Anyone have any ideas, news or events they feel need CASAA's attention? This is a consumer advocacy group, so let's hear from all you consumers!
CASAA Suggestion Box
- Thread starter halfevildruid
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Get the registration fixed! and some content! I was so excited to see CASAA but after trying to register, it seems it all worked but I can't log in, have seen no updates and still no content on the site.
I think this could be a great thing and I know everyone is very busy with other stuff, but ASH the ACS, the FDA and others work every day against us. The more who get involved, the less work for everyone and the more activism we can do.
I"m super busy too, but i'll help with the little time I do have. If I can get registered that is!
I think this could be a great thing and I know everyone is very busy with other stuff, but ASH the ACS, the FDA and others work every day against us. The more who get involved, the less work for everyone and the more activism we can do.
I"m super busy too, but i'll help with the little time I do have. If I can get registered that is!
All this is in process now. It is no small task, bear with us. We are diligently working to get everything up and running as soon as possible.
Now you're speaking my language!
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...e-page-ranking-communications.html#post691621
Over 90% of e-cig users never read these forums and suppliers would be nuts to send their users to a sea of other supplier advertising. As long as CASAA stays ad-free, it's resources will be a valuable source that suppliers won't feel threatened to share with their customer base.
my suggestion: change the name S in CASAA from smoke-free to smokeless
thus making it one word (non-compound) and a bit more befitting to the acronym
thus making it one word (non-compound) and a bit more befitting to the acronym
I think that "smokeless" is considered equally correct, but personally I prefer "Smoke-free" because "smokeless tobacco" specifically refers to chewable plant material. "Smokeless alternatives" isn't necessarily the same thing, but rather than get bogged down in semantics...I just stick with Smoke-free most of the time.
I keep seeing threads asking people to write senators, and other people/places to help the cause of the electronic cigarette, but I wonder how many people actually do it. I was wondering...
Would it be useful to start a thread specifically for the pupose of emailing the link to some of those places. For example, the OP could write a sort of "form letter" and ECF members could follow with a short post to support it. Possibly saying nothing more than "I agree. Debra T., Kentucky." Much like a petition, I guess.
It would make it very easy for people who might not otherwise get involved.
Just an idea
Would it be useful to start a thread specifically for the pupose of emailing the link to some of those places. For example, the OP could write a sort of "form letter" and ECF members could follow with a short post to support it. Possibly saying nothing more than "I agree. Debra T., Kentucky." Much like a petition, I guess.
It would make it very easy for people who might not otherwise get involved.
Just an idea
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 67
I urge all members of CASAA to contact Indianapolis / Merion County Council urging them to delete the eleven-word e-cigarette clause (that bans usage of e-cigarettes) from the smokefree workplace legislation they are considering on Monday, November 30 at 7PM.
See more details and letters from Smokefree Pennsylvania and American Association of Public Health Physicians at:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...marion-county-have-ecig-ban-2.html#post775913
See more details and letters from Smokefree Pennsylvania and American Association of Public Health Physicians at:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...marion-county-have-ecig-ban-2.html#post775913
Bill,
I've forwareded this to all members in that area. We are in the process of loading the casaa.org site now and will be sending SMS text and email alerts (based on region) as well as posting time-critical "action items" like this as they come in.
Please keep me on speed dial until we can get the infrastructure up and running -
Thanks,
Michal
I've forwareded this to all members in that area. We are in the process of loading the casaa.org site now and will be sending SMS text and email alerts (based on region) as well as posting time-critical "action items" like this as they come in.
Please keep me on speed dial until we can get the infrastructure up and running -
Thanks,
Michal
Thanks Bill.
I'm hoping that you and Dr. Nitzkin are also on the even more ominous New Jersey (statewide) legislative effort?
I'm hoping that you and Dr. Nitzkin are also on the even more ominous New Jersey (statewide) legislative effort?
Hi all, I came across an interesting article at tobaccoanylysis.blogspot.com/2009/07/comparison.html that tells "The rest of the story" as Paul Harvey would have said. This article demonstrated how completely biased the FDA's argument against e-cigs is, and how they failed to disclose the "maximum tobacco-specific nitrosamine levelels in various cigarettes and nicotine delivery porducts"...except for nicotine gum and patch which had zero TSN levels. The results are extraordinary and backed up by serious scientific studies.
Bottom line--The TSN levels (harmful tobacco ingredients in tobacco smoke, and there are four different kinds they test for) in a Marlboro ranges from a total score of 6600 to a high score in another study of an amazing level of 11,190. All of the studies are listed in the article for all to see. The result level for an e-cigarette? Are you ready for this? The total number for the electronic cigarettes they tested (Runyan for this test) averaged 8.183 or to put it another way, only tiny traces, thousands of times less than a burned tobacco cigarette. Barely measurable.
Now this same FDA it telling us it wants to ban this amazing device, take away our freedom of choice and force those of us that choose vapor to smoke because we want to avoid the tar, second hand smoke, carbon monoxide, and all of the other toxins you find in a tobacco cigarette. Why has the FDA chosen to take this stance? Simple, follow the money. We are talking about billions in losses for cigarette manufacturers and pharmaceutical companies with their patches, gums and pills that many of us (myself included) tried, and didn't work for us for a variety of reasons.
Those combined entities have an awful lot of political clout in this country and that is why we must seriously organize protests, contact by email and phone our state representatives and make our voices heard, and demand our right to use the e-cigs.
BTW, I am not claiming the e-cig to be a cessation device for smoking, but the fact is I personally have not smoked a cigarette in three months, and I smoked two packs a day for forty years (I am 57, and my brother quit smoking on his fortieth birthday and died of lung cancer at 64. Turns out they found dangerous levels of radon leaking into his house from his floors, but that is a whole 'nuther thing. I NEVER thought I would see the day I would give them up, (either did my wife) but that is the truth. I love my e-cigs and I AM NOT GOING TO GIVE THEM UP.
Let's get active people!
Bottom line--The TSN levels (harmful tobacco ingredients in tobacco smoke, and there are four different kinds they test for) in a Marlboro ranges from a total score of 6600 to a high score in another study of an amazing level of 11,190. All of the studies are listed in the article for all to see. The result level for an e-cigarette? Are you ready for this? The total number for the electronic cigarettes they tested (Runyan for this test) averaged 8.183 or to put it another way, only tiny traces, thousands of times less than a burned tobacco cigarette. Barely measurable.
Now this same FDA it telling us it wants to ban this amazing device, take away our freedom of choice and force those of us that choose vapor to smoke because we want to avoid the tar, second hand smoke, carbon monoxide, and all of the other toxins you find in a tobacco cigarette. Why has the FDA chosen to take this stance? Simple, follow the money. We are talking about billions in losses for cigarette manufacturers and pharmaceutical companies with their patches, gums and pills that many of us (myself included) tried, and didn't work for us for a variety of reasons.
Those combined entities have an awful lot of political clout in this country and that is why we must seriously organize protests, contact by email and phone our state representatives and make our voices heard, and demand our right to use the e-cigs.
BTW, I am not claiming the e-cig to be a cessation device for smoking, but the fact is I personally have not smoked a cigarette in three months, and I smoked two packs a day for forty years (I am 57, and my brother quit smoking on his fortieth birthday and died of lung cancer at 64. Turns out they found dangerous levels of radon leaking into his house from his floors, but that is a whole 'nuther thing. I NEVER thought I would see the day I would give them up, (either did my wife) but that is the truth. I love my e-cigs and I AM NOT GOING TO GIVE THEM UP.
Let's get active people!
Oops, sorry about the typos, I was really irritated when I typed that post and didn't proofread it well enough...
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 67
Per yvilla's comment, the NJ legislation that was recently approved by the House Health Committee is unlikely to be approved by the full House, the Senate Health Cmte and the full Senate by the end of the legislative session in several weeks.
But if anyone hears/reads that the bill is being pushed by legislative leaders of either party (i.e. on a fast track), please let me and others know immediately. Had I known that the bill was introduced and being considered by the House Health Cmte, I would have contacted them (and urged others to do so as well) urging opposition.
Regarding Paramus (a small town in NJ), Joel Nitzkin and I sent letters to the Paramus Board of Health Secretary (didn't have e-mails of board members) last week on the day they voted to ban use of e-cigarettes in workplaces. But I don't know if the board secretary forwarded our letters to other board members because the secretary supported banning e-cigarette usage.
While this and other e-cigarette websites/blogs provide excellent tools for identifying, monitoring and mobilizing campaigns to oppose/defeat unwarranted e-cigarette prohibition legislation/regulation, these processes are in desparate need of improvement (e.g. 90+% of notes posted in the Campaigning section of this website have little/nothing to do with legislative advocacy).
While I'll try to keep posting notes on various website/blogs, I'm building an e-mail list of folks who are truly interested in doing e-cigarette legislative advocacy (not just whining or opining about it) to whom I can send action alerts to oppose/defeat unwarranted e-cigarette legislation (i.e. provide contact info of elected officials, model letters, and links for bills and news articles).
Anyone who wants to be included/added to my e-mail list, send me an e-mail stating such to smokefree@compuserve.com (and please provide your name as well, as I don't care much for communicating with aliases).
Bill Godshall
But if anyone hears/reads that the bill is being pushed by legislative leaders of either party (i.e. on a fast track), please let me and others know immediately. Had I known that the bill was introduced and being considered by the House Health Cmte, I would have contacted them (and urged others to do so as well) urging opposition.
Regarding Paramus (a small town in NJ), Joel Nitzkin and I sent letters to the Paramus Board of Health Secretary (didn't have e-mails of board members) last week on the day they voted to ban use of e-cigarettes in workplaces. But I don't know if the board secretary forwarded our letters to other board members because the secretary supported banning e-cigarette usage.
While this and other e-cigarette websites/blogs provide excellent tools for identifying, monitoring and mobilizing campaigns to oppose/defeat unwarranted e-cigarette prohibition legislation/regulation, these processes are in desparate need of improvement (e.g. 90+% of notes posted in the Campaigning section of this website have little/nothing to do with legislative advocacy).
While I'll try to keep posting notes on various website/blogs, I'm building an e-mail list of folks who are truly interested in doing e-cigarette legislative advocacy (not just whining or opining about it) to whom I can send action alerts to oppose/defeat unwarranted e-cigarette legislation (i.e. provide contact info of elected officials, model letters, and links for bills and news articles).
Anyone who wants to be included/added to my e-mail list, send me an e-mail stating such to smokefree@compuserve.com (and please provide your name as well, as I don't care much for communicating with aliases).
Bill Godshall
I would encourage all of you to contact Mr Godshall and get on his email list.
Edit to add:
We need to be organized if we are to have any chance at all. Believe that those who value tax dollars over our lives are well organized and well funded. The people we are fighting against are both powerful and relentless. Get involved. Do it today.
"For the evil men of this world to succeed the good men have only to do nothing."
Edit to add:
We need to be organized if we are to have any chance at all. Believe that those who value tax dollars over our lives are well organized and well funded. The people we are fighting against are both powerful and relentless. Get involved. Do it today.
"For the evil men of this world to succeed the good men have only to do nothing."
Last edited:
Well getting to something simpler, but really representing of what a serious
consumer rights group should do.
How about a CASAA-level demand for a fixed discount on all suppliers 0 mg e-juice, this will :
1. be fair since the most expensive part of e-juice is nicotine
2. advocate an image of less harm possible, giving an extra reason for ppl
to wean off nicotine.
3. give ppl a simple goal to 'fight' for or to join CASAA, aka 'advertise' CASAA
as something fundamentally different to ECA ... we are the consumers
afterall
consumer rights group should do.
How about a CASAA-level demand for a fixed discount on all suppliers 0 mg e-juice, this will :
1. be fair since the most expensive part of e-juice is nicotine
2. advocate an image of less harm possible, giving an extra reason for ppl
to wean off nicotine.
3. give ppl a simple goal to 'fight' for or to join CASAA, aka 'advertise' CASAA
as something fundamentally different to ECA ... we are the consumers
afterall
I see where you're going and I like the idea. Like the ATA for the airline industry or AORC for auto manufacturers, we have no real power to enforce anything, but to encourage a generally accepted practices list would be a great thing to get all suppliers to agree to.
We encourage any webmaster to use a CASAA logo and link to our site at www.CASAA.org on their site, but suppliers would have to most to gain (in public trust) by placing one there. Since the logo would imply some sort of CASAA-compliance, we need a set of these GAPs to avoid any fly-by-night scam outfit from misleading the public.
Such a GAP was discussed early on, but I'll bring it up to the BoD as a reminder to start drafting those guidelines.
- Status
