******** Call to Action! *******

[SSRob]

Might want to ask him to contact the ECA which is what I think you meant. ECF is this forum.

 

[sattec]

Glenn is interested in the double standard appied by the FDA...cigarettes are legal but the product 1400 times more safe is about to be banned, pot is legal (almost) but e-cigs aren't or won't be. I'll clear that up about the ECA/ecf but I think I told him ECA, but there's nothing wrong with him visiting with the ECF board to get the info.....thanks everybody, but I need hundreds of emails or they will pass on the story...hundreds!!!

 

[jimik]

I didn't know he became a Mormon.

What he does stand for is individual liberty.

It would be interesting to see if his conservative-libertarian views are trumped by his religious sensibilities.

Yep, there is a video with him giving his testimony on youtube. He joined before he started on television, actually that is part of his testimony.

It would be interesting to see his views on the matter, I personally think his libertarian views would come first. But who knows.

 

[malyden]

I really don't know if he would support e-cigs as an alternate to regular tobacco. His religion explicitly requires people not to smoke tobacco. Knowing the LDS church, they would likely frown upon use of any product that promotes the use of nicotine and claim it falls under the same category as tobacco. The LDS church is basically against any addictive substance.


If I remember correctly, Glenn is temple worthy which means he adheres strictly to the church as well as to the word of wisdom

He might take a stance, because he seems to be anti-regulation. But at the same time, he could do the exact opposite and paint e-cigs in a bad light.

Having grown up in the LDS church aka Mormon there is nothing in the word of wisdom against nicotine just tobacco so in that sense I do not see a problem. My mom and sister both who are very religious and active in the church look at the ecig as something very good to help smokers.

 

[DisMan]

I didn't know he became a Mormon.

What he does stand for is individual liberty.

It would be interesting to see if his conservative-libertarian views are trumped by his religious sensibilities.

I've heard the guy enough to say that if you don't think like him, you're a ....... He's an elitist jack ......just like Howard Stern. He claims "individual liberty" but he's really only about "Individual liberty if you agree with me."

Again, just like Howard Stern.

Yes, number 3 in the nation. Howard Stern is number 1 in the nation. But that is irrelevant in the political namespace. Glenn Beck is as powerful in politics as Howard Stern is. Neither of them can sway a politician as politicians are not in things "for the ratings".

Seriously, it would be a severely damaging move to get any conservative based individual on the side of e-cigs right now. This is a Democratic government...figure out how to use the Democratic mindset. Focus on how the e-cig could be damaging to the single user, but it's effects on the whole would minimize the damage second hand smoke causes. How it can reduce the long term health expenses of smokers and the economy as a whole. How it reduces cigarette .... pollution in landfills (they take 2 years to decay, you know?) How the smoke is not as "hot" and doesn't produce greenhouse gases (not sure on this one). Stuff like that...that is what the Democrats like to hear.

Focus on protecting the whole, not the right of the individual. Taking the individual route will kill e-cigs future...whether you like it or not, that is where we are today.

 

[Vocalek]

I've heard the guy enough to say that if you don't think like him, you're a ....... He's an elitist jack ......just like Howard Stern. He claims "individual liberty" but he's really only about "Individual liberty if you agree with me."

Again, just like Howard Stern.

Yes, number 3 in the nation. Howard Stern is number 1 in the nation. But that is irrelevant in the political namespace. Glenn Beck is as powerful in politics as Howard Stern is. Neither of them can sway a politician as politicians are not in things "for the ratings".

The approach is called "shock radio." A lot of folks like it. The ones who don't won't be listening.

I don't think the goal is to have Glen Beck sway politicians. Radio & TV personalities don't sway politicians. Voters do.

The goal is to make more of the American Public aware that the government knows something is out there that has already proven that it can help lots and lots of people refrain from smoking tobacco -- and the government wants to keep it off the market.

They (the government) has a lot of explaining to do, but if folks haven't even heard of the issue, they won't be demanding those explanations.

 

[BigJimW]

Just for some flavor, here's one clip of his I NJoy. (Yeah, I crack myself up.)

And Beck isn't kidding about it being big trouble. It's called Hyperinflation, and we're heading right for it. 8-o

 

[DisMan]

The approach is called "shock radio." A lot of folks like it. The ones who don't won't be listening.

I don't think the goal is to have Glen Beck sway politicians. Radio & TV personalities don't sway politicians. Voters do.

The goal is to make more of the American Public aware that the government knows something is out there that has already proven that it can help lots and lots of people refrain from smoking tobacco -- and the government wants to keep it off the market.

They (the government) has a lot of explaining to do, but if folks haven't even heard of the issue, they won't be demanding those explanations.

If you want true success, pass the story to Oprah. She'll discuss the issue at length. She's the one who has the *true power* to sway both audience and politicians. Don't forget, she was critical to Obama's election.

And I don't even watch the lady....

Shock radio is entertaining, but it really doesn't make people think or take action. It just gives people an outlet to hear their thoughts on the airways.

 

[.308]

And Beck isn't kidding about it being big trouble. It's called Hyperinflation, and we're heading right for it. 8-o

Zimbabwe, here we come!

 

[PakAdayX50]

Considering the current political environment, I don't feel that Glenn Beck is going to be our best bet in regards to having someone get our message to legislators who are currently in the majority! He could actually do more harm than good.

I agree. We have to keep this issue away from hot button politics. Beck is about as hot as buttons get.

 

[BigJimW]

Glenn is interested in the double standard appied by the FDA...cigarettes are legal but the product 1400 times more safe is about to be banned, pot is legal (almost) but e-cigs aren't or won't be. I'll clear that up about the ECA/ecf but I think I told him ECA, but there's nothing wrong with him visiting with the ECF board to get the info.....thanks everybody, but I need hundreds of emails or they will pass on the story...hundreds!!!

I sent him a second email:

Dear Mr. Beck,

I’ve heard about the blind following of main stream media for sometime, but until now I didn’t realize how deep it ran. It runs deep.
As concerns are being raised as to the FDAs lab report of the toxins found in the Electronic Cigarette, many questions have been raised. I personally have a few questions and concerns.
I want to give my take on this FDA report. This is basically a rundown of what they supposedly found in their lab report:
Specifically, DPA’s analysis of the electronic cigarette cartridges from the two leading brands revealed the following:

* Diethylene glycol was detected in one cartridge at approximately 1%. Diethylene glycol, an ingredient used in antifreeze, is toxic to humans.
* Certain tobacco-specific nitrosamines which are human carcinogens were detected in half of the samples tested.
* Tobacco-specific impurities suspected of being harmful to humans—anabasine, myosmine, and β-nicotyrine—were detected in a majority of the samples tested.
* The electronic cigarette cartridges that were labeled as containing no nicotine had low levels of nicotine present in all cartridges tested, except one.
* Three different electronic cigarette cartridges with the same label were tested and each cartridge emitted a markedly different amount of nicotine with each puff. The nicotine levels per puff ranged from 26.8 to 43.2 mcg nicotine/100 mL puff.
* One high-nicotine cartridge delivered twice as much nicotine to users when the vapor from that electronic cigarette brand was inhaled than was delivered by a sample of the nicotine inhalation product (used as a control) approved by FDA for use as a smoking cessation aid.
Lets break it down:
* Diethylene glycol was detected in one cartridge at approximately 1%. Diethylene glycol, an ingredient used in antifreeze, is toxic to humans.
Found in HOW MANY cartridges in HOW MANY you tested? I think this was more of a manufacturing defect that needs to be addressed so this does not happen again. Yet, this is the FDAs flagship banter on these things.
* Certain tobacco-specific nitrosamines which are human carcinogens were detected in half of the samples tested.
My question to the FDA would be would they care to specify WHICH ONES were found? It is amazing the news outlets also were silent on the list of these supposed “nitrosamines” they found. Just harped on the anti-freze angle. Without specifics, they can say just about anything you want. And only in HALF the cartridges. What was found in the OTHER half?[/b]
* Tobacco-specific impurities suspected of being harmful to humans—anabasine, myosmine, and β-nicotyrine—were detected in a majority of the samples tested.
“Suspected” with absolutely no evidence to be a fact. And even if they were found, they were in such small traces they had to practically suck on these cartridges with machines that measured in PARTS PER BILLION! They could find impurities in Holy Water if you looked hard enough.
* The electronic cigarette cartridges that were labeled as containing no nicotine had low levels of nicotine present in all cartridges tested, except one.
Alcohol free beer also contains trace elements of alcohol, yet is labeled alcohol free. The nicotine found were in such small traces that legally, like alcohol free beer, could be labeled “nicotine free", as it is in such minute traces it would be impossible for someone to get hooked. PPB tests can reveal a lot. Do the same test on a tomato and they would find nicotine, and probably in the same trace quantities.
* Three different electronic cigarette cartridges with the same label were tested and each cartridge emitted a markedly different amount of nicotine with each puff. The nicotine levels per puff ranged from 26.8 to 43.2 mcg nicotine/100 mL puff.
Same thing happens with a real cigarette. The range of nicotine delivered is in proportion to how the person draws in the drug. Since you were doing such minute testing, it is easy to see a difference in nicotine levels. And the nicotine levels you describe are no higher than a real full strength, non filter cigarette. Which are still legal by the way. Nicotine is NOT cancer causing either.
* One high-nicotine cartridge delivered twice as much nicotine to users when the vapor from that electronic cigarette brand was inhaled than was delivered by a sample of the nicotine inhalation product (used as a control) approved by FDA for use as a smoking cessation aid.
Which is WHY NRTs do not work. The nicotine levels provided do not compensate for the ACTUAL nicotine people get from real cigarettes. Do the same test using a real cigarette and compair it to that inhaler, THEN get back to us.
Overall a very sloppy report that, unfortunately, the world is listening too and may be the start of a public health disaster by providing misinformation to the American public (and the world). This type of report has no place in true science. If the FDA is not willing to release what these so-called nitrosamines that they found are, then it makes the entire report suspect.
* Here are a few media headlines after the FDA press release on electronic cigarettes:
* Electronic cigarettes unsafe, linked to cancer – NOT TRUE – no cases or examples of electronic cigarettes causing cancer exist
* Health officials in the nation have said that the testing of two leading e-cigarette brands has shown that they contain cancer causing chemicals and other toxins, including a major compound used in antifreeze. – NOT TRUE – one cartridge from one company had diethylene glycol (DEG) in it, which is found in antifreeze
* FDA: E-cigarettes are as dangerous as tobacco cigarettes – NOT TRUE – this is crazy
Here is what they actually found:
* Out of 18 cartridges, 1 had diethylene glycol (DEG) in it at less than 1%. One.
* Tobacco specific nitrosamines (TSNA) and tobacco specific impurities were detected in both products at very low levels (taken from the FDA Electronic Cigarette Evaluation conclusion). Makes sense if the nicotine was taken from tobacco. Many FDA approved NRTs have Tobacco specific nitrosamines in them. Also, not all the samples contained TSNA.
* Since 100% of tobacco cigarettes contain multiple carcinogens and only 50% of the electronic cigarette cartridges tested contained detectable levels of carcinogens (and even then it was at “very low levels” according to the report), what is the FDA saying about it’s relative safety compared to tobacco cigarettes.
Here is what they did:
* They received the electronic cigarette test results back on May 4th, 2009.
* They postponed a scheduled press conference from May 5th, 2009 to July 23rd, 2009 at which time they released their findings.
* They tested 14 cartridges from Smoking Everywhere (including zero nicotine) and 4 from Njoy, but didn’t test zero nicotine from Njoy. The FDA has been sued by both these companies.
* They used the Nicotrol Inhaler as a “control” but didn’t test it for anything except nicotine.
For all you “journalists” here are some good questions to ask the FDA:
* Why was the report not released until now?
* Did you test any cartridges other than the 18 you published?
* Why didn’t you test the Nicotrol Inhaler for diethylene glycol or tobacco specific nitrosamines?
* Why didn’t you test the zero nicotine from Njoy?
* How many reported illness from electronic cigarettes have there been?
* How many reported deaths from electronic cigarettes have there been?
* Based on your testing, are electronic cigarettes safer and healthier than tobacco cigarettes to the user and the surrounding public? Or alternatively, are e-cigarette more dangerous or as dangerous as burning tobacco?
* Why was no American made e-liquid tested?
It is important to note for anyone who doesn’t know much about the electronic cigarettes, is that the e-liquid is a separate thing from the device. The e-liquid ingredient list can be reworked to make sure there are no cancer causing substances or even impurities. We need time and support to do this, not misleading press conferences. As an example, rather than propylene glycol (which is where many suspect the DEG came from), you can use food grade vegetable glycerin (VG) as the base. Another good question…..why didn’t the FDA test e-liquid with a VG base. This is a distinct advantage over tobacco cigarettes where it has been proven very difficult to make a combustible product safer or healthier.
Responsible suppliers and manufacturers in the industry are very concerned about the quality of the product and the safety of the users. But calling for a ban on electronic cigarettes because of this limited testing is like pulling all beer off the market because 1 bottle had a mouse in it.
So how did 1 sample with DEG and 5 samples with tobacco specific nitrosamines turn into “electronic cigarettes contain cancer causing antifreeze”? Presentation. Oh yeah….and lack of questions.
But why would the FDA want to skew public perception over the e-cigarette? Well, considering the very large $$$$ involved in NRTs (Nicotine Replacement Therapies) sold by the pharmaceutical and the fact that the FDA receives a lot of it’s funding through pharmaceutical companies, one could speculate that those selling competing products want total control over the market. Conspiracy theory? Maybe. But follow the money trail.
What the FDA wants to do is compare the electronic cigarette to nothing. Therefore, any issues with it are worse than nothing. They need to be compared to tobacco cigarettes. E-Cigarettes are used in the same fashion by the same group of people; tobacco smokers.
The FDA has told anyone with any adverse effects to report them by:
* Regular Mail: use postage-paid FDA form 3500 available at: Download Forms and mail to MedWatch, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20852-9787
* Fax: (800) FDA-0178
* Phone: (800) FDA-1088
I agree. Those with adverse effects should report them. But the method by which they ask for feedback (the mock scientific data in press release form) makes it appear like the FDA wants issues to give them a reason to pull the e-cigarette off the market. For the sake of the thousands and thousands of e-smokers who find it a suitable alternative to burning tobacco, I hope this is not the case.
The FDA goal to pull the electronic cigarette off the market is simple. They want people to go back to the real ones, for the sake of the almighty dollar, and NOT because they have any grave "conserns" over electronic cigarettes. It was not surprising that the Food and Drug Administration cranked out a report like this. It turned out to be nothing more than inept and incomplete, and used gestapo scare tactics to instill fear in the American public by pumping out misinformation and lies using the mass media as their vehicle. The sad fact remains that they have deep pockets, and as American citizens who want to bring the truth out, it leaves us with little resources and as a concequence, it prevents a proper rebuttle. Again, it is no surprise that the government uses this media to further its agenda. It has done so in the past, and it will do so again.
I will leave you to draw your own conclusions.
Thank you for your time.
Moonport Productions
Source: Electronic Cigarettes by INSTEAD E-Cigarette
Official Press Release: How and Why The FDA Misled The Public about Electronic Cigarettes
Issued By: Moonport Productions
Contact Email: webmaster@moonport.org
City/Town: Warwick
State/Province: Rhode Island
Country: United States
Categories: Medical, Government, Health
Tags: fda, ban, electronic cigarettes, Health, deception
Last Updated: Aug 03, 2009

Love or hate this guy, he can get the word out.

 

[Satyr]

And Beck isn't kidding about it being big trouble. It's called Hyperinflation, and we're heading right for it. 8-o

You ain't kiddin', brother! That's why I started hoarding gold and silver 3 years ago. I buy what I can, when I can.

 

[Drunkwaco]

Glenn = wanna be rush limbaugh + even more crazy and less right wing extremest followers. He's in a nut shell Fox news voice of the HATERS

 

[randyc]

EVERYBODY Needs to respond!!

 

[johnwb1]

On July 28th 2009 edition of Fox and Friends, Beck stated that " that Barack Obama was a "racist" who had a "deep-seated hatred for white people and the white culture."
Consequently, advertisers Procter and Gamble, Lawyers.com and Progressive Insurance all pulled their ads from the show. Additionally, Fox is currently getting thousands of requests that he be terminated at this time. The Democrats hold the Presidency, House and senate. They all think he is a quack!

Seriously folks, their are dozens of better options in regards to media contacts who aren't so controversial!

 

[Moobyghost]

Glen beck is a certifiable quack who has his own "news" show. He yells, and cries, and makes fun of anything that is not GOP related.

 

[Straykat]

One thing I think folks can agree on, there is no one spokesperson that everyone will agree with, ever. Any talking head that someone suggests will disagree with someone.

All I know is if I don't want to participate then by all means, I'll pass the opportunity up without hating on the free choices made by others.

 

[mxellis]

Yeah I don't think we should have a guy who equates. the current president with hitler and then says the world would have been a better place if someone had killed Hitler. Is he saying what I think he's saying?

We need to get Matt Salmon out more. He is technically the ECF's spokesman.

Best Regards,

Mr.E

 

[jimik]

Having grown up in the LDS church aka Mormon there is nothing in the word of wisdom against nicotine just tobacco so in that sense I do not see a problem. My mom and sister both who are very religious and active in the church look at the ecig as something very good to help smokers.

I feel like a complete idiot now.. I was looking into ECA, and reading up on Matt Salmon and found that the President of the ECA is a Latter-day saint.

 

[Psyko1]

To truly make things newsworthy it needs to be hit from all angles. From people like Beck and Howard Stern, to Oprah, to people like Jamie and Adam on Mythbusters. Trying to agree on one spokesperson cuts out a large percentage of the population. I never watch Oprah, Never heard of Glen Beck... The world of smokers is a large and varied one. We need to hit all of them to get the word to everyone.