Columbus, Ohio front page

[macaddict]

FYI

The Columbus Dispatch : The controversy over e-cigarettes

This story was on the front page of the Columbus, Ohio Dispatch.
If the link doesn't work it's columbusdispatch.com

 

[eric]

Good find, macaddict.

 

[Tone]

The FDA spokesmann said "There was no mention of e-cigarettes, however, in legislation approved Thursday by the U.S. Senate and yesterday by the House that would give the FDA the power to regulate the content and marketing of cigarettes, Riley said. President Barack Obama, a smoker, has said he will sign the bill".

Interesting.

 

[LuckyCharm]

The article got a bunch of positive comments. Seems like the vast majority of Americans, smokers and nonsmokers alike, view e-cigs favorably. Is it too much to hope for, a massive public outcry in support?

The only error in the article was the quote stating there have been no tests or studies. TobaccoHarmReduction.org has a lot of impartial info and links to more.

~~Cheryl

 

[happily]

Don't like to see anyone quoted on the front page saying "it gives me a bigger buzz than cigarettes"

 

[macaddict]

Good find, macaddict.

Thanks, but didn't have to search to far as it landed on my porch today

 

[Oldnamenomore]

Don't like to see anyone quoted on the front page saying "it gives me a bigger buzz than cigarettes"

shoot I've never gotten a buzz from e-cigs and I hadn't got a buzz from analogs in years.

 

[Surf Monkey]

The FDA spokesmann said "There was no mention of e-cigarettes, however, in legislation approved Thursday by the U.S. Senate and yesterday by the House that would give the FDA the power to regulate the content and marketing of cigarettes, Riley said. President Barack Obama, a smoker, has said he will sign the bill".

Interesting.

This is why all the panic on the board is irrational. We don't know how the legislation will impact e-cigarettes. Anyone who says otherwise is engaged in speculation. It may be speculation based on relevant evidence, but it's still speculation. We still need to wait and see how this plays out.

 

[effigi]

The owner at work had the front page sitting in my office this morning. He thought it was an interesting read. I agree with the "bigger buzz" thing. I havent noticed that. Seems like such a waste of an article to not mention all the good things for e-cigs. Granted, newspapers are newspapers......

 

[happily]

just to clarify I was never discussing the "buzz" part..........just don't want to feed children and opponents of the pv with more ideas.

great buzz=negative press

 

[Surf Monkey]

There's no such thing as bad press. If people think it'll give them a better buzz, they'll go out and try it.



Seriously, though... raising the profile of e-cigarettes is exactly what's needed. The better known they are the harder it'll be to throw down a ban.

 

[saintgadreel]

This is why all the panic on the board is irrational. We don't know how the legislation will impact e-cigarettes. Anyone who says otherwise is engaged in speculation. It may be speculation based on relevant evidence, but it's still speculation. We still need to wait and see how this plays out.

The only loophole I see in this kind of statement is that we are forgetting that the bill doesn't HAVE to say anything about e-cigs. If the e-cig is considered a drug delivery device, then it already falls under the FDA jurisdiction. Now that cigarettes do as well, there is no "third class" that they could really fit under. Thats part of the reason why the "panic" exists. I also believe that the "panic" is more rage than fear. We have in front of us a huge sign of government failing a large portion of our the population, and for the most part, we have little to no say in it, even though many of us have been shouting it loudly in the faces of the people who are supposed to be listening. Its discouraging, infuriating, and depressing all at once. For that reason, I understand some of the response we are seeing here on the board.

 

[saintgadreel]

There's no such thing as bad press. If people think it'll give them a better buzz, they'll go out and try it.



Seriously, though... raising the profile of e-cigarettes is exactly what's needed. The better known they are the harder it'll be to throw down a ban.

I agree. Raise the profile, make it impractical to ban, force testing to be done by SOMEONE. I can almost guarantee that testing will prove the e-cig to be a non-threat.

 

[nicowolf]

Now you've gone and gotten my all political again! Doggoneit! I'm gonna go mod off some of this angst I now feel.