Big Tobacco and E-Cigs... A Winning Combination

[DC2]

........................

 

[BillyWJ]

You know, the idea that BP was holding back cures would be believable if there was only one company. The problem is, that the first company that patents a cure for say, the common cold, shuts down all his competition and corners the market. To believe that they were holding back cures, you would have to believe that all the companies were working together and had long range goals. I find that highly unlikely.

The reality is, the kind of decision making by Big Pharma isn't to hide research and cures, it's probably more like "Okay, this line of research, which could lead to a cure, will take 10 years, and cost us 10 billion, and there's no sign of anything we can patent or trademark. This other line of research, which is for treating the symptoms, will cost us 100 million over 5 years, and we can have it on the market and be profitable in 10, and we'll have a patent on it."

 

[Ed_C]

I don't. After a short period of time, the "cure" would be generic and prices would plummet. BP executives aren't that short-sighted.

I may be wrong but I think exclusivity lasts 7 years and patents last 20. Still enough time to make a boat load of money. And I tend to think executives are very short-sighted. I'd think they would care more about their bottom line today, than in 8 years.

 

[BillyWJ]

Yeah nutrition was a big factor at one point and still an issue for much of the world. So many people still don't have a clean drinking supply. It's really criminal that this is the case in this day and age. Also you're right, antibiotics were huge. ....and we get antibiotics from the local witch doctor........oh wait, that's not right, we get them from pharmaceutical companies.

Big Pharma didn't exist like it does now, back then. GlaxoSmithKline didn't discover penicillin, but they'd patent it and profit on it, in a heartbeat, now.

 

[BillyWJ]

I may be wrong but I think exclusivity lasts 7 years and patents last 20. Still enough time to make a boat load of money. And I tend to think executives are very short-sighted. I'd think they would care more about their bottom line today, than in 8 years.

Why can't they care about both? Most big companies I've worked for had short term plans and goals, and long term plans and goals.

Short term is profit. Long term is power.

 

[Ed_C]

At an exorbitant price due to the financial scheme that Big Pharma and the FDA have entered into.

Like I've said, I'm not a huge fan of our, for profit, system. I know there's corruption and huge issues on all sides. I just get tired of this us/them, either/or mentality. I just close down when people start saying "they" do this and "they" do that. The world is just not that simple or black and white. I just don't believe that it's one giant conspiracy. And to tell you the truth, I'm not totally opposed to some sort of hybrid single payer system. Everyone is railing against the system we have, but I've yet to read one suggestion as to how we might improve it.

 

[DC2]

Everyone is railing against the system we have, but I've yet to read one suggestion as to how we might improve it.

Honestly, there is NO way to improve the system, at least to the point of making it what people really want.

Cutting edge medicine is expensive, and can not be afforded by the average person.
And any system that proposes to make it so is either lying, or will quickly bankrupt any country in existence.

The fact is, never ever will the common man be able to afford top-of-the-line medical care.
Magic Johnson and Michael J. Fox notwithstanding.

To think otherwise is pure fantasy.
And this is the REAL reality that no one wants to face or admit.

 

[kathi17]

I think they are more likely to say "Hey, I tried one of those e-cig things, it sucked". I know I tried a hit off of a friends cig-alike a year or two before I started vaping, and I thought "Well, that sucks". Only after another friend started vaping and having success and suggesting I try it did I start googling and find the ECF forum.

I don't think that using a cig-alike and finding that it doesn't work is going to make most people think "Hey, that didn't work worth a darn, so obviously I need to put more time and effort into learning about them". It just makes them think "those suck", then they move on.

That is exactly right Baldr, I tried four different kinds of cigalikes over the last few years, and they didn't work for me. The last time I used them was a little over a year ago. When using them, they helped me cut down, but they weren't great, and I always stopped using them.

When I went into our cigarette shopper just before new years, they had a new type. They were the ego type with clearomizers, and some new juice. They were an off brand, but seemed to be so much better than the cigalikes that I wanted to find out more about them. The juice had no flavor, and only the tobacco flavor was 24. The flavorless 12s, which were supposed to be fruit flavored, did nothing for me. I did a google search, and that's how I found this group. Then I found out about good flavors and better pvs.

If BT are the only ones allowed to sell e-cigs, then everyone will be stuck with only cigalikes, no good flavors, and no way to customize the experience to suit their taste. E-cigs will fail, and BT, BP, and the tax collectors will win.

 

[Rancor0681]

It probably been said already but I'll say it again after trying cigalikes and UPGRADING why would I want to downgrade my experience

 

[Giraut]

First, I have nothing against Big Tobacco. I started smoking in the late 90's so people were well aware of the dangers of smoking.

If you have nothing against big tobacco and you think it's your fault because you should've known better, you're generous beyond belief - to put it politely.

I suppose you started smoking as a kid, or as a young adult. Yes, you made a mistake when you started, but you know what? That's what kids do. They make mistakes. Otherwise they'd be adults. However, the difference between, say, TP'ing someone's house and trying your first cigarette is, you don't become addicted to TP'ing people's houses.

Cigarettes on the other hand get you hooked. It's a drug. Tobacco companies are pushers, plain and simple. And just like pushers, they know perfectly well the kind of crap they're selling, and they've known for at least a hundred years.

Let me repeat this: you should have known, but *THEY F*ING KNEW*! You've been had by drug dealers, and the government, like a giant pimp, collected taxes, profited immensely and turned a blind eye. Nobody in their right mind has "nothing against drug dealers" because they should have known better than to start in the first place.

Tobacco addiction can't be blamed on smokers alone anymore than snort addiction can be blamed on junkies alone. The pushers are very much at fault for selling what they know to be poison for profit. Tobacco industry execs are drug dealers, nothing more. I don't understand why you don't want them all slowly tortured and killed. That's how I feel. At the very least they should be tried for drug trafficking and conspiracy to commit murder.

As for e-cigarettes and liquids sold by tobacco companies, well that's just too easy isn't it? Sell us cancer lollipops for decades, then when it becomes unfashionable, jump on the vaping bandwagon. Sorry, the vaping industry has been kickstarted by folks who wanted free from tobacco shackles, and the tobacco industry .......s have no right to a share of that cake.

Worse, don't you find it extremely cynical that they want to start selling new products specifically designed to get free from their other traditional products? Sell the problem, then sell the cure. The greedy sumb!tches That's utterly despicable.

But it's a free market, and there's no legal way to deny big tobacco the right to profit from e-cigarettes. That's why vapers - who are mostly ex-smokers, well aware of what tobacco does to them - should take matters into their own hands: vote with your wallets. Boycott mods and juices sold by tobacco companies, however good and attractive they may become. When convincing a smoker to quit and switch to vaping, make sure you mention the mods and liquids they shouldn't buying and why. They'll listen, because they too know what the tobacco industry did to them.

My dearest wish is that smokers massively quit smoking (e-cigarettes now makes this possible, for the first time in history), and all boycott e-cigarette products from big tobacco, so that the tobacco industry is denied all souces of income and goes bankrupt.

(Oh, and also, kill all tobacco industry execs. Did I mention that I hate them with a passion?)

 

[Ed_C]

The reality is, the kind of decision making by Big Pharma isn't to hide research and cures, it's probably more like "Okay, this line of research, which could lead to a cure, will take 10 years, and cost us 10 billion, and there's no sign of anything we can patent or trademark. This other line of research, which is for treating the symptoms, will cost us 100 million over 5 years, and we can have it on the market and be profitable in 10, and we'll have a patent on it."

So is this based on anything other than pure speculation?

 

[kathi17]

This is a HUGE point, but it has two sides...

There are those that tried sub-par products and figured this was a good idea and maybe they can find something better.
And there are those that tried sub-par products and figured this was just another gimmick that doesn't work.

It is pretty tricky to figure out what the big picture on this issue really looks like.

That's what happened to me. For four years, I was in the second group. It wasn't until this year that I was in the first group.

I keep hearing people say that they tried those blues or whatever they are called, and they thought they were too expensive and they didn't like them. I always show them my devices, and tell them where to get them, and to come to this forum. The only problem is, the people I tell are only a tiny percentage of the people who try them and who never hear from anyone who knows there are better options.

 

[Myrany]

Do your own research on any big corporation and you will find out that they will do anything in their power to corner a market. It is just good business. As such it is to Big Tobacco's best interest to both make sure that vaping continues to exist and to limit the form it exists in to their own products. As such Big Tobacco is a double edged sword to vaping as we know it.

Big Pharma I do not see profiting from vaping at all. In fact vaping hurts their bottom line both directly and indirectly. Directly as it competes with their Pills, Patches and Gums. Indirectly in medications to treat smoking related diseases. Make no mistake as a business BP wants vaping squashed into the ground.

What dog does the Government have in the hunt. Well given the anti smoking hysteria out there and the resemblance of vaping to smoking they can both sin tax us to death (making a fortune) and get a much needed public opinion boost for making the world safer for kids (or appearing to). Regulating us to hell and back is win/win for the Government.

Make no mistake if we want to keep vaping as we know it, we have a fight on our hands. A BIG ONE!

 

[kathi17]

While I don't necessarily disagree with this, I would really like to shift the focus to Big Pharma.
As far as I'm concerned, they are far more "evil" than Big Tobacco ever was.

But somehow, they are the good guys in the eyes of the public.
And they are also our biggest foes in this fight.

I'd rather focus on that, but that's just me.

It's not just you, I think BP is more worrisome as well.

 

[NiNi]

I'm sorry for all your pain and suffering, but how do you explain that people are living so much longer? As for suicidal ideologies with meds that are for the treatment of people who already have suicidal ideologies, it doesn't seem unreasonable that suicidal ideologies would be listed. Granted that there are bad drugs out there and good drugs that can have very bad side effects. Doctors should be very clear what side effects are possible with any treatment and what the rates of occurrence of these are. We live in a capitalist country and money motivates people. Until we get profit out of medicine there will be abuses. Do you have any suggestions for a better system? I'd be happy to listen.

OFF TOPIC: The point: BP would rather continually treat you for the same illness than find the cure.
20 years ago, many HIV and AIDS afflicted patients were receiving far better medications in Canada and Scandinavia. Many forms of cancer were put in remission or diminished by treatments also available in Scandinavia, mainly Sweden, 40 years ago.
There is medication such as Buprenorphine that has been in studies since the 90's for depression, but it's schedule III status and on label use as detox for opiod users has stalled the process. Dr's are more frequently prescribing it "off label" for depression if they are not receiving Federal funds. Tetrahydrocannabinol has been studied time and again to alleviate depression. Again, Dr's are more frequently prescribing this for depression, in states where it is medically legal, under the guise of the patient being in chronic pain.
And as far as BP listing possible side effects, "black box label".......BP has nothing to do with it, the FDA does that and only because BP is negligent. If BP doesn't list side effects, how can a Dr. know? The FDA was responsible for "black boxing" anti-depressants, NOT BP.
A huge change in longevity and health was antibiotics, early VACCINATIONS, hygiene, healthy diet choices and their accessibility, and environmental awareness.

But I digress, this thread is about vaping and BT.

 

[molimelight]

All this in response to "While those 'innocent' users of Big Tobacco have zero blood on their hands?" Still curious what your honest response to that question is? Though I can perhaps accurately guess given your implications in your response.

If you mean the blood of other's on their hands, no I haven't lied to and someone and worked to make cigarettes more addictive. I haven't marketed cigarettes to kids and teens. (Go look at some of the old ads for cigarettes. They were as geared toward youth as Coca Cola.) If you mean personal responsibility for taking up something that I know is addictive? I never said (and I challenge you to quote me where I have) that holding BT responsibility for their criminal behavior absolves me of the consequences of my actions. I deal with both the addict and the dealer in my job and both have to answer for the laws they broke. I have a little more compassion for one than the other. I guess in your eyes they're the same.

Oh look, another hit piece that seeks to absolve users of responsibility for their choices.

(See above.) And you figured this out without actually watching the movie? Amazing. In case you're interested, they too do not absolve any individual of the consequences of their actions. It doesn't make BT any less guilty of what they have done.

I'd enter into that discussion/debate.

There's little to debate here. Studies have shown that nicotine rates far above alcohol when using first use to dependence as a measure.

(Probability of Transition From First Use to Dependence On a Substance) "In a large, nationally representative sample of US adults, the cumulative probability of transition to dependence was highest for nicotine users, followed by ....... users, alcohol users and, lastly, ........ users. The transition to ........ or ....... dependence occurred faster than the transition to nicotine or alcohol dependence. Furthermore, there were important variations in the probability of becoming dependent across the different racial-ethnic groups. Most predictors of transition were common across substances.

"Consistent with previous estimates from the National Comorbidity Survey (Wagner and Anthony, 2002a), the cumulative probability of transition from use to dependence a decade after use onset was 14.8% among ....... users, 11.0% among alcohol users, and 5.9% among ........ users. This probability was 15.6% among nicotine users. Furthermore, lifetime cumulative probability estimates indicated that 67.5% of nicotine users, 22.7% of alcohol users, 20.9% of ....... users, and 8.9% of ........ users would become dependent at some time in their life."

Source: Catalina Lopez-Quintero, et al., "Probability and Predictors of Transition From First Use to Dependence on Nicotine, Alcohol, ........, and Cocaione: Results of the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC)," Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 2011 May 1; 115(1-2): 120-130.

I quit cold turkey (for 8.5 years). I know of many alcohol drinkers that don't fit category of chronic alcoholic but do fit category of 'have problems with use of it' and who seemingly have no desire to stop forever. I think I could count on one hand the amount of actual social drinkers and not people who claim that but are essentially lying to themselves and whoever will listen. Becomes a game of relativity and then the fall back position of "well, it's legal."

You quit cold turkey, what? Alcohol, Cigarettes? No treatment, 12-Step group? And if you're capable of doing that, then, good lord, what are you doing here messing with vaping?

Disagree, I know of several people who started/tried nicotine and didn't get hooked. I know of others who are social smokers in the vein of social drinkers above. I still smoke and don't crave them.

See the study quoted above. I also know "Social Smokers" who bum and bum and bum until people won't bum them anymore then they buy a pack and then the next pack, and then...

Thank you. I will and won't be shy about discussing this topic.

I kinda figured as much...

 

[BillyWJ]

If you have nothing against big tobacco and you think it's your fault because you should've known better, you're generous beyond belief - to put it politely.

I suppose you started smoking as a kid, or as a young adult. Yes, you made a mistake when you started, but you know what? That's what kids do. They make mistakes. Otherwise they'd be adults. However, the difference between, say, TP'ing someone's house and trying your first cigarette is, you don't become addicted to TP'ing people's houses.

I don't think anyone would disagree that any of us were unaware of the addictive qualities of cigarettes - I started smoking of my own free will, I own that. But, what I have against Big Tobacco is how they have engineered that product to make the addiction more severe, to boost profits. I could have researched it, but I didn't. I own that too. But like most smokers, I thought they were just selling me chopped up tobacco in a paper tube, not all of the other nasty crap they put in there. That's on them, 100%.

That does not bar me from having issues with them now, now that I'm aware of it.

 

[BillyWJ]

So is this based on anything other than pure speculation?

.............

 

[Ed_C]

Nope. Is your question based on anything other than a passive aggressive response to being wrong?

No Billy it wasn't passive/aggressive, it was just a honest question and I'm really not sure what I was wrong about as I made no statement. I was just going by what you said and the way you started out by saying "it's probably more like". I'm sorry if I came across a little abrasively. I just like to know why someone thinks the way the do and when people start lumping large groups together and making far reaching claims about them, it puts up a red flag for me. I have no idea if your statement is generally true or not and you didn't give any background as to why you thought that way. No hard feelings.

 

[BillyWJ]

No Billy it wasn't passive/aggressive, it was just a honest question and I'm really not sure what I was wrong about as I made no statement. I was just going by what you said and the way you started out by saying "it's probably more like". I'm sorry if I came across a little abrasively. I just like to know why someone thinks the way the do and when people start lumping large groups together and making far reaching claims about them, it puts up a red flag for me. I have no idea if your statement is generally true or not and you didn't give any background as to why you thought that way. No hard feelings.

Sorry, I totally misread that. We're friends.