Australian anger at e-cig in THE TOURIST [Herald Sun]

[Placebo Effect]

Experts hit out at e-cig claims | Herald Sun

Experts hit out at e-cig claims

* Brigid O'Connell
* From: Sunday Herald Sun
* February 20, 2011 12:00AM

ANTI-SMOKING advocates are outraged an electronic cigarette distributor is trumpeting its use by Johnny Depp in a recent hit movie.

Quotes from the antis

"Our jury is still out on whether the e-cigarette is a good device to help people quit smoking," Ms Sharkie said.

"Do we really need more people addicted to nicotine or to addictive devices, when nicotine is such an insidious addiction and so hard to kick?"

. . .

"If you're addicted to e-cigarettes, you go to a milk bar and they don't have them, but they do have normal ones. These e-cigarettes mightn't give you lung cancer, but they can lead to stroke, heart attacks and coronary heart disease."

 

[wv2win]

I guess the "anti's" are as ignorant and dishonest "down-under" as they are in the states.

 

[Rosco]

"These e-cigarettes mightn't give you lung cancer, but they can lead to stroke, heart attacks and coronary heart disease." "

So can "living" in our world today. You want to quit that?

 

[Bustastew]

Haha let them be enraged, I love how it pisses em off that they cant stop us from living healthy lives vaping instead of smoking!

 

[Timtam]

It makes me sick they are labelled as "experts". Seems you don't have to pass primary school to be an "expert" nowadays.

However, having read more of that article, the supplier is not making a good impression, touting them as "healthy". I mean, of course the people with their hands in the pockets of big tobacco and big pharma will jump all over these statements.

 

[keelalagirl55]

These e-cigarettes mightn't give you lung cancer, but they can lead to stroke, heart attacks and coronary heart disease.

And where exactly is this documented???? Typical fear monger!

PGM International director Paul Medarov said e-cigarettes were "safer" than tobacco cigarettes and that the company planned to soon register their product as a smoking cessation device with the Therapeutic Goods Administration

This won't be good for us and the FDA........

 

[FreakyStylie]

>Quit or die.

 

[Beez]

Define "expert." I am an expert in human behavior and I have long said that the way to get people to stop smoking is to give them something that simulates smoking. What we have to have and as soon as possible is hard data on that.... But given how long it takes to get funding and approval for large studies, that could be some years away.

 

[rothenbj]

However, having read more of that article, the supplier is not making a good impression, touting them as "healthy". I mean, of course the people with their hands in the pockets of big tobacco and big pharma will jump all over these statements.

I don't see any issue with what they said if they follow through-

"PGM International director Paul Medarov said e-cigarettes were "safer" than tobacco cigarettes and that the company planned to soon register their product as a smoking cessation device with the Therapeutic Goods Administration."

I'd love to see them prove efficacy and safety. That being said, if Australia's health agency is anything like the FDA, i don't see that happening any time soon and their effort would be squashed like a bug since one of their partners is not looking for approval.

 

[kristin]

I commented:

I find it ironic that these health "experts" oppose the depiction of a safer source of nicotine in this movie, yet have no qualms that Depp's character also smokes tobacco cigarettes!

Yes, nicotine may be addictive, but in smokeless form, it has VERY LOW health risks - comparable to caffeine. The reason nicotine addiction was bad is because it made people SMOKE. If people can have the smoking experience without actual smoke, it will reduce health risks by 98-99%. Why is this not seen as a GOOD thing?

Ice cream is bad for you because it contains loads of fat and sugar, which leads to obesity-related diseases. It's not bad just because it tastes good. Low-fat, sugar-free ice cream is not "good" for you, but it's magnitudes better than the high-fat stuff. E-cigarettes are the "low fat" equivalent of tobacco cigarettes.

The "nicotine is more addictive than ......" claim is ridiculous and simply made up. Did they never stop to consider that a person with an addictive personality, who has given up a ...... addiction that was costing them thier job, family, health, savings and self-worth, would find smoking a lesser of two evils that didn't ruin their daily life yet satisfied a need?

 

[Kempton]

So I commented too but I see not comments posted on the site.

 

[jordan85]

I should tell them how going to see that movie I was forced to see opened my eyes to e-cigs and changed my life forever. Too bad they don't want to hear that

 

[Ravenscroft]

Tonight (Monday) at 6pm our channel 9 news is going to jump in with, I fear. more BS.
Sadly I won't be home to see it.

Looks like it could be starting up for us.

The anti's are all as bad as each other where ever you go.

RC

 

[n2xe]

I commented:

All great points Kristin. I read somewhere that the FDA was considering lowering the nicotine content of cigarettes. I guess their reasoning is that nicotine is bad but someone pointed out that smokers would just smoke more to get the nicotine they want and get a lot more smoke in the process. Thus making smoking even more deadly.

What is so hard to grasp about the concept of tobacco SMOKE???

 

[Thulium]

What is so hard to grasp about the concept of tobacco SMOKE???

I don't think it is about being difficult to grasp, but difficult to admit that the REAL problem is not tobacco or nicotine addiction...its about the addiction to all the money that smoke can generate.

If 'they' admit that the problem really is smoke and the hazards of combustion, they might have to also admit that that is the cause of many other problems including environmental and public health hazards from the petro-chemical (transportation, energy, pharmaceuticals and healthcare) industries.

"E-gizmos" might seem like a small issue, but if you look too closely at a small issue sometimes you discover a much larger Cause.

 

[Kempton]

so can anyone else view the comments, I can't?

 

[kristin]

No, I'm not seeing the comments posted, either.

 

[Delilah718]

It's interesting that since we have stopped smoking, the big demon now is nicotine! I'm so glad for ECF and CASAA, and all of the advocates and ex-smokers who are banding together to let these groups know that they need to find a new scapegoat -- and it is not us!

 

[rothenbj]

All great points Kristin. I read somewhere that the FDA was considering lowering the nicotine content of cigarettes. I guess their reasoning is that nicotine is bad but someone pointed out that smokers would just smoke more to get the nicotine they want and get a lot more smoke in the process. Thus making smoking even more deadly.

What is so hard to grasp about the concept of tobacco SMOKE???

Isn't that basically what the tobacco industry did with lights and ultra lights that the antis complained caused you to smoke more. Now since it's THEIR idea, it's okay or at least will increase the penalty to those that refuse to submit to their demands.

 

[Vocalek]

Isn't that basically what the tobacco industry did with lights and ultra lights that the antis complained caused you to smoke more. Now since it's THEIR idea, it's okay or at least will increase the penalty to those that refuse to submit to their demands.

Actually, it was their idea in the first place. The National Cancer Institute asked the tobacco companies to try to reduce the tar and nicotine in cigarettes, thinking that this would reduce the "addictiveness". Of course, nobody bothered to test out the idea ahead of time. The tobacco companies ran with the idea and the surgeon general advised all us smokers to switch to lights if we were not ready to quit altogether.

Now the antis claim it was all the tobacco companies idea and that they knew it would increase their cigarette sales. I can't say for sure what the tobacco companies knew or didn't know, but I can say that the National Cancer Institute should have known better than to call for implementation of an untested theory.