C-SPAN2 starting tobacco coverage now

[Surf Monkey]

The funny thing in this very interesting discussion is that Surf Monkey is articulating Sen. Richard Burr's arguments about allowing less harmful alternatives for those who choose not to quit nicotine.

Essentially, yes. I don't agree with Burr on much, but on this matter we're on the same page. As that Slate article said, the government let smoking go mostly unregulated for two generations due to a lack of scientific evidence showing their potential health risk. Now the government wants to do the opposite with e-cigarettes and ban them BECAUSE there's no scientific evidence showing risk or lack thereof. It's inconsistent and it's bad legislation. Social engineering in so many words. Culture war rather than rational thought.

 

[playerags]

I agree TB. For some reason I was naive in hoping there was a live feed going on the Senators' offices. H.R. 1256 will pass undoubtedly. I just hope everyone paying attention takes away from this a good lesson on how our government really runs this country. This legislation is bad for all citizens of this country, top to bottom.

 

[Wally]

Just to address this particular statement...

It's my understanding, based on decades of reading about smoking and its effects on the health care system, insurance and so forth, that it does have a major impact. I know that there are differing opinions, but even if the risk is half what most people think it is, that's still a major risk. As I've been saying all along, the issue here is one of risk management. The assumption is that e-cigarettes represent a significantly lower risk level than traditional smoking. Therefore, it should be covered by separate legislation. The problem is that alternatives like e-smoking are being lumped in with cigarettes, cigars and chewing tobacco.

I agree completely with you on these issues, I'd just use different language. The e-cig is a major risk (or harm) reduction approach that I personally like a lot; and I'd say that smoking is a significant risk. The problem with the exaggeration of the problems of smoking is that it's driven by the same hysteria that might do in the e-cig. That's why I posted the comment. I don't think we need to fuel the hysteria.

 

[Cancer]

about everything in this thread...Does that make me indecisive?

 

[WerkIt]

It is anti-tobacco -- expect that -- but avoids giving control to the FDA and allows harm reduction alternatives .. snus, dissolvables, e-cigs .. to remain as available options for the smoker wanting to leave cancer sticks behind.

As always, your comments are spot on. To me this appears to be about the conflict at the center of the issue, in the health care field and with the anti movement. The real battle is between the prohibitionists and the harm reductionists. The antis steer towards total prohibition, believing all must quit ALL forms of tobacco and nicotine, because no other alternatives are considered acceptable.

The harm reductionists, whom I like to call the realists or pragmatists, say that total abstinence from tobacco and nicotine is unrealistic and not practical and not necessarily desirable. Since alternatives to analogs, such as dip, chew, snus, dissolvables, e-cigs, etc, can be scientifically demonstrated to cause less health issues than analogs (with rather thin data presently on e-cigs), the prudent thing to do is to focus on harm reduction instead of abstinence, and even formulate tax policies based on level of harm. The antis don't care to hear it because of 'THE CHILDREN!"

(TropicalBob: Please don't refrain too much from commenting in these forums. There are MANY of us who follow you and your comments here. We know you are well informed on many of these issues from the standpoint of facts instead of opinion or emotion, which I personally chalk up to your journalism background. I am one who listened to your warnings months back and stocked up on high nic e-liquid as a result of your 'prophecies in the wilderness '. Although a handful may think you a chicken little, I KNOW you were damn well prescient and I now sit pretty because I listened to your warnings. PLEASE keep it up!)

 

[Wally]

With regard to the idea of stocking up on fluid, how much do people think they can lay in and how long would the supply last?

 

[yvilla]

Wally, nic liquid is reported by several sources, including a major manufacturor, DeKang, to have a shelf life of two years. I would be a bit concerned about some nicotine loss over that long of a period, however.

In any event, quite a few forum members have bought the (roughly) 1/2 liter and liter bottles available at places like Central Trade. Prices are really excellent at that level.

 

[WerkIt]

With regard to the idea of stocking up on fluid, how much do people think they can lay in and how long would the supply last?

I got 100ml of 24 mg tasteless. At the time, I was cutting it to 4mg, which would have lasted me two years, I think. I have since switched to snus and hadn't vaped at all for about 6 weeks, but I pulled out my e-cigs last night and have been hitting them off and on throughout the day, using other liquids I had left over and cutting the 6 mg down to 3 mg.

 

[Kate51]

TropicalBob, Have you ever given a thought to running for the Senate! We need more people like you, you've got a good grip on the issues, that's for sure. I'd be glad to donate if you want to give it a try! You should all be in Wisconsin, we are totally at the mercy of Democrats and none of them can agree on anything except passing the Smoking BAN!
That was one of their priorities, and that's about as far as we got. The newspapers are standing by to hear if the budget got passed, but the committee hearings keep getting postponed, because they can't agree on an Agenda. I guess they decided not to let our prisoners' go, people might not like that so much. You know, the non-violent criminals....if they were really not-so-bad criminal people why are they in prison??? Our road projects are always 10 years late, money got spent on something else that we had to do NOW. When they do get going they're over-budget from the get-go. And it's all Republicans fault, you know, from ten years ago. We need more schools, because the last ones built got moldy. Or something to do with location. Not enough students. Too many students. Teachers need more pay AND a shorter week. Now add on all the Federal BS, and we've got trouble. Right here in River City!! It is just plain sickening. Our newspaper bloggers were kinda complaining because our polititians didn't keep their campaign promises. Geez, be glad they didn't, or we'd REALLY be in a pickle! And it ain't even hurricane season yet...oh, that's a different story....but we're still fighting the not-choice war, but the choice war is almost over, probably...screwed that up too. Maybe we could BUY OUT Afghanistan, wouldn't that work better??? We could move a Chevy plant over there, that would be GREAT!!! And a dealer or two. I mean a car dealer. And I know they're kinda in love with white pick-up trucks with benches in the back.

 

[WerkIt]

Maybe we could BUY Afghanistan, wouldn't that work better???

Naa, we only need an oil pipeline, which has to go in either of Iraq or Afghanistan. Since Iraq is out, you know which country that leaves and we certainly do not need to buy that country to have the pipeline. What would we buy it with anyway? Monopoly money?

 

[halopunker]

I want to rip this ladies face off.

....Honestly...ask any kid if smoking is bad for them...guess what they'll say. I can almost guarantee that they'll say 'Yes it is bad'. It was never about the 'flavors' that 'lured' me into smoking. It was about the time I started drinking that lured me into smoking!

Obviously it's alcohol that needs to be regulated with their thousands of flavors! I'm just so glad my taste buds obviously died when I was 18 because I can't enjoy 'flavors' anymore.

 

[halopunker]

Oh and the vote for the burr/hagan amendment has changed to 4:20pm ET

 

[wiscguy]

TropicalBob, Have you ever given a thought to running for the Senate! We need more people like you, you've got a good grip on the issues, that's for sure. I'd be glad to donate if you want to give it a try! You should all be in Wisconsin, we are totally at the mercy of Democrats and none of them can agree on anything except passing the Smoking BAN!
That was one of their priorities, and that's about as far as we got. The newspapers are standing by to hear if the budget got passed, but the committee hearings keep getting postponed, because they can't agree on an Agenda. I guess they decided not to let our prisoners' go, people might not like that so much. You know, the non-violent criminals....if they were really not-so-bad criminal people why are they in prison??? Our road projects are always 10 years late, money got spent on something else that we had to do NOW. When they do get going they're over-budget from the get-go. And it's all Republicans fault, you know, from ten years ago. We need more schools, because the last ones built got moldy. Or something to do with location. Not enough students. Too many students. Teachers need more pay AND a shorter week. Now add on all the Federal BS, and we've got trouble. Right here in River City!! It is just plain sickening. Our newspaper bloggers were kinda complaining because our polititians didn't keep their campaign promises. Geez, be glad they didn't, or we'd REALLY be in a pickle! And it ain't even hurricane season yet...oh, that's a different story....but we're still fighting the not-choice war, but the choice war is almost over, probably...screwed that up too. Maybe we could BUY OUT Afghanistan, wouldn't that work better??? We could move a Chevy plant over there, that would be GREAT!!! And a dealer or two. I mean a car dealer. And I know they're kinda in love with white pick-up trucks with benches in the back.

Ugh. Kate I agree with you wholeheartedly. I live in the independent republic of Madison lol.

 

[OutWest]

Oh and the vote for the burr/hagan amendment has changed to 4:20pm ET

Thanks for the heads up

 

[OutWest]

I want to rip this ladies face off.

....Honestly...ask any kid if smoking is bad for them...guess what they'll say. I can almost guarantee that they'll say 'Yes it is bad'. It was never about the 'flavors' that 'lured' me into smoking. It was about the time I started drinking that lured me into smoking!

Obviously it's alcohol that needs to be regulated with their thousands of flavors! I'm just so glad my taste buds obviously died when I was 18 because I can't enjoy 'flavors' anymore.

Likewise. In fact, I was drunk on a lemonade flavored drink at a bar in mexico when I first lit up a cig. (that is, unless you count the time when I was 5 when I snuck a snipe out of the car ashtray and tried it and coughed my brains out)

 

[halopunker]

Senate is in Recess until 2:15pm ET

 

[Surf Monkey]

The "it comes in flavors" argument is the weakest one of all. I don't know where this hogwash even came from. I can understand being worried about candy colored packaging and using cartoon characters to hawk cigarettes, but FLAVORS?? Last time I checked, flavors appealed to everyone, adult and child alike. Everything we eat has flavors. Companies flavor everything. It has exactly 0 to do with marketing to children.

So asinine. I mean, what are companies supposed to do? make their products taste like a dog fart so that they'll appeal to adults? Everyone knows that only children like pleasant flavors.

 

[JennFL5366]

Actually, you're wrong on this point. Anarchy is a lack of government. He hasn't said anywhere that we should do away with government, he's simply saying the government shouldn't interfere with individual rights so long as those individual rights don't infringe upon the lifel, liberty and pursuit of happiness of others. I agree with him on this point, and think most rational people would do the same.

this is exactly what i was saying it is my right to put into my body what i would like. apparently it got to you as you have quoted me several times. i just don't see where being long winded will get the point across on how i feel, i keep it simple.;-)

 

[JennFL5366]

Thanks for the support man.... Its surprising to me that not everyone feels this way. Some people seem very quick to accept the fact that the government tells them what they can and can not do...Everyone wants to feel protected by their government. We want to be protected from murder, theft, and extortion. We need the government for contract enforcement. The government was designed to protect our most basic rights.

We do NOT need the government dictating to us aspects of our personal lives that don't directly effect the wellbeing of others. The Federal government was meant to be small.... not the overpowering force it has now become.

i agree on this completely...

 

[JennFL5366]

The assumption is that e-cigarettes represent a significantly lower risk level than traditional smoking. Therefore, it should be covered by separate legislation. The problem is that alternatives like e-smoking are being lumped in with cigarettes, cigars and chewing tobacco.

ok this i can agree with...it should be seperate and shouldn't be lumped in