has different needs. It would be prudent for any litigation to have Mr. Hon appearing at any proceeding in any country where his products are sold, or being "copycatted and marketing false claims.

KISS

 

[Vapor Pete]

Oh please, here's what happened to me an hour ago.
This morning I find a message from my employer, a public school, announcing an important change to our health insurance rates. You know where this is going. As of Jan. 2010, if I do not quit using nicotine, my rates will increase dramatically. "Starting January 1st, tobacco-free employees will no longer be subsidizing the medical insurance premiums of tobacco users. This means that tobacco users will pay a significantly higher insurance premium than non-tobacco users...nicotine testing will likely play a role." I am seething right now, attempting to stop myself from firing back an angry retort to this nonsense. The last significant claim I had to my health insurer was the birth of my son 16 years ago. I have not even met the $500 family deductible for my plan since then. I take no prescriptions and have no known health issues, yet I am blamed for the rising health care costs of my peers who are obese, hypochondriacs, alcoholics, etc It is somehow MY fault, despite my lack of claims and health problems that health care is rising. Excuse me, I have to go sob in the corner after I vomit.
It is not about smoking. It is about NICOTINE. Please FIGHT BACK

Sheri,
I believe there is another thread related to this issue. I was under the impression that this thread was about a group called ASH, who has explicitly stated that e-smokers are, in essence, a bunch of snobs who want their cake and eat it to by using these things to get around a smoking ban... thats where I stepped in and gave my two cents. So my discussion is aimed at the vaping in public debate, not the "Im paying high insurence premiums because of smoking" debate.
I feel your pain on the issue. And you are right, alcohol contributes to more work related injury, job loss, company lawsuits, tardiness, call-ins, and low performance, than any other drug... yet you arent required to pass an alcohol test for pre-employment. So while I agree with you, this thread (I thought) was about something different.
My best,
-VP

 

[ladyraj]

Sheri,
I believe there is another thread related to this issue. I was under the impression that this thread was about a group called ASH, who has explicitly stated that e-smokers are, in essence, a bunch of snobs who want their cake and eat it to by using these things to get around a smoking ban... thats where I stepped in and gave my two cents. So my discussion is aimed at the vaping in public debate, not the "Im paying high insurence premiums because of smoking" debate.
I feel your pain on the issue. And you are right, alcohol contributes to more work related injury, job loss, company lawsuits, tardiness, call-ins, and low performance, than any other drug... yet you arent required to pass an alcohol test for pre-employment. So while I agree with you, this thread (I thought) was about something different.
My best,
-VP

I guess Sheri should have qualified the circumstances of her post regarding the insurance issue. I frequent the Introduction to Action on Smoking and Health, ASH site to know my enemy. The darling of ASH is an attorney and teacher, Mr John Banzhaff. He is behind the development of higher insurance costs for smokers based on a rather fanciful formula where he contends that nicotine users cost America billions of dollars. Thus, he has campaigned with ASH to write letters to our legislators and corporations to bring about this action by Sheri's employer.

What I get from her terminology is that as a vaporer, not a smoker, she will be paying more because of the Banzhaff/ASH contentions that all smokers should pay more. Her insurance carrier will add the cotinine test to their company test and as a vaporer the nicotine will show up. A favorite vehicle for Banzhaff, and therfore ASH, is this site: Free Services for PR :: News :: Press Releases

Here's a link to the site against the e-cig compliments of Banzhaff/ASH:

FDA Begins Regulating E-Cigarettes as Drug-Delivery Devices // ASH's Legal Petition Spurs/Explains Action

His website contains this qualifier: He has also been hailed as "one of the "100 Most Powerful People in Washington." You can find it at: Prof. John F. Banzhaf III of George Washington University Law School and Action on Smoking and Health (ASH)

Further, this statement: Today Mr. Banzhaf remains at the forefront of the antismoking movement as Executive Director of Action on Smoking and Health (ASH), a public interest organization he founded in 1968. At website: What Others Have Said About Action on Smoking and Health (ASH)

So, we are fighting the workings of a very gifted lawyer behind the "charitable" organization of ASH. He is the man behind the curtain. Knowing where this little froggy will jump, may help direct the campaign of e-cigs. I believe that anyone can post on the PR-inside.com site and this may be an avenue for our more articulate writers to counter ASH.

The ECA has already posted on the Pr-inside.com (2 articles): http://www.pr-inside.com/results?cx...lectonic+cigarette+association"&sa=Search#762

 

[sherid]

Sheri,
I believe there is another thread related to this issue. I was under the impression that this thread was about a group called ASH, who has explicitly stated that e-smokers are, in essence, a bunch of snobs who want their cake and eat it to by using these things to get around a smoking ban... thats where I stepped in and gave my two cents. So my discussion is aimed at the vaping in public debate, not the "Im paying high insurence premiums because of smoking" debate.
I feel your pain on the issue. And you are right, alcohol contributes to more work related injury, job loss, company lawsuits, tardiness, call-ins, and low performance, than any other drug... yet you arent required to pass an alcohol test for pre-employment. So while I agree with you, this thread (I thought) was about something different.
My best,
-VP

That was rather snippy.
My best,
Sheri

 

[ladyraj]

----
I think there is a little rebel in most all of us vapers. Beat the ban” was the initial assertion from the manufacturers. We liked that marketing. I think using the “beat the ban issue” along with “an alternative to smoking” viewpoint are where it should have stopped, and this is where our focus should remain. Using “health” claims” such as “The Healthier Alternative” and any other health related claim obviously was the culprit. If that is the case, the FTC should shut down companies for false advertising, and those only making the 2 legitimate claims above should remain.

The tobaccophobes should fight these devices on the local, even municipal level. Sure, any new state or local law can be passed to prohibit the use of PVs in Bars, restaurants, workplace, etc.
However, this was never done at such a level. It SHOULD have IMHO. Every locality is different, and has different needs. It would be prudent for any litigation to have Mr. Hon appearing at any proceeding in any country where his products are sold, or being "copycatted and marketing false claims.

KISS

Sorry I cut a portion of your post but I did it for brevity (although I'm normally long-winded ).

Unfortunately, I predict it may be too late to seperate e-cigs from the health claims. It's everywhere on the internet. Further, I suspect the latest campaign regarding smoking in movies is the precursor to lumping cigarette look-alikes with the anti-smoking rhetoric. This bypasses any legal issues or local issues because this is based on cultural protection of children. But that campaign may be a boon for the e-cig because Hollywood can use the product to side-step the suggested R-rating with a disclaimer. This is similar to what they do at the end of movies regarding the lack of harm to any animals.

 

[Sar]

... "Starting January 1st, tobacco-free employees will no longer be subsidizing the medical insurance premiums of tobacco users. This means that tobacco users will pay a significantly higher insurance premium than non-tobacco users...nicotine testing will likely play a role." ...

Sherid, as a vaper you are not a smoker or tobacco user, so this will not apply to you. Even if they test for and find nicotine, that only means that you have nicotine, not that you are a smoker. If they only use nicotine testing to determine if one is a smoker, they will not be able to claim you are a smoker. As far as I know people chewing nicorette gums are not smokers either.

 

[sherid]

Sherid, as a vaper you are not a smoker or tobacco user, so this will not apply to you. Even if they test for and find nicotine, that only means that you have nicotine, not that you are a smoker. If they only use nicotine testing to determine if one is a smoker, they will not be able to claim you are a smoker. As far as I know people chewing nicorette gums are not smokers either.

I'm not sure I understand what you are saying. The test for nicotine proves you are using tobacco for their purposes. BTW, I am not taking the test because I will opt to pay the higher premiums. Should I decide I want to smoke some real cigs, I will not take the chance of them not covering something should I become sick. Besides that, the stress of knowing that I could not smoke because of the testing and the coverage would definitely drive me to smoke.
It's just the way I am.

 

[playerags]

Sheri,
I believe there is another thread related to this issue. I was under the impression that this thread was about a group called ASH, who has explicitly stated that e-smokers are, in essence, a bunch of snobs who want their cake and eat it to by using these things to get around a smoking ban... thats where I stepped in and gave my two cents. So my discussion is aimed at the vaping in public debate, not the "Im paying high insurence premiums because of smoking" debate.
I feel your pain on the issue. And you are right, alcohol contributes to more work related injury, job loss, company lawsuits, tardiness, call-ins, and low performance, than any other drug... yet you arent required to pass an alcohol test for pre-employment. So while I agree with you, this thread (I thought) was about something different.
My best,
-VP

wow.....thanks for clearing that up, Richard

 

[Sar]

I'm not sure I understand what you are saying. The test for nicotine proves you are using tobacco for their purposes. ...

Sherid, what I meant was that testing for nicotine is no longer proof that someone is a smoker. So if the purpose of their test is to determine who is smoking tobacco, testing for nicotine will not give them valid results. It will only show that a person has nicotine in her/his system, but not how it got there (smoking, nicotine patches or gums, vaping, etc). Of course, if you don't have to take the test, it is even better.

But it really is terrible that the government has no problem with insurance companies forcing smokers to pay more. If the information on the stats site is correct, the government already collects billions in tobacco/smoker tax revenues each year. I've read how that money is being used to finance schools, healthcare for children and such, but I have not seen what portion (or if any) of that tax money is earmarked for smoker's healthcare.

 

[OutWest]

but I have not seen what portion (or if any) of that tax money is earmarked for smoker's healthcare.

I dont have the numbers, but the multistate 1998 Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement [Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement - Wikipedia] was supposed to be used for that (plus prevention and quit smoking programs). Sadly, many states have misappropriated a large part of the funds and used them for other purposes. Ie: Georgia has used a big part of their share for rural economic development and medicaid. [Source:Tobacco Settlement Dollars at Work in Georgia | NowPublic News Coverage] The TMSA also funds the American Legacy Foundation, one of the big opponents of the ecig. Dr. Cheryl Healton, President, American Legacy Foundation is the one that has been on the news quite a bit lately saying that we dont know what is in the liquid in ecigs [I guess she's never heard of water, PG, nicotine, and food grade flavorings] and that kids are at risk of becoming hooked on 'em.

 

[Sar]

I dont have the numbers, but the multistate 1998 Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement [Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement - Wikipedia] was supposed to be used for that (plus prevention and quit smoking programs). Sadly, many states have misappropriated a large part of the funds and used them for other purposes. Ie: Georgia has used a big part of their share for rural economic development and medicaid. [Source:Tobacco Settlement Dollars at Work in Georgia | NowPublic News Coverage] The TMSA also funds the American Legacy Foundation, one of the big opponents of the ecig. Dr. Cheryl Healton, President, American Legacy Foundation is the one that has been on the news quite a bit lately saying that we dont know what is in the liquid in ecigs [I guess she's never heard of water, PG, nicotine, and food grade flavorings] and that kids are at risk of becoming hooked on 'em.

They will fight e-cigs tooth & nail. You know it is possible that she is well informed but listing the ingredients would not really aid her cause.

The sad thing is that if the government bans e-cigs, many vapers will probably go back to analogs and pay huge tax on each pack, portion of which can be used to ensure that e-cigs remain banned.

I found some highlights of how is the cig tax used:

• Dump trucks, golf carts and a course irrigation system, and a new county jail in New York
• Broadband-cable networks in Virginia
• Psychiatric care for prisoners in New Jersey
• Boot camps for juvenile delinquents, alternative schools, and metal detectors and surveillance cameras for schools in Alabama
• Upgrading public television stations with DVD technology in Nevada
• Harbor renovation and museum expansion in Alaska
• Water and sewer improvements in South Carolina
• Pasture and weather monitoring for a thoroughbred association in Kentucky College scholarships in Michigan
• New schools in Alaska and Ohio
• City parks and the purchase of undeveloped land in California
• A senior citizen prescription-drug program and property-tax rebates in Illinois
• Medicaid dental services in Maine
• Water Resources Trust Fund and flood-control projects in North Dakota
• Operating expenses for the Carolina Horse Park, truck-driver training, pine-straw farming research and equipment upgrades at a knitting plant in North Carolina
• A People's Trust Fund, which will generate interest income that can be spent at the legislature's discretion, in South Dakota
• Help in balancing the budget, which used four years of MSA money, in Tennessee
• Rural economic development in Georgia
• Tax rebates in several states
• Offsetting a revenue shortfall in Wisconsin by selling municipal bonds backed by future MSA payments

But I am not sure how valid the above is, since it didn't exactly come from a neutral source: NoCigTax.com Cigarette Taxes - Where Does the Money Go?

 

[Vapor Pete]

So I explain my posts to Ladyraj... she gets it.
Then I explain a post to Sherid, including why I wrote what I wrote, that there is another thread dedicated to smoking and health costs (which she may not have known about), tell her I AGREE with her, that I feel her pain on the issue, and that I thought I was speaking to something completely different... she then says I was "snippy"....
What did I miss?

My best,
-VP

 

[Vapor Pete]

wow.....thanks for clearing that up, Richard

Who are you? I dont believe we've met. My name is Pete, not Richard.
Oh wait...I get it. Were you trying to be clever by calling me Richard, when you meant to call me a d*ck???? LOL! I would say thats rather richard'ish of you, since nothing in my post that you quoted was rude. But your a clever dude, and I like that. Carry on...
My best,
-VP

 

[ladyraj]

They will fight e-cigs tooth & nail. You know it is possible that she is well informed but listing the ingredients would not really aid her cause.

The sad thing is that if the government bans e-cigs, many vapers will probably go back to analogs and pay huge tax on each pack, portion of which can be used to ensure that e-cigs remain banned.

I found some highlights of how is the cig tax used:

• Dump trucks, golf carts and a course irrigation system, and a new county jail in New York
• Broadband-cable networks in Virginia
• Psychiatric care for prisoners in New Jersey
• Boot camps for juvenile delinquents, alternative schools, and metal detectors and surveillance cameras for schools in Alabama
• Upgrading public television stations with DVD technology in Nevada
• Harbor renovation and museum expansion in Alaska
• Water and sewer improvements in South Carolina
• Pasture and weather monitoring for a thoroughbred association in Kentucky College scholarships in Michigan
• New schools in Alaska and Ohio
• City parks and the purchase of undeveloped land in California
• A senior citizen prescription-drug program and property-tax rebates in Illinois
• Medicaid dental services in Maine
• Water Resources Trust Fund and flood-control projects in North Dakota
• Operating expenses for the Carolina Horse Park, truck-driver training, pine-straw farming research and equipment upgrades at a knitting plant in North Carolina
• A People's Trust Fund, which will generate interest income that can be spent at the legislature's discretion, in South Dakota
• Help in balancing the budget, which used four years of MSA money, in Tennessee
• Rural economic development in Georgia
• Tax rebates in several states
• Offsetting a revenue shortfall in Wisconsin by selling municipal bonds backed by future MSA payments

But I am not sure how valid the above is, since it didn't exactly come from a neutral source: NoCigTax.com Cigarette Taxes - Where Does the Money Go?

Here's a little bit of truth (copyrighted by anti-smokers ) that I know people on this forum will freak out about but I must point out something obvious. America is in love with Capitalists, not a Socialists, nor Fascists in our country. Name some large tax-paying companies that have not been stimulated, or the US does not own over 50% of their worthless stock, or that are not in the red...and you may see where this is going. The tobacco companies are solvent despite the fact that approximately 80% of the people who have been exposed to the anti-smoking media blitz think these corporations are demons. What do you think is funding this government in this current era? The tobacco companies are a capitalist endeavor who sell products people buy. I still buy cigarettes and every time I light up I am contributing to my country...do I get a thank you for being so patriotic? No, I get isolated and submitted to repeated abuse by the very charities I fund via the MSA and excessive taxation. What a joke and the only response I get when I make this point is to just quit smoking.

I would hate to lose the pleasure I get from smoking but I would love to have a front row seat to the rats scurrying if their favorite symbol of all that's wrong in the world packs up and travels to distant, more receptive shores. I wish our legislators would make tobacco illegal and just be done with it because only in America could a group profess they are helping you by robbing you blind!!! Salesman are creatures I've always known were trying to sell me something...bottom line is whatever they are selling is going to cost me, the question is how much. I have chosen to buy a legal product that middle-men merely want to get their share of. This is not about "health" ...it never was...it's about money and fanciful concepts such as punitive damages (which is money) help for the societal costs (money) and taxation (money). Historically whenever the government needed to raise funds guess what they taxed?

End of rant!

Small businesses are the backbone of America and much needed in this current era. The e-cig is a growth industry with the potential to bring technology to the table with vendors to sell wares that feed the economy from spending. That it may be less hazardous to smoking cigarettes is merely a bonus to the campaign for marketing, not the driving force that may fuel a poor economy. In my humble opinion, if the campaign had emphasized the e-cig as a growing small business with demostrated trends of consumerism for a lofty market share there would not have been talk of bans. A change in direction is not too late.

If the whole point of e-cig sales was to industriously make money in a niche because there was no regulation and opportunity knocked...who then is responsible when these health claims are queried by the FDA which has been around since about 1906. I submit that some people knew (or should have known) there would be a problem all along and has simply diverted the blame. The anti-smokers could use this argument to go after every e-cig supplier or manufacturer for addicting thousands (if not more) to liquid nicotine and flavorings simply to make a quick buck. The army of letters, petitons, and calls to our government can actually be viewed in negative terms as an indication of how addicted people behave...we better act now to protect them!!! It is all in how one frames the letters and the product because all positives can be perceived as negatives depending how the information is presented. I suspect more emphasis should be played refuting the points that groups such as ASH and the media are spouting!

Ok, I guess I needed to rant more, thanks for reading! Any imput?

 

[Vapor Pete]

Im with you Ladyraj... agreed. Well said, well thought out.
My best,
-VP

 

[LaceyUnderall]

For those who haven't seen this, here is James' response with ecigarettedirect... OfficialWire: A Reply To Ash.org From E Cigarette Direct

 

[TropicalBob]

There are people you talk to, not with. There are people who listen, but do not hear. ASH will not be swayed. James is really preaching to the choir with his well-chosen words in favor of e-smoking. We sing along with him. Attaboy, James!

ASH, however, will be carry on. It has its own choir, its own fanboys, and they're singing the anti song.

P.S. Nice rant, Ladyraj. I find particular truth in this:

I submit that some people knew (or should have known) there would be a problem all along and has simply diverted the blame.

Yes they did know and they did ignore. The pity is we must share the consequences of their marketing folly.