Arkansas war on vaping begins

[ScottP]

but the total numbers were still not a home run with vaping successful at one year at ~20% vs. NRT at 9.9%. So vaping is a great tool, but it still didn't work for the majority of smokers who tried it.

Part of the reason for the low % for vaping is that by the standards they used vaping has not worked for ANYONE on this forum. Only people that switched to vaping from smoking and then went on to quit vaping without relapsing to cigarettes are counted in that %. If they counted how many people used vaping to quit smoking even if still vaping that % would be a lot, lot higher.

That recent survey reported by CNN did show over 50% of Americans believe vaping equal to or greater harm to health than smoking. I think that's a big first fallacy that requires action..

Yes that is a huge issue. If someone has been brainwashed into thinking vaping is way worse than smoking then they hear teens are doing it, it is really easy to sell them on a ban. The sad truth is we don't have the funds to launch a reeducation campaign for the public. We don't have money to make puppet commercials, put up billboards and signs everywhere, etc. We certainly don't have the money or clout to get reporters and journalists (AKA: propaganda mercenaries) to report the truth to the masses. So I am not sure what the answer is.

 

[Eskie]

Part of the reason for the low % for vaping is that by the standards they used vaping has not worked for ANYONE on this forum. Only people that switched to vaping from smoking and then went on to quit vaping without relapsing to cigarettes are counted in that %. If they counted how many people used vaping to quit smoking even if still vaping that % would be a lot, lot higher.

What I was referring to was the recent New England Journal of Medicine article https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1808779

They did allow for continued use when making their calculations. In fact they made note that at the one year point 80% of those successful with vaping were still vaping, versus 9% of those successful with NRT who continued its use at the one year mark.

 

[ScottP]

What I was referring to was the recent New England Journal of Medicine article https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1808779

They did allow for continued use when making their calculations. In fact they made note that at the one year point 80% of those successful with vaping were still vaping, versus 9% of those successful with NRT who continued its use at the one year mark.

Well I stand corrected then.

 

[Eskie]

Nah. There are so many studies out now with so much different data it's hard to keep track of. Your point is still valid. The majority of those who stop smoking with vaping will continue to vape for quite a long time after. If you do exclude them (and I have no doubt we'll see plenty published who do because that wouldn't be a "true" quit rate) the numbers will look far worse. Reading the methods becomes more and more important than ever.

I hate cutting and pasting big chunks, but here's the primary results from it

Spoiler

A total of 886 participants underwent randomization. The 1-year abstinence rate was 18.0% in the e-cigarette group, as compared with 9.9% in the nicotine-replacement group (relative risk, 1.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.30 to 2.58; P<0.001). Among participants with 1-year abstinence, those in the e-cigarette group were more likely than those in the nicotine-replacement group to use their assigned product at 52 weeks (80% [63 of 79 participants] vs. 9% [4 of 44 participants]). Overall, throat or mouth irritation was reported more frequently in the e-cigarette group (65.3%, vs. 51.2% in the nicotine-replacement group) and nausea more frequently in the nicotine-replacement group (37.9%, vs. 31.3% in the e-cigarette group). The e-cigarette group reported greater declines in the incidence of cough and phlegm production from baseline to 52 weeks than did the nicotine-replacement group (relative risk for cough, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.6 to 0.9; relative risk for phlegm, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.6 to 0.9). There were no significant between-group differences in the incidence of wheezing or shortness of breath.

 

[jcoopercam]

It sounds a bit conspiracy theory nut job to say, but when looking at all previous stop smoking programs/aids/gimmicks and comparing them to vaping, the difference is that vaping works where they fail.

In the real world vaping has a far, far higher success rate, and it's long term success not just a year or two and then right back to it again.

And that seems to be the problem. Its not that vapor looks similar to smoke, or that vaping might appear similar in nature, the problem is that we are staying off cigarettes.

For the record: The term "conspiracy theorist" was coined by the FBI back in 1963. It was used against anyone who questioned and/or disputed the Warren Commission Report findings on JFK's assassination. MSM continues to use it against guests, when so instructed.

 

[Jebbn]

For the record: *The term "conspiracy theorist" was coined by the FBI back in 1963. It was used against anyone who questioned and/or disputed the Warren Commission Report findings on JFK's assassination. MSM continues to use it against specific guests, when so instructed.

*citation needed
the origin of the term could very well be a conspiracy theory all by itself.

 

[Opinionated]

For the record: The term "conspiracy theorist" was coined by the FBI back in 1963. It was used against anyone who questioned and/or disputed the Warren Commission Report findings on JFK's assassination. MSM continues to use it against specific guests, when so instructed.

I think for the average Joe questioning government overly much brings to mind tinfoil hat wearing people, so it's likely Hollywood that's been more influential in that regard.

 

[jcoopercam]

Ever notice how the price of a pack of cigarettes always matched the price of a school lunch?

 

[jcoopercam]

I think for the average Joe questioning government overly much brings to mind tinfoil hat wearing people, so it's likely Hollywood that's been more influential in that regard.

Ironic, since people are now buying EMF protective paint for their homes.

 

[Opinionated]

Ironic, since people are now buying EMF protective paint for their homes.

I've never heard of such a thing, but it does seem we are getting off track..

 

[jcoopercam]

I've never heard of such a thing, but it does seem we are getting off track..

We have no influence over what the government does, so what's the point of discussion?

 

[zoiDman]

We have no influence over what the government does, so what's the point of discussion?

Have you ever Considered that there might be an Arkansas Vaper out there who is looking for Information about what is going on in their State?

And then they come to this thread and wade through EMF Paint Videos, School Lunch price comparisons, and the Pro's/Con's of a Plastic Bag surcharge. Just trying to find Something, Anything, related to Arkansas. Or even e-Cigarettes for that matter.

On what page of this Thread do you think they would Give Up?

Nothing wrong with "Discussing" the Government with No Clear direction. In Fact, the ECF has a Complete Section that you can Preach Partisan Beliefs until your Finger Bleed.

It called the OUTSIDE. And this Ain't It.

 

[jcoopercam]

Have you ever Considered that there might be an Arkansas Vaper out there who is looking for Information about what is going on in their State?

And then they come to this thread and wade through EMF Paint Videos, School Lunch price comparisons, and the Pro's/Con's of a Plastic Bag surcharge. Just trying to find Something, Anything, related to Arkansas. Or even e-Cigarettes for that matter.

On what page of this Thread do you think they would Give Up?

Nothing wrong with "Discussing" the Government with No Clear direction. In Fact, the ECF has a Complete Section that you can Preach Partisan Beliefs until your Finger Bleed.

It called the OUTSIDE. And this Ain't It.

Good point! Sorry... I get negative when I'm sick.

 

[DaveP]

Looks like there's some push back going on with the Arkansas legislature. Even the American Heart Association is against it.

Vaping and e-cig regulation bill stalls

More than a dozen spoke out against this bill in a House Rules Committee with just a few speaking for it saying it's about public safety, but the opposition saying it would burden small businesses and preempt local control.

"One of the major concerns we have with this bill is the preemption language that is in this bill, this bill is written by the tobacco industry," said Barbara Kumpe, Government Relations for the American Heart Association.

"Under the definition of manufacturer, which is a whole separate license and a whole separate thing, if you assemble our vapor products, you are a manufacturer, under the lawby taking this tank that has liquid nicotine in it and screwing it in to this device, I have just assembled a vapor product," said Gregory Conley, American Vaping Association President.

 

[ScottP]

Looks like there's some push back going on with the Arkansas legislature. Even the American Heart Association is against it.

Vaping and e-cig regulation bill stalls

While it's awesome people are pushing back, this article is about a completely different 4th bill to mess with vaping, SB 978. Wow AK has it in for vaping.

 

[United States]

We need all toodle puffers to march the capital. Those who exhale tiny whisps of vape....

It can cause the politicians to realize not all vapers exhale copious amounts of vaper like train smoke in the wild west.

Not this guy.
Politicians think this guy is out to make every teenager in America addicted to nicotine,

 

[stols001]

While I am super glad Arkansas has some push back I sort of think the answer is continue to fight... And then do absolutely nothing.

I firmly believe there are enough vapers and would be vapers to have a fairly comprehensive black market and if the early days proved ANYTHING, it is that vapers are a smart, committed lot.

We saw prohibition with alcohol. It failed. I DO TRULY believe the same will hold true for vaping.... It is indeed possible we are headed for a prohibition given where this country now stands.

If so, so be it Say I. I'm going to go with it, even if it means only vaping at certain meetup locations and also in the privacy of my own small, dank Garage in Douglas.

Because *I* will not be stopped. Not until they try to put me in jail. Maybe then I'd have to stop, but I would suggest at that point becoming Crafty.

If Singapore can do it, we can too. Will it suck? Probably more than a free market. But I see prohibition as something that could actually TAKE tobacco down and ESTABLISH vaping. Once and for all. The government will realize it does not have the resources, and they will lose.

Maybe that is optimistic but I do think it is where we are headed.

Anna

 

[jcoopercam]

Since quitting drinking and smoking, my blood pressure went from 198/85 (average) to 128/68 (average). Hasn't been this low since 1979. I also started drinking distilled water, to help clear excess calcium from my system. I think all the above, combined, are responsible for the adjusted reading.

 

[Jebbn]

Since quitting drinking and smoking, my blood pressure went from 198/85 (average) to 128/68 (average). Hasn't been this low since 1979. I also started drinking distilled water, to help clear excess calcium from my system. I think all the above, combined, are responsible for the adjusted reading.

This thread is about the war on vaping in Arkansas. You have diluted the content of it, is that your intention?

 

[Misty]

Well, this thread has officially gone off the rails.

This is not about Republicans vs. Democrats. It's not about Trump vs. Obama. It's not about plastic bags or health care.

My apologies to the vapers of the state of Arkansas (and any other state that follows Arkansas' lead should they pass this), but I'm gonna shut it down...

@Opinionated could you close this thread or refer it over to another mod that could?

Thread closed as per request