ASH takes credit for New York's Unanimous 125-0 Vote to Ban e-cigarette Following Email From ASH

[Windsage]

If someone had a reaction to the small amount of PG that might have been exhaled, then they would have a hard time living in the modern world. Most spray type air fresheners, antiperspirants, and many other aerosol products include PG in them.

Go read "Propylene Glycol uses" on Google.

 

[quakereject]

It's not the PG so much, since the moment they tried to vilify that they would be easily countered by it being FDA approved and sold at feckin wal-mart. Not to mention used in so many other things.

It's the mystery chemicals that all these crusading zealots imply is in an ecig, sure there's carcinogens, can't get nicotine currently without carcinogens due to the way it's processed, but it is certainly a damn sight less in concentration than you would get from a regular cigarette. Other than that, there's really not much else.

I can totally understand where a nonsmoker comes from in this respect, and honestly, until a source of any repute tells me there's no nicotine in the exhalation vapor.. I would never smoke in a hospital, and I wouldn't vape in one either.. it's just not worth the risk of causing a problem if there is a tangible nic content in the exhalation and surrounding air. Elsewhere is a different story, simply because people don't go to bars or restaurants because they're suffering from physical problems.

Now Mr. "typical sensitive" guy may very well be sensitive to nicotine, however I still contend that unless he made a concerted effort to inhale or was tied down and forced to breathe in the vapor, that this can't happen. Otherwise he'd need to be in a bubble for the rest of his life with that ridiculous level of sensitivity.

WILL SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN?!?!?!

Face it, if kids are going to smoke, they're going to smoke. They WILL get it somehow, and to say that because PV's are sold over the internet that kids can get it easier.. well hell, I can get cigs delivered to me from the internet... how is this different again? Oh yeah, it's not.

Hell, maybe I should sue the FDA for not doing enough to keep me from buying cigarettes as a kid.. been buying them since I was 14, wherever I wanted. First time I got carded for it was AFTER I turned 18. Now that's efficiency.

 

[Treadmaker]

I havent had a cigarette in three days now that I'm vaping. I suppose thats not factual acordding to Big Pharmas beeoch, the fda. Too bad for them my ecig experience after twenty years of using tobacco cigs is true and accordingly you cant deny the truth in science.

 

[Badfish20]

Where is their proof ? Why are they allowed to make statements with out any proof ?

They must work for FOX news

 

[quakereject]

They must work for FOX news

Or MSNBC... or for that matter, pretty much any media outlet.

 

[me who]

Or MSNBC... or for that matter, pretty much any media outlet.

Agree there, where's all the investigative reporting; you know like the old 60 minutes.

 

[quakereject]

They investigate, but it usually involves one of the interns reading up on it on wikipeida or TMZ, then relaying the info.

 

[thewomenfolk]

No, they obviously don't work for FOX. When the truth doesn't serve ASH well, they resort to lies. I saw several in the original post. What's unbelievable is that those who 'want' to believe ecigs are bad jump on those lies and swallow them whole.

 

[trukinlady]

I actually sent an email to ASH explaining (ineffectually it seems) how e-cigs are helping me break a 32 year cigarette addiction. And just for good measure I threw in a little of my medical history: I'm a 3 time cancer survivor--in remission for 9 years now. None of the cancers I had were related to smoking analogs at all. Here's what I wrote:

"Hello;
E-cigarettes saved my life. I am a 3-time cancer survivor--in remission 9 years--who was addicted to nicotine. After attempting to quit smoking with every Nicotine Replacement Therapy product available, as well as prescription Welbutrin, and Chantix, I was able to SUCCESSFULLY break a 32-year tobacco cigarette addiction using the electronic cigarette. The e-cigarette is not marketed as a smoking cessation device, but thousands of smokers have used it as such to SUCCESSFULLY stop smoking tobacco products permanently. I am just one of many. If e-cigarettes are banned, it will be a death sentence to those who are unable to quit smoking tobacco using more traditional methods. Many people have SUCCESSFULLY stopped using e-cigarettes as well. Or continue using the e-cigarette with no nicotine. If you continue in your efforts to effect a blanket ban on e-cigarettes, you will have millions of smokers whose death could have been prevented by using e-cigarettes to quit nicotine altogether.

Sincerely,
Xxxxxx Xxxxxxx"

My email to them will most likely be deleted without being read. But at least I expressed my opinion!
Vapers need national exposure and support. I'm a big fan of Reader's Digest. They are the most read magazine in the USA, as well as overseas, I believe. They have a tremendous audience! I sent an email to them as well, explaining the current situation. I hope they will do an article about the entire controversy in their "That's Outrageous" section, which profiles situations such as these, like a watchdog organization. I really hope they take an interest in it!
Maybe everyone needs to write or email RD and express their opinions loud and clear! Just kidding!
Maybe its just wishful thinking, but a compromise seems to be the solution to an otherwise volatile situation. I just hope a compromise can be reached!

 

[Devilooman]

It seems that part of this must be libel as there is no way they have any evidence to prove it. Most certainly the part about PG.

 

[laborer75]

We need to organize a huge march on DC and catch the publics eye. What gives some politicians the right to say what we can and cant put into our bodies? I'd bet McDonalds french fries are more toxic than ecigs!!!

 

[crashinbrn]

he just wants to save everybody.
whether we want to be saved or not.
i used to call them militant non-smokers.
now he's just an ....

and he OR his web page really don't deserve any time here either.

 

[quakereject]

He doesn't want to save anyone by this action. Maybe sometime in the past he did, but not now. This is all agenda and bottom lining.

 

[suddenly]

Yeah Quakereject is right!



WILL SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN?!?!?!


Make them steal from their parents like I had to

 

[quasimod]

Agree there, where's all the investigative reporting; you know like the old 60 minutes.

They made most of that crap up too. Just sayin'.

 

[Vap3rLov3r]

They can kiss my ASH!

i 2nd that!!

 

[woolfe99]

One of my favorite pieces of sophistry, this one is hall of fame:

"If you look at how smokeless products are marketed, they are sold as something to use at times you can’t smoke. The implication is you will increase nicotine exposure, not reduce smoking."

Well gee, they aren't allowed to market them as smoking cessation devices, so of course they are going to market them as some kind of supplement to smoking. So they are not allowed to say that they will help you quit smoking, and the fact that they don't is then used as evidence that the device is ineffective for smoking cessation.

These young Jedi masters are strong in the bull......

- wolf

 

[PaulB]

...
Vapers need national exposure and support. I'm a big fan of Reader's Digest. They are the most read magazine in the USA, as well as overseas, I believe. They have a tremendous audience! I sent an email to them as well, explaining the current situation. I hope they will do an article about the entire controversy in their "That's Outrageous" section, which profiles situations such as these, like a watchdog organization. I really hope they take an interest in it!
Maybe everyone needs to write or email RD and express their opinions loud and clelar! Just kidding!
...

Just kidding about Reader's Digest?

I'm very curious about what kind of stand RD might take. Historically, they were an anti-smoking voice in the wilderness dating back, I think to the 1920s. Back in my younger years (1960s-70s) when it came into our home, I remember a fevered pitch of articles exposing this or that awful thing about smoking, well before that kind of thing became prevalent (although they obviously didn't work on me...). So, in a way it would make sense for them to take some sort of position on e-cigarettes. But, given our fortunes with the anti-smoking crowd, I wouldn't necessarily expect the answer we might like to read.

 

[trukinlady]

Just kidding about Reader's Digest?

I'm very curious about what kind of stand RD might take. Historically, they were an anti-smoking voice in the wilderness dating back, I think to the 1920s. Back in my younger years (1960s-70s) when it came into our home, I remember a fevered pitch of articles exposing this or that awful thing about smoking, well before that kind of thing became prevalent (although they obviously didn't work on me...). So, in a way it would make sense for them to take some sort of position on e-cigarettes. But, given our fortunes with the anti-smoking crowd, I wouldn't necessarily expect the answer we might like to read.

Very good point, PaulB. I was unaware of RD's history on smoking. I hope I haven't opened Pandora's box!

 

[kristin]

Petition against ASH et al.

IMPORTANT!! http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-sign-petition-raise-awareness-ecig-bans.html


.