CBC Radio The Current will discuss Ecigs this morning!
- Thread starter Oriana871
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
I don't think it takes insider info to know that's coming. The doctor said it as well, didn't he?
I think HC will be making a move to regulate it, their current policy is clearly not working. There is no problem for us to get nic-juice despite the fact they forbid the sale of it. So I sure they will try and make a move in a way that involves them in the process. The question is, what shape and form will that be?
Also in response about the inside information. It has been reported that the FDA will be looking to regulate e-cigs in April. There are posts here about that. There was some kind of hearing the states earlier this month. Sorry I'm a bit foggy on the details. Right now in Canada, it's a bit like the wild west. Things are going to change, you can almost bank on it.
IN April the FDA will open discussions about what to do,this could take months and months.
Indeed, no such thing as fast track policy in the US, HC will follow what the FDA does.
Now,I've been hearing "sky-failing" theories for years, this is no different.
That being said, it's only wise to be like the Chipmunk, and save for a rainy day:
While I agree with what you wrote, I wouldn't argue that ecigs are 'heathy' (or healthier) but rather 'less harmful' than tobacco cigarettes. We really need to steer clear of making claims that ecigs are 'healthy' until you can cite a health benefit associated with ecigs that is not present in a non-smoker...just sayin'
Well, I agree to agree! I suppose less harmful would better suited. All I'm saying is, its better (health wise) than smoking. I'm no doctor, lets make that clear. I don't know what the long term effects of vaping will hold for me or anyone. Vegetable Glycerin, Propylene Glycol and food flavors were never designed to be inhaled. Long and short of it is, I feel better so it can't be worse, and I'm not alone. So, wouldn't less harmful be healthier? Or is it semantics? I would never encourage a non smoker to vape. In a perfect world, we wouldn't smoke or vape, I see where you are coming from and agree, but, the comparison here is with a smoker, not a non smoker.
If anybody could be a spokesperson for e-cigs, I think you would be it. Your communication style is top notch!
I think it's important to comment on the "normalizing cigarette smoking" argument. Just because something pretty harmless looks like something harmful, doesn't make a case to ban its use in public. If studies show that ecigarettes have minor or no health dangers, that there is no second-hand nicotine and that the odor is not offensive, nor does it linger, then I don't think prohibiting the use in public places or lumping both in the same category in general can be held up legally. I could be wrong... at any rate if someone articulate cares to take up this challenge, please provide an argument to the CBC. Thanks 
.
Cigarette use is not outright banned. Adults can still smoke in front of kids. Alcohol is allowed in public. Sorry for the avid anti-smoking campaigners but I just don't think they have a leg to stand.
Edit: Sorry I'm not articulating well but also trying to work at the same time. The fear that vaping resembles smoking argument needs to be addressed somehow, as I don't think anything legally can be done to treat vaping the same as smoking, based on that fear. And as I said, I could be completely wrong but still there is a possibility that it could be challenged in court. What do you all think?
.Cigarette use is not outright banned. Adults can still smoke in front of kids. Alcohol is allowed in public. Sorry for the avid anti-smoking campaigners but I just don't think they have a leg to stand.
Edit: Sorry I'm not articulating well but also trying to work at the same time. The fear that vaping resembles smoking argument needs to be addressed somehow, as I don't think anything legally can be done to treat vaping the same as smoking, based on that fear. And as I said, I could be completely wrong but still there is a possibility that it could be challenged in court. What do you all think?
Last edited:
I think it's important to comment on the "normalizing cigarette smoking" argument. Just because something pretty harmless looks like something harmful, doesn't make a case to ban its use in public. If studies show that ecigarettes have minor or no health dangers, that there is no second-hand nicotine and that the odor is not offensive, nor does it linger, then I don't think prohibiting the use in public places or lumping both in the same category in general can be held up legally. I could be wrong... at any rate if someone articulate cares to take up this challenge, please provide an argument to the CBC. Thanks
Cigarette use is not outright banned. Adults can still smoke in front of kids. Alcohol is allowed in public. Sorry for the avid anti-smoking campaigners but I just don't think they have a leg to stand.
Edit: Sorry I'm not articulating well but also trying to work at the same time. The fear that vaping resembles smoking argument needs to be addressed somehow, as I don't think anything legally can be done to treat vaping the same as smoking, based on that fear. And as I said, I could be completely wrong but still there is a possibility that it could be challenged in court. What do you all think?
One way to address this would be to ban any device that looks like a cigarette. I've always hated the term e-cig, that's what's lumped us all together. If I have a Silver-dog, a Zenesis, an iHybrid, a VMODxl or an Orion in my hand there is no way that there can be an association with a cigarette. It is DIFFERENT.
True. My friend here at work suggested that if we disguised our PV as an oxygen bottle and had the hoses in our nostrils, even with the vapor being emitted, no one would question us
I'm not keen on the label e-cigarette either. I tell people it's a personal vaporizer. IMO it may mimic a cigarette but it's not. You can explain that to groups like the NSRA, but I'm sure it will fall on deaf ears.
It's a bit Frankenstein's Monster, isn't it? The term (and form factor) that probably helped get the whole thing off the ground may well be the thing that causes the most irrational responses to it.
It absolutely IS semantics but keep in mind, that is what we are dealing with coming from all of the naysayers and health agencies.
Ok I wrote something really fast, hope it comes across ok:
I am writing in reaction to the fear that electronic cigarettes will "undermine tobacco control gain" as stated by Melodie Tilson and further backed up by the Canadian Lung Association. Using an electronic cigarette, although it looks and acts similar to a real one, is not one. An electronic cigarette does not burn carcinogens, it does not smell like a cigarette nor does it produce a foul odor and the water vapor does not linger. It also does not produce "second-hand smoke" Secondhand Electronic Cigarette Vapor is Harmless, New Study Says - Yahoo! News. Not to mention that a majority of the ecigs being used contain no nicotine at all.
One would think that the thousands, if not millions, of people who have had no success quitting smoking from any other NRT, but that have successfully given up smoking with an electronic device, would be a very positive gain. It seems to me that Ms. Tilson, the CLA, Health Canada, etc. are actually cutting off their nose to spite their face. The fact that the anti-smoking campaigns are so set against anything that remotely resembles a cigarette I doubt would legally stand a chance in court. The general public are not their children. There comes a point where they go to far. If they wish to use that argument then I suggest that real cigarettes stop being produced and sold, that alcohol stop be produced and sold and consumed in public, that junk food stop being produced and sold and marketed, that casinos are closed down, that violent computer games be outlawed. People will always have negative influences around them and will find a way to do what they want in the end, no matter what deterrents are set in place.
Electronic cigarettes do not effect non-smokers the same way as real cigarettes. Electronic cigarettes will not promote non smokers to take up smoking. Candy flavored juice will not cause your teenage daughter to take up vaping, and if it does, it's better then smoking. Real cigarettes taste vile compared to an electronic cigarette. Please stop lumping them into the same category. Enough is enough.
I am writing in reaction to the fear that electronic cigarettes will "undermine tobacco control gain" as stated by Melodie Tilson and further backed up by the Canadian Lung Association. Using an electronic cigarette, although it looks and acts similar to a real one, is not one. An electronic cigarette does not burn carcinogens, it does not smell like a cigarette nor does it produce a foul odor and the water vapor does not linger. It also does not produce "second-hand smoke" Secondhand Electronic Cigarette Vapor is Harmless, New Study Says - Yahoo! News. Not to mention that a majority of the ecigs being used contain no nicotine at all.
One would think that the thousands, if not millions, of people who have had no success quitting smoking from any other NRT, but that have successfully given up smoking with an electronic device, would be a very positive gain. It seems to me that Ms. Tilson, the CLA, Health Canada, etc. are actually cutting off their nose to spite their face. The fact that the anti-smoking campaigns are so set against anything that remotely resembles a cigarette I doubt would legally stand a chance in court. The general public are not their children. There comes a point where they go to far. If they wish to use that argument then I suggest that real cigarettes stop being produced and sold, that alcohol stop be produced and sold and consumed in public, that junk food stop being produced and sold and marketed, that casinos are closed down, that violent computer games be outlawed. People will always have negative influences around them and will find a way to do what they want in the end, no matter what deterrents are set in place.
Electronic cigarettes do not effect non-smokers the same way as real cigarettes. Electronic cigarettes will not promote non smokers to take up smoking. Candy flavored juice will not cause your teenage daughter to take up vaping, and if it does, it's better then smoking. Real cigarettes taste vile compared to an electronic cigarette. Please stop lumping them into the same category. Enough is enough.
- Status
Similar threads
