Anti-Vape puppet commercials

[ScottP]

You said they could. To wit:

No, they can't.

Sigh, I guess I wasn't clear, I should have used more pronouns. That post was in response to someone saying that to reduce the nicotine would require not using tobacco. So my response was to point out that apparently they have some process that CAN physically perform the ACT of reducing nic in tobacco and that I have no idea what that process is. Just like they can reduce caffeine in coffee. The "they" in "if they wanted to" was the tobacco processors, not the FDA.

 

[Jebbn]

What do 0nic cigarettes contain? It's not tobacco.

Are you really that stupid? Anyone that has had a 1st year high school biology class knows that. Just because something is safer than something else more dangerous doesn't make it safe. I guess stabbing yourself with a knife is safe because it's safer than shooting youself with a gun? There has been many studies that show wgat I'm saying to be true al9long with COMMON SENSE. Why don't you show me one study, just one, of the many that are out there that say vapiing has no effect at all on the human body? You can't because there isn't one. My statements are proven fact. Vaping is safer than smoking. Not vaping is safer than vaping.
https://www.webmd.com/smoking-cessation/features/vape-debate-electronic-cigarettes
If you do a web search this is the first thing that comes up.

you posted a link to web md. Not sure its worth reading but I will later.
Now, if you could phrase your posts in an adult fashion and drop the personal attacks that would be great. Im trying to ignore the aggressive attitude of the personal attacks on my intelligence and I am a patient and forgiving guy. I understand you are fired up, but you are conducting yourself in a less than mature manner.

I didnt actually say that there was 0mg nic, I was simply inferring that if there was 0mg tobacco Im sure it would be very addictive.
I guess that if I had said that originally you wouldnt have acted out in such an unbecoming fashion. Apologies.


edit: okay, I read the web md.... umm... piece, in the link you provided.
I now understand where you are at. You might want to read some actual study/research papers rather than popular media articles.

 

[Rossum]

even though vaping is safer than smoking vaping is not completely safe. If you smoke it's better to vape. If you don't smoke don't vape.

I agree with this, but the personal attack that surrounds it is uncalled for.

 

[gpjoe]

If kids are vaping, it's bad. Not as bad as smoking, but it sheds a negative light on vaping for all. I am all for restricting access to kids as long as vaping remains fully unrestricted to adults as an alternative to smoking. It's a difficult line to walk and I hope that FDA is up to the task, without burdening those (us) that are merely trying to reduce harm.

 

[Don29palms]

I agree with this, but the personal attack that surrounds it is uncalled for.

Go back to the beginning. It's not a personal attack

 

[Jebbn]

Ok so now I completely understand. You are an idiot. The difference between ignorant and stupid is ignorant can be fixed. You are stupid. The whole point AGAIN that you have no comprehension of is even though vaping is safer than smoking vaping is not completely safe. If you smoke it's better to vape. If you don't smoke don't vape. I also see that you can't and won't post any links showing that vaping is 100% safe. Get an education idiot.

Back off with the personal attacks. Try to be adult.
No where in this thread or any other have I said that vaping is 100% safe. I have never said that at any time. I dont even think that vaping is 100% healthful.
The point I made was that I felt your opinion overstated how harmful vaping was.
In any of it I have not attacked you or your character in any way.
Please go back through the posts and reread them. You will find that I never said vaping was safe and I never out right attacked you in the same way you continually attack me.
I think you have completely grabbed the wrong end of the stick and just ran with it.

 

[Jebbn]

Go back to the beginning. It's not a personal attack

Actually, it very much does feel like it.

 

[Jebbn]

I agree with this, but the personal attack that surrounds it is uncalled for.

If you go through the thread you wont find anything to suggest that I disagree.
I simply think that the unhealthiness of vaping is wildly over stated in some cases and that was the crux of this "whole thing".

 

[dripster]

 

[Jebbn]

So now you're going to lie about what you said. Maybe you should have a ......ed 3rd grader explain it to you. You obviously have no reading comprehension skills. You can't even understand what you wrote much less what I or anyone else wrote. Yes vaping is safer than not smoking. Not vaping is safer than vaping. That is fact. That is the original point I made from the beginning. You had to argue with that. Now you want to lie and say you didn't.

Don, I literally cant lie about what I wrote and have no need to, its up for everyone to see.
All yours, Im out. Stop with the insults, they hide your message and you appear less than you could be.

 

[United States]

What-say you two take it up in PM's so this thread can get back on track.

Pretty please with sugar on top.

 

[Don29palms]

What-say you two take it up in PM's so this thread can get back on track.

Pretty please with sugar on top.

I'm done.

 

[mp25]

I’ve always found it bizarre when people accuse Big Tobacco of propagating anti-vaping messages. First of all, most of the companies have entered the vaping business to some degree. Second, they already lost (big time) with the 1998 settlement. Several years before vaping became popular, not only was the smoking rate already on a steep decline, but the amount of cigarettes being smoked per smoker was substantially lower than prior decades. With high taxes at every level of government and comprehensive indoor smoking bans, there’s no recovering for them.

In short, this campaign has Big Pharma written all over it

 

[DPLongo22]

Ms. Minton has done some nice research and reporting on the impact (and cause) of some of the activism that affects vape.

FDA, Activists Put Smokers' Lives at Risk with Misleading Claims about E-Cigarettes

 

[DPLongo22]

 

[Unforeseen]

Have noticed that the conversation has gotten a bit heated. Please be civil with one another during a discussion. There is no reason to resort to personal attacks.

Any continuation of such actions in this thread may lead to action being taken against ones account.

 

[dripster]

I’ve always found it bizarre when people accuse Big Tobacco of propagating anti-vaping messages. First of all, most of the companies have entered the vaping business to some degree. Second, they already lost (big time) with the 1998 settlement. Several years before vaping became popular, not only was the smoking rate already on a steep decline, but the amount of cigarettes being smoked per smoker was substantially lower than prior decades. With high taxes at every level of government and comprehensive indoor smoking bans, there’s no recovering for them.

In short, this campaign has Big Pharma written all over it

I don't think it is bizarre. The "Big" in "Big Tobacco" suggests they are companies that have all the cash it takes to apply for and to survive the wait for FDA's approval (i.e., the noose that is the PMTA trajectory), and that have all the cash it takes to push for those specific types of strict regulation that will ban all their competition purely out of existence and that will enable them to buy all their dying competition for a shin, with heavy taxation to make vaping less accessible to poor people, to make vaping less attractive to wannabe vapers financially, and to allow tax money to be used to fuel smear campaigns against vaping because they need to sell more tobacco cigarettes if they're going to convert more smokers into those specific types of vapers who can't quit smoking (i.e., dual users) because the vaping products that will be FDA compliant will most likely be those specific types of products that, for reasons that should be completely obvious by now, won't be twice as effective as non-vaping NRTs at helping smokers quit. It's a well thought out strategy IMO, as the fact it looks too far fetched for it to be taken seriously is what's ultimately helping them to keep it all nicely covered up.

 

[dripster]

Look at what happened to Netscape. It went into bankruptcy as a direct result from the fact Microsoft violated the law, after which Microsoft never had to pay any compensation because bankrupt companies can't demand compensation. Sure, Microsoft did lose the trial so they were fined. But this fine was chump's change in comparison to how much they gained by driving Netscape out of business. It's how monopoly always works in America, and, if you don't want to believe that, then all you've got to do is look at what happened to Lehman Brothers to know that it's true.

 

[Ben Killeen]