Blu Cigs released a VV battery?!
- Thread starter OptimoMuffin
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
-
- Tags
- provari
- Status
We need to let go of ancient history and myths created by the ANTZ. We've been so brainwashed by ANTZ lies that most of us don't even realize that BT has been developing safer alternatives for decades since those 7 companies were sued and it has been the ANTZ and government agencies lying to us for 30 years not BT. Did those 7 company tobacco executives hide what they knew about the health risks? Probably. But were they doing anything different than other big companies were doing back then? Did anyone really think inhaling smoke into their lungs for 30, 40, 50 years wasn't going to have any adverse effects on anyone? Ask yourself why the tobacco industry is vilified more than any other industry that has engaged in the exact same behavior. We all seem to forget and forgive the oil industry, power industry, automobile industry, food industry and pharma for their transgressions. The difference is the ANTZ. Anti Nicotine and tobacco Zealots. They have kept the hate going with their lies to achieve their goal of a tobacco and nicotine free world. It hasn't been a battle against smoking related diseases and death for them at all. That has just been their cover story for their war against tobacco companies and consumers. All of the things we hate BT for are the same kinds of lies the ANTZ are now telling about e-cigs. Toxic chemicals, targeting children, second & third hand smoke, pushing addiction, innocent victims - all propaganda to keep their lucrative anti industry alive and achieve their tobacco and nicotine free utopia.
The way I see it, the ANTZ are 1,000 times worse than BT and I refuse to further their agenda by trying to be accepted by society repeating ANTZ lies. Rather than trying to get social acceptance continuing to vilify tobacco, I want to enlighten the public about the ANTZ deception and hold them accountable for the 440,000 smokers a year they say BT killed over the past 30 years, when really it was their refusal to admit that NRT doesn't work and smokers only choices were not quit or die. If we simply continue to vilify the tobacco industry, we are only aiding the ANTZ agenda. The ANTZ love to accuse BT of addicting its customers. The ANTZ have systematically moved from "anti smoking" to "anti smoker" to "anti tobacco" to finally, "anti nicotine addiction" regardless of the low health risks. We would be naive to think distancing ourselves from the tobacco industry is going to make us less of a target. The ANTZ are thrilled to have another cause to keep the funding rolling in. Where there is no evidence to support their lies, they'll just make it up or keep pressuring researchers to find "risks" that will be exaggerated in the media, so they can convince the public to vilify and demonize e-cig users just as they did with smokers.
So, instead of trying to win over the ANTZ by supporting their lies and junk science about tobacco, we need to work on exposing those lies. There is nothing wrong with nicotine and low-risk tobacco use anymore than there is with Big Gulps and Starbucks lattes. We won't change attitudes about e-cig use until we get that truth out. But we need know and acknowledge those truths for ourselves first. As long as tobacco continues to be misrepresented, all nicotine products will be guilty by association. I, for one, will not continue to hand them bullets for a gun that I know will be turned on me.
(This is my personal view. The opinions expressed in this post do not reflect CASAA policy nor represent the opinions of other CASAA directors.)
The way I see it, the ANTZ are 1,000 times worse than BT and I refuse to further their agenda by trying to be accepted by society repeating ANTZ lies. Rather than trying to get social acceptance continuing to vilify tobacco, I want to enlighten the public about the ANTZ deception and hold them accountable for the 440,000 smokers a year they say BT killed over the past 30 years, when really it was their refusal to admit that NRT doesn't work and smokers only choices were not quit or die. If we simply continue to vilify the tobacco industry, we are only aiding the ANTZ agenda. The ANTZ love to accuse BT of addicting its customers. The ANTZ have systematically moved from "anti smoking" to "anti smoker" to "anti tobacco" to finally, "anti nicotine addiction" regardless of the low health risks. We would be naive to think distancing ourselves from the tobacco industry is going to make us less of a target. The ANTZ are thrilled to have another cause to keep the funding rolling in. Where there is no evidence to support their lies, they'll just make it up or keep pressuring researchers to find "risks" that will be exaggerated in the media, so they can convince the public to vilify and demonize e-cig users just as they did with smokers.
So, instead of trying to win over the ANTZ by supporting their lies and junk science about tobacco, we need to work on exposing those lies. There is nothing wrong with nicotine and low-risk tobacco use anymore than there is with Big Gulps and Starbucks lattes. We won't change attitudes about e-cig use until we get that truth out. But we need know and acknowledge those truths for ourselves first. As long as tobacco continues to be misrepresented, all nicotine products will be guilty by association. I, for one, will not continue to hand them bullets for a gun that I know will be turned on me.
(This is my personal view. The opinions expressed in this post do not reflect CASAA policy nor represent the opinions of other CASAA directors.)
Last edited:
I liked the Stephen Dorff commercial
It was better than some of those off-brand ecig infomercials that come on REAL LATE at night...I sincerely hope no one sees those, lol
And until every vaper understands all of this, we have little chance of ever being free.
In fact, until every one of our friends and family understand this, we have little chance of ever being free.
Last edited:
They fact that Lorillard owns Blu ecig is not visible to most people who are not on ECF and those who buy their products. So, I think it has no visible marketing effect. And BT is in the business for sure with British American Tobacco having bought Intellicig last December.
I wouldn't use their products no matter what they put out, but I have used their products the first day that I quit and it found it very effective. It would be good if they came out a variety of stuff, especially if people could get it from Walgreens or wherever Blu is sold. I will always distrust them because they're owned by BT though.
The fact is that Lorillard is in the e-cig business, and that makes them a part of the e-cig community whether we like it or not.
So maybe we should think about whether it's wise to cut off our nose to spite our face.
So maybe we should think about whether it's wise to cut off our nose to spite our face.
I support it. I want tobacco companies to get in on the e cig so they can start banking in on it instead of trying to kill it. If they're part of it they arent going to try to chop off their own legs.
I completely agree with your stance about ANTZ Kristen, BUT I do not think for one second we should "cozy up" to BT either.
In fact, it's not just BT. It's almost ANY morally bankrupt company (i.e. those that live only for the bottom line, without regard for absolutely anything else), that draws my ire these days, but I digress.
BT made their beds by extensively lying and buying their way for decades. I think it would be absolutely terrific if everyone of them would focus hard on developing e-cig tech, and making it an even better alternative than it already is. But who among us TRUSTS them to do so?
Don't misunderstand me. I would have zero problem with BT (or anyone else) making enormous profit from vaping. I have no problem with that at all! I just don't want corners cut, deceitful use of additives to keep us coming back, and REAL product development for the purposes of improvement WITHOUT harming the users of such!
I would trust a tobacco company as much as I would any other company - including most e-cigarette companies. I don't fool myself by believing that most e-cigarette companies are above the unethical behaviors of any other industry just because they are run by vapers. Most AREN'T run by vapers and unethical behavior is rampant. If anything, BT has more to prove and will likely make a greater effort to gain public trust. If we are going to base our trust on a industry never "lying and buying their way for decades" in the distant past, that will leave us with very few options - if any! I cannot think of any industry with a completely unblemished past.
Comments like "who among us TRUSTS them" and "deceitful use of additives" tells me you haven't let go of all of that ANTZ brainwashing yet.
Think hard about where that accusation comes from and who created the "evidence" to support it. That's not to say I don't have other reasons to be wary of the big tobacco companies entering the market - same as I am of the big e-cigarette companies and associations. I don't trust them to do anything more than protect their business models and throw vapers like us (who don't use pre-filled carts in just 18 mg or less tobacco and menthol flavors) under the bus in order to corner the market. That is very likely to be the main fight we will have with the tobacco company e-cigarettes and BE (big e-cig) companies.
But as far as BT knowingly adding chemicals to e-cigarettes that would harm consumers? That is just illogical and pure fear mongering based on ANTZ lies, IMO.
In this day and age, that would be the fastest way to go out of business.
Ok, Ms. Kristin, you make some very compelling arguments.
It's my view, that current and formers smokers alike who don't take responsibility for there own actions deserve what they get. I'm not willing to give BT a pass because of their users personal responsibility either. I do believe BT damned good and well knew what they were putting in their products, and I think BT damned good and well knew that those things were harmful. We all tout the 1000's of known chemicals and carcinogens found in cigarette smoke right here on ECF! To think that BT was unaware of these harmful ingredients, and unknowingly added them to their products is preposterous. That's what concerns me about these same people getting into the vaping world, in force!
As far as vape shops and juice/gear suppliers go, I looked for exactly what you stated. Before I made my "second" vaping purchase (for the record, my "first" e-cig was a Blu disposable...ironic huh? )...and after a lot of search time and review, I found a great place where the owner actually vapes his own stuff, and uses his own gear. Is he there to make money? Without a shadow of a doubt he is! But I don't think for one second, that the man would do so at the knowingly harmful expense of the loyal customers he refers to as "Family".
Are there unscrupulous e-cig companies? Yes ma'am. How do we combat that problem? Identify them, spread the word, and the problem takes care of itself. That's all I'm trying to say about BT. They had their chances. For many decades. I'm done giving chances to them. The onus is upon BT to convince me otherwise.
I really do hear what you're saying. BT has huge revenue streams to draw upon. Cash infusions that would make our common cause much stronger than it is today. I know it's temping to befriend the enemy-of-my-enemy. However, it would take A LOT of cold, hard, substantiated, independent data about any products coming from BT for me to feel comfortable supporting them.
It's my view, that current and formers smokers alike who don't take responsibility for there own actions deserve what they get. I'm not willing to give BT a pass because of their users personal responsibility either. I do believe BT damned good and well knew what they were putting in their products, and I think BT damned good and well knew that those things were harmful. We all tout the 1000's of known chemicals and carcinogens found in cigarette smoke right here on ECF! To think that BT was unaware of these harmful ingredients, and unknowingly added them to their products is preposterous. That's what concerns me about these same people getting into the vaping world, in force!
As far as vape shops and juice/gear suppliers go, I looked for exactly what you stated. Before I made my "second" vaping purchase (for the record, my "first" e-cig was a Blu disposable...ironic huh?
)...and after a lot of search time and review, I found a great place where the owner actually vapes his own stuff, and uses his own gear. Is he there to make money? Without a shadow of a doubt he is! But I don't think for one second, that the man would do so at the knowingly harmful expense of the loyal customers he refers to as "Family".Are there unscrupulous e-cig companies? Yes ma'am. How do we combat that problem? Identify them, spread the word, and the problem takes care of itself. That's all I'm trying to say about BT. They had their chances. For many decades. I'm done giving chances to them. The onus is upon BT to convince me otherwise.
I really do hear what you're saying. BT has huge revenue streams to draw upon. Cash infusions that would make our common cause much stronger than it is today. I know it's temping to befriend the enemy-of-my-enemy. However, it would take A LOT of cold, hard, substantiated, independent data about any products coming from BT for me to feel comfortable supporting them.
Here is where our beliefs differ greatly. I do not believe tobacco companies added chemicals to their products that they knew were harmful. I believe that is a lie and continuing myth perpetrated by the ANTZ in the same vein as "e-cigarettes contain anti freeze."
Consider this - the ANTZ claimed BT was adding harmful and addictive things to their cigarettes, right? That made them "more dangerous" for consumers? Then how do we explain the other convenient ANTZ claim that "organic" or "additive free" cigarettes are not less harmful? If the chemicals BT supposedly added to cigarettes made them "worse," then how come cigarettes without the chemicals are not "better?" Why did the ANTZ demand "safer" cigarettes with lower nicotine and tar yields and once the companies started making them accuse the companies of deceiving the public, because "there is no strong scientific evidence that low-yield cigarettes are less harmful than regular cigarettes" and prohibit the tobacco companies from advertising "light" or "mild?"
They can't have it both ways. If additive-free cigarettes are no less dangerous than those with the supposedly "hazardous" additives, then those additives cannot have been adding any real hazards in the first place! Most of us just assumed that the ANTZ were looking out for us - why would they exaggerate the effect of the additives? (Why would they lie about e-cigarettes?) And most of us have never even looked at that list of 599 additives (required by the government in 1994) that are supposedly so horrible. ALL of the ingredients on the list are approved as food additives (but not for smoking.) The very same argument could be made about inhaling the flavoring additives in e-cigarettes. Are e-cigarette companies secretly trying to poison us with dangerous additives, because they knowingly add flavorings? You can bet the ANTZ would latch onto that one should one or two flavorings show to be potentially harmful down the road.
The fact is, the tobacco-specific nitrosamines they claim cause cancer are present in additive-free cigarettes the same as cigarettes with flavorings (which all of those additives are in there for.) It's not the additives that cause cancer or heart disease and the ANTZ know it - just like they know that the levels of tobacco-specific nitrosamines in e-cigarettes are harmless and the "toxic chemicals" the FDA found in one sample wouldn't be toxic unless you DRANK the contents of a few thousand cartos.
Same thing with the so-called "free base nicotine" that "makes cigarettes more addictive." There is no proof that the additional ammonia (which also occurs naturally) to help improve nicotine absorption makes cigarettes "more addictive." There are no studies that prove this. The ANTZ just postulated that is what happens when you increase nicotine content or absorption. (They have theorized that e-cigarettes may be "more addictive" for the same "absorption" reason and - incredibly - because the e-cigarette doesn't "burn down" smokers don't "know when to stop." This is "science?") These are the same geniuses who believe that reducing nicotine in cigarettes won't make smokers smoke MORE cigarettes to get enough nicotine (and thereby exposing themselves to less nicotine but far more of the SMOKE.) They know that people who switched to lights often would smoke more or cover the holes in the filters - that is called "compensation." Logically, the more nicotine smokers get per puff the LESS they would need to smoke and the less they are exposed to the harmful chemicals found in that smoke.
All of this is not just "my opinion." Look on the ANTZ and government sites. On one page they claim big, evil tobacco companies added insidious chemicals that harm smokers and make them "more addictive" and on another page they essentially admit those additives don't make cigarettes anymore dangerous, because additive-free are just as deadly and just as addictive.
Obviously, I don't think smoking is healthy or I wouldn't be vaping instead. I believe it definitely increases RISK. I do think BT knew that long before they admitted it, but the fact that they didn't want to come out and say it doesn't surprise me. Who were they really fooling? By the time the settlement came around, health groups had been telling people smoking was bad for your health for 20 years already. To suggest that "no one knew" until the companies admitted it is just ridiculous. And the fact that the companies didn't admit that nicotine was addictive is also understandable, because I'm still not convinced myself that nicotine is the sole culprit. After what I see people do vaping and knowing that the gums and patches fail so miserably that nicotine cannot possibly be the only thing keeping people smoking or the NRT would succeed 100%.
Anyhow, THAT is why I don't believe that the tobacco industry is as evil and deceptive as it has been portrayed for the past 30 years. Too much of what the ANTZ claim just doesn't stand up under real scrutiny and I have no faith in anything they've told us for 30 years after watching them lie about e-cigarettes for just the past 3 1/2 years. I'm not defending BT's actions - just shifting the focus of blame.
Edited To Add: There aren't "1000's of known chemicals and carcinogens found in cigarette smoke." There are a few thousand chemicals, but (as with chemicals in our food and air) not all of them are harmful or found at harmful levels. But there are less than 60 carcinogens (many not even HUMAN carcinogens) and they still haven't figured out which actually "cause" smoking-related cancers. My only point in saying that is that anything can be made to sound worse than it really is and we could face the same kind of fact-twisting with e-cigs. If you did a chemical analysis of my peach-strawberry liquid it could probably be claimed there are hundreds, if not thousands, of chemicals in my vapor, too. The artificial flavorings, PG, nicotine and water, analyzed down to parts-per-million, probably would reveal trace amounts of all sorts of scary-sounding chemicals.
I'd like to also point out that not once have I commented in my posts about cozying up to BT for its lobbying power. That is a whole other topic.
(Again - my opinion and does not represent CASAA policy nor the opinions of other CASAA directors.)
Last edited:
The initial question was more geared towards weather or not you would trust the quality of Blu products if they released more advanced products that would be used by experienced vapers here, since their less advanced vaping products fall through a lot.
Sorry - yes. I would maybe try them because just about ALL cig-style batteries kind of suck compared to what I use now, not just blu. At least it would be convenient to get supplies locally (no good e-cig stores anywhere near me.) Can't really use a company's stick battery line as a standard to what they would put out in for an advanced model. But I use an eGo VV, so I'm used to "average" as compared to all of the stunning mods like those seen on ECF, lol! But I doubt that a vv would work well with pre-filled carts and I'm pretty certain that is what blu is sticking to as its business model. So I'd be surprised if they bothered selling advanced products that work best with tanks or drip tips. Putting a prefilled cartridge with filler on my eGo vv would be like using a VCR with my high definition LCD TV, lol!
- Status
