Article from local major daily newspaper

[Jman8]

It is the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and article is titled Electronic cigarette business booming

It is actually more fair than I thought it would be given my experience with this newspaper (I used to work in the company, so very familiar with this paper and its editorial leanings).

I learned of local vape shops that I didn't know existed, all of which are just far enough way to have me likely stick with online sales, but I still like that there are now ones than are less than 30 miles away. One quote by a vape vendor, that I hadn't heard of until this article, was something I found troubling.

"Regulations will, in general, be good for our particular business," said Don Muehlbauer, owner of Securience, which says it, too, is among the nation's biggest manufacturers of e-cigarette liquids. "They will drive out the little players."

Which makes me want to contact Mr. Muehlbauer and ask if the had more to say than this as it kinda makes him come off as somewhere between greedy and out of touch with struggle in vaping industry. Though I'm guessing he is likely as much or more in touch with that struggle than me, a consumer.

Everything else in article I had heard before. As there wasn't much on the negative side it was a decent article, IMO. Though it did lead to about 20 min. conversation between me and a family member (ex-smoker) who initiated that discussion, based on the article. After 20 min. I won the argument. And after winning I noticed something interesting which is if this same sort of discussion had ensued when I was in smoking logs mode, I would've had to have one either during or right after. Yet, in this discussion, I didn't vape once, didn't think about needing to vape at any point and even when I was done, after getting riled up for a little bit, I didn't need to go vape to ease my stress. IMO, that matters significantly, but is possibly only something that those who enjoy nicotine and have been addicted to logs can actually relate to.

 

[MorpheusPA]

Mind you, I would like to see some standards. However, they don't have to be regulations that put the small fellow out of business. Little things like laws regarding cleanliness and ingredients and the like, roughly the same that apply to the small-business baker.

I also agree that I do want to see long-term studies once these have been around for the long-term. At the moment, that's hampered by the fact that they've only been popular for about five years. Early indications look very good, but many of the studies' methodology and completeness leaves something to be desired on both sides of the fence.

All that having been said, in the decision between smoking and vaping, it's a no brainer. Vape.

 

[DetraMental]

Finally an article that didn't shaft ecigs and their use! Thanks for sharing!

 

[Jman8]

So, another chapter on this article has been written. A person from American Lung Association - Wisconsin wrote a 'letter to the editor' that said what I think vaping community would expect ALA to say. Here is link to that (note: it is the 4th item down on this page).

Because this letter came to my attention from family member who was concerned about my use of eCigs, and as I was prepared to refute the article with this family member, it was suggested that I write to this ALA person. And so I did, today. Fairly pleased with what I said, though possible I am opening up a little can of worms. Not sure, and if anything comes about, I'll perhaps post any updates here on this thread.

 

[AegisPrime]

It is the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and article is titled Electronic cigarette business booming

Sadly some truly bigoted and vile comments by ANTZ there though

 

[Uma]

On a good note, shopping is up so well this year that Amazon had to limit registrations for their special shipping delux pkg. . Like a poster on the thread said, it's good to see people having a little spending money for a change, go Vapers!
Amid holiday delivery woes, Amazon limited Prime - Yahoo Finance

 

[Jman8]

I heard back from the ALA person about letter I sent them a couple days ago. It essentially said (in a respectful tone):

- let us agree to disagree
- it is unwise for people to directly inhale something into their lungs
- until there is a strong body of evidence proving that it will not harm them

*Underlined emphasis done by ALA person

Personally given what I chose to say and how they chose to respond, I see it as clear victory on side of vapers. I am tempted to write back and belabor the point of 'strong evidence' within perspective all other things people either inadvertently inhale or do so by choice, but I feel that reading between the lines, the position is - the evidence is not strong enough for us to change our position. I was just happy to plant the seed, suggesting that fear mongering will not work if you are readily admitting that the evidence of harm is not there.