E-Cigarette Forum Discussion Thread

[renstyle]

Now that my I can see the new front page...

I have to admit, the information placed there is pretty balanced considering it is the front page of ECF.

<laymans cap on> It doesn't sugar coat ecigs and portray them as the greatest thing since oreos. It lays the top bullet points out in a way that turns the question back to the reader: it's a personal decision for you to make for yourself. Nicotine is optional, it's better for you than smoking. The vibe was good IMHO.</layman>

It really looks like something that speaks to those smokers out there like my parents, sister, most of my friends.

 

[UntamedRose]

I hope they consider changing it, Sallie.

Like this:



E-cigarettes WERE designed for the purpose of quitting smoking (one can just read the story about the inventor) and the "totally" in the sentence needs to be explained. Lay-people don't understand the difference between smoking cessation and nicotine cessation. It's an ANTZ contrivance to make them one and the same. And plenty of people sell and/or use e-cigarettes because they want to help people quit smoking or because they don't want to smoke (for whatever reason.)

The only reason this sentence would need to be on the page is if ECF was selling e-cigarettes and needed to comply with the FDA about health claims. So, I really don't understand why it is there at all. If anything, ECF should be promoting the health benefits, the anecdotal and survey evidence and the support from scientific and medical groups for e-cigarettes as smoking cessation and reduction BECAUSE the merchants cannot do so. While I understand it's necessary to be and look balanced, there is no reason to underplay the positives like they are. If any site has the right to be more biased, it's ECF!

I'm willing to bet the FDA is exactly why they wrote it the way they did. We arnt upheld to not having illegal drug talk on ECF either but we do b/c of the anti's.

Agree with the other posters, post in the site feed back and tell them what you think it should be. At the very least it would an interesting discussion.

 

[Neriah]

Keeter is on for another week. You have to ante up Sallie.

 

[MustangSallie]

Keeter is on for another week. You have to ante up Sallie.

Wrong again!

Better than a black tutu tho, gotta admit!

 

[LibertariaNate]

Now that my I can see the new front page...

I have to admit, the information placed there is pretty balanced considering it is the front page of ECF.

<laymans cap on> It doesn't sugar coat ecigs and portray them as the greatest thing since oreos. It lays the top bullet points out in a way that turns the question back to the reader: it's a personal decision for you to make for yourself. Nicotine is optional, it's better for you than smoking. The vibe was good IMHO.</layman>

It really looks like something that speaks to those smokers out there like my parents, sister, most of my friends.

Agreed, renstyle. I've already said it, but I'll say it again...

I don't see anything wrong with how the information is written on the front page.

Don't get so caught up in the wording that you inadvertently cut of your nose to spite your face. I feel we need to embrace e-cigs as a viable alternative to smoking. To many health organizations smoking cessation IS nicotine cessation. We're not going to be around long enough to change this mentality if we put the cart before the horse. Let the scientific studies speak for themselves.

"The truth will out."

If e-cigs are banned because it's deemed that they're being promoted as a smoking cessation device, I think it would be a travesty for harm reduction.

 

[MagnusEunson]

Alright.. I'm on the fence again. Per Rose, and Nate, if it was done to avoid the trouble then let it stand.. well... with edits for consistency and maybe some clarifications. -Magnus

 

[John Phoenix]

Just saw the ECF front page. I don't like a lot of it. I think they are being too obtuse. It also reads in some places like it was written by a teenager.

Under Can I use it to stop Smoking?, telling someone to consult a doctor to not put harmful tobacco in their body is silly.

" Hey Doc, I think i'm gonna stop using this bolt cutter to cut my fingers and toes off.. gone through half of them already.. do you think that's o.k. Doc.. is there any medical reason why I should continue to cut off my fingers and toes?"

Hey EFC, what you are doing there is playing right into the FDA and corrupt medical establishments hands. They want people to be paranoid and feel the must ask a Doctor for any health related thing. People know what they want to do, they know thier bodies. they have the right to make the choice for themselves without a doctors approval. That's a Freedom we all enjoy. Under guise of " we don't know whats best for us and so must follow a doctors advice", they take that freedom from us and will use it against us. Bravo FDA, you won one small battle on ECF and forced them to close their minds.

What they SHOULD have said is, Many people do use e-cigs to quit smoking. They use them to wean themselves down from the nicotine and the smoking habit until they are ready to put the e-cig down for good.

This would have in no way contradicted any FDA ruling or law.

 

[renstyle]

I guess when I looked at the page "as a n00b would" I was able to see the forest for the trees.

I was apprehensive when I first started looking into ecigs as a way to get away from smoking analogs. The typical stereotypes of past-quitters and non-smokers asking as their first question: "So, now that you've quit smoking... when are you gonna stop using that ecig thing?" were quite prevalent with nearly everybody I spoke to once I got my first KR. Even my smoker friends "assumed" it was a journey to total cessation.

When I told them "I don't know when this will end", I got the "tilted puppy dog face look" from them, they couldn't grasp the concept of harm reduction, elimination of smoke, or long-term nicotine intake. They understood my stance after I explained it to them, but I still got the "um, ok <shrug>" kinda look from most of them. 30+ years of nicotine==smoking and nicotine==deadly poison (insecticide even) being beaten into your head will do that to you.

 

[renstyle]

Wish we could get JEL onboard to help with the disinformation. Not sure if the powers that be at their organization would embrace ecigs (prolly not?) but the commercials would be hilarious!

 

[MagnusEunson]

Just saw the ECF front page. I don't like a lot of it. I think they are being too obtuse. It also reads in some places like it was written by a teenager.

Yes, let us all reward ECF's continued efforts to help the community by not providing feedback in the right places and insulting them at breakfast. And they write like they're teenagers? Have you read your own posts??? -Magnus

 

[MadmanMacguyver]

Commander I need to speak with you.......

Well speak your mind son.......

Privately sir.......

.......There is a chain of command in all places...and a certain bit of Decorum is necessary in matters of leadership and command policy...I'm not saying this is an army of PV users here...or maybe I am...but regardless we must be civilized and tactful about what opinions we voice openly where anyone can see them......

In other words DON'T POKE THE BEARS!!! they can rip your hand off with one swipe...lol

We all know this is a work in progress and the perils of posting the wrong info in this new world we are in...maybe it could be gotten away with simple post what ya want on the front page years ago but this is now the BIGGEST E-cig website on the net...the world is watching...

 

[MagnusEunson]

...the world is watching...

Says the all-seeing opalescent eye. -Magnus

 

[MadmanMacguyver]

Well I'm Watching too but I have more benevolent intentions

 

[rolygate]

The InfoPages content is certainly a valid topic for discussion, I opened another thread in this board on the topic of switching or quitting, and the issue of editing the content.

Please note that I am not at all sensitive about most if not all topics and welcome discussion. However the Mods sometimes see things differently, and since I am not a Mod I don't presume to tell them their job. You can always email me about anything and start a discussion that way if you think it's maybe better than posting on the forum:

chris[AT]e-cigarette-forum[DOT]com
[rebuild the email address with @ and .com as usual]

I apologise but I have to block PMs as 99% I get are in fact for the Forum Manager, not me. Email me.

 

[LibertariaNate]

JP,

Don't mistake prudence and caution for paranoia...

... telling someone to consult a doctor to not put harmful tobacco in their body is silly. ...

Most people know that smoking can have a negative impact on health. If an individual is ready to make the step toward living a healthier lifestyle what is wrong with asking their health care practitioner for advice? If that individual decides to start vaping it isn't just about "not put[ting] harmful tobacco in their body." They've replaced the tobacco and smoke with PG, VG, and food flavorings... There is NOTHING wrong with questioning the safety of a device that has been on the market less than a decade. Some people are going to have serious (and valid) concerns. We already know that some people have been negatively (albeit minor) impacted by vaping.

What they SHOULD have said is ...

Easy for you to say... If this domain was seized by the government, it's no skin of your back. You have invested nothing (other than a bit of your time) in this place. You wouldn't (potentially) face any legal consequences. The owners don't have that luxury.

Of course, you're more than welcome to start your own internet forum dedicated to e-cigs. May I suggest "quitsmokingwithecigs.com"?

This would have in no way contradicted any FDA ruling or law.

What ECF currently has posted doesn't either.

 

[John Phoenix]

Yes, let us all reward ECF's continued efforts to help the community by not providing feedback in the right places and insulting them at breakfast. And they write like they're teenagers? Have you read your own posts??? -Magnus

Ouch. No I don't read my posts, I hired a girl to do that for me. Not provide feedback in the right places.. some of you made comments as to how you feel about it here, why should I be any different? I didn't insult them, I offered constructive criticism. I meant teenage like in style not content, re read the whole thing a few times and I'm sure you will see what I mean.

 

[kristin]

Agreed, renstyle. I've already said it, but I'll say it again...

I don't see anything wrong with how the information is written on the front page.

Don't get so caught up in the wording that you inadvertently cut of your nose to spite your face. I feel we need to embrace e-cigs as a viable alternative to smoking. To many health organizations smoking cessation IS nicotine cessation. We're not going to be around long enough to change this mentality if we put the cart before the horse. Let the scientific studies speak for themselves.

"The truth will out."

If e-cigs are banned because it's deemed that they're being promoted as a smoking cessation device, I think it would be a travesty for harm reduction.

And I still don't see how changing "smoking" to "nicotine" would hurt anything?

 

[MagnusEunson]

You know what's kinda messed up? For some reason my brain had decided that ~in this thread~ Organic Granola-crunchy Cute Sallie avatar would magically appear. *face palm* -Magnus

 

[MadmanMacguyver]

Think you must liken this to scientists back in the days of Issac Newton if you were outside the churches established norm you could find yourself in hot water...Literally

Uh oh...The Doctor is having a short circuit day...everybody look out

 

[MagnusEunson]

And I still don't see how changing "smoking" to "nicotine" would hurt anything?

If they intentionally went the more conservative route to avoid the ire of certain health agencies then it would hurt a lot. If not, if it was just an internally chosen semantic, maybe it won't hurt one bit. I'm hoping for the latter but given my past decade worth of being immersed on "that" side of the Government fence seeing bureaucratic abuse of the system, I'm not at all surprised if somebody went ultra-conservative to avoid the trouble. From my EFF experiences I'm thinking that writing it w/ the full ECCA/CASAA risk reduction positions with a nice red disclaimer at the bottom would dot he trick but I don't know.

I'm still not seeing the existing page ~hurting~ though.. -Magnus


p.s. It looks like the change wagon started rolling anyway..