E-Cigs for Quitters only?

[WadeCounty]

Here's something to think about:

E-Cigs are currently (and only) marketed as an alternative to help you quit smoking, and that's great. It also marketed as not meant for people who do not smoke.

My question is: should people have to go through cigarettes first (and the health risks associated with them) before morally being allowed to consider e-cigs as a safer, healthier alternative?

It is an inevitability that curiosity will strike and people will want to try cigarettes (hell, just think how most of us got started).

If you think they should NOT have to use cigarettes first in order to try an e-cig, vote "No"

If you think that E-Cigs should ONLY be for people trying to quit smoking, vote "Yes"

Thoughts?

 

[adrianx]

I voted "Yes" because I would prefer to see non-smokers remain "smoke" free. vaping, in my opinion, is something you do instead of smoking. If you are not inclined to inhale smoke or something that resembles smoke, why would you want to vape?

 

[Rusty]

I'm for freedom of choice,,,,,,I'd let anyone try owt that is legal, then they can make an informed decision about it.

 

[martha1014]

I also voted yes. Who would want to try ecig unless you wanted to find a safer alternative to smoking.

Ecig require a lot of effort much more than cigarettes. It is not easy to maintain the use of ecigs.

 

[Sylvie]

I voted no for different reasons.. One of them being is that it can be used for people who are trying to stay away from sweets as well.. Like my fiance who gets a sweet tooth in the middle of a nap or nights, with the non nicotine sweet flavors to satisfy that nightly bad habit, he is keeping them extra pounds off that he was putting on beforehand...

 

[PaulB]

I voted "undecided" because I appreciate your including an "undecided option." Or at least, I think I appreciate it.

 

[tedward1555]

there are also some benefits to nicotine. Seems it helps with dementia and parkinsons. maybe others even anti depressant

 

[lorikay13]

I voted No. There are increasing studies showing that nicotine, BY ITSELF, may have very positive anti-inflammatory effects. Especially in the brain/nervous system. This translates into the possibility of drugs being developed to treat Rhuematoid Arthritis,Parkinsons,Ulcerative Colitis and Alzheimers. Google "smokers paradox" for more info.
Once again....BIG TOBACCO has cast a shadow over something that could be a positive. Tobacco itself, if used as an herb and not an addiction with all the BT additives has many remedial qualities. It is my belief that that additives and genetic manipulation of the tobacco plant is more responsible for the negative consequenses of using tobacco than the plant itself as the Creator made it.

Also....PV's have an amazing potential as a drug delivery device for OTC drugs and herbal preperations. (I am NOT talking about anything illegal) But any type of herbal remedy or homeopathic remedy has a potential for being delivered much more effectively as a vapor. And in fact...extensive research has been done and published as to the exact vaporization temp of 100's of different herbs.

Yes....we need to consider carefully the possibility of children/young people using PV's unwisely.....but I'm sorry...that is life. There are many things that children should not do and it is ultimately up to their parents to make that known to them.

 

[tedward1555]

I voted I don't know, but I would change that to no now. I saw my doctor today and of course he was thrilled I'm not smoking... and he said as a "health care provider" he wouldn't really tell me to "keep vaping with nicotine" but he truly believes that there are significant benefits to nicotine including Crones Disease. So I asked does that mean he wants me to stop using juice with nic... and he said NO.
Cool Doc

 

[suddenly]

I will leave it to the individual to decide. Not my job man.

 

[Drozd]

Here's something to think about:

E-Cigs are currently (and only) marketed as an alternative to help you quit smoking, and that's great. It also marketed as not meant for people who do not smoke.

actually they aren't supposed to be marketed as a cessasion aid...only as an alternative to smoking

 

[dubd1c3]

Well this raises an interesting issue. It relates to whether the method of attaining nicotine should determine, or at least influence, its identity. Why should e-cigs be exempted from pharma NRT? Because it is "pleasurable"? Should nicotine gum be used recreationally? Most will say no, citing that it is not "pleasurable" to chew gum. It is, however, "pleasurable" to vape, and therefore, according to this poll, PVs should be viewed as a competitor to cigarettes and not an alternative.

The FDA may cheat the system and attempt to "medicinalize" PVs. In this case, PVs will inherit a maximum legal usage limit. Doses of nicotine will be restricted and nearly inaccessible. Off-label use will classify as abuse and be considered illegal. Meaning only a smoker attempting to quit will have access. By PVs becoming medicinalized, their use will become an embarrassing affair performed by a "helpless addict." However, teen access and appeal will be minimized, as well as appeal to non-smokers. Users of PVs for longer than the label dictates will count as abuse and may be prosecutable. Usage of PVs by non-smokers will be considered off-label use and possibly be prosecutable by law.

Is it illegal to use nicotine gum if you are using it for purposes other than intended by the manufacturer? I don't know. Is it illegal to use cough syrup to produce psychotropic effects? I'm not sure. Is it illegal to use prescription drugs without a prescription? Yes, yes it is.

In my opinion, assigning the role of drug-device combo to PVs completely emasculates them. More importantly, it ensures that cigarettes STAND ALONE in the marketplace. Big Tobacco would want PVs to become pharma NRT because then they wouldn't have to COMPETE with them. Do y'all see?

PVs are NOT chewing gum.
PVs are NOT the patch.
PVs are NOT a prescription drug.
PVs are NOT lozenges.

PVs are an alternative to smoking just as much as an alternative to quitting (nicotine). PVs are a competitor for commercialized nicotine.

That statement should apply to future smokers just as it does to current smokers.

When PVs become a smoking cessation device (by legal definition) smokers lose, because most nicotine users WANT nicotine for their various reasons. Most smokers who want to quit smoking, in my guess, don't want to stop using nicotine. I have not heard any smoker ever say they want to quit smoking because they 'hate the effects of nicotine.'

That is why PVs should be a recreational option just as cigarettes are a recreational option.

QED. Did I miss anything?

 

[newplague]

I voted no. People are going to try cigarettes for the first time. Saying you would rather them not doesn't change a damn thing. They are going to smoke! I would rather put a PV in somones hands then a lit cigarette.

 

[GtrSoloist]

Tough issue.

From a marketing/legal/political standpoint I think it is a can of worms that is better left unopened to start actively marketing e-cigs to non-smokers.

That being said, I believe in personal freedoms. So if a non-smoker wants to vape, more power to them, especially with the 0 nic options available. The problem here for me is that fact that there have been no long term studies done on the effects of vaping PG/VG/Flavorings. So non of us really know how bad it may be for us.

It certainly seems to be less harmful than cigarettes, but the true risks, especially to non-smokers is anyone's guess.

 

[Xanax]

I'm gonna have to go with YES. Nothing personal and it's not that I don't want to accept non-smokers into the vaping community. It's just that it really makes us look bad IMO. If a non-smoker who hates the smell of smoke and the taste of smoke tries vaping and absolutely loves it then who's to say a child that obviously only likes "yummy" things wouldn't want to do it as well. If there wasn't such a huge legal controversy going on right now I'd vote NO, but it is the way it is, and I wish I could change it but I can't. So, YES.

 

[Xanax]

And honestly... If there were absolutely NO nicotine/any remotely harmful chemical in vaping and there NEVER was... Then the act of inhaling and exhaling a visible vapor or smoke(which it's not) as some people call it would be taboo... Why is it so taboo? What is so unnatural about exhaling something visible to other people? Anyone care to chime in and educate me?

 

[Cephane]

I'm voting no simply because, when i was in high school, I know alot of the kids i went to school with did the initial "just because i can" run when they turned 18. Basically they'd go out the day of or after they're 18th birthday and buy everything that was previously off limits usually including sharpies, glue spray paint, etc, but most often analogs. And I know that quite a few of my close friends ONLY started smoking after buying their first pack of analogs for this rather stupid reason. So if someone is going to go out and buy a pack to try (for wahtever reason) and many teens will, wouldn't it be better to be able to hand them an eCig with 0mg juice to try out than an analog with who knows how many addciting and / or harmful substances?

 

[boughtrecords]

I believe that the future of smoking is in PV's. The equipment, ingredients or methods may change but eventually the idea of inhaling a burning plant will be beyond imagination. Kids will do as kids do and many will start vaping for whatever reason they choose. It is far better than smoking in any light. I also work in the mental health field and can verify that MANY studies have been done to show that nicotine is an extremely effective anti depressant and also helps decrease many of the symptoms of mental illness. Including some interesting research being done with people who have schizoaffective disorders who do not smoke. For years I wondered why most of my clients smoked and after seeing this type of research it made sense, self medication! We already know that inhalation is a very effective method of transmitting medications into the blood stream. I hope that much more research is done in this area. Imagine not having to fumble with clumsy inhalers for asthma patients or diabetics no longer having to give themselves injections? Imagine a medicine cabinet in your bathroom with primarily carts instead of different sized bottles, tubes, boxes and other things to drop in the sink while brushing your teeth? Imagine possibilities, Imagine progress, Imagine the future!

 

[Needo]

I voted no. As far as I am concerned ..... ....... should be legal. In the case of substances which impair judgment or reflexes don't operate any machinery in public while under the influence. I do think warning labels should be in order.

 

[Skyway]

I voted no because I have gotten 2 people that dip to covert over to vaping for the nicotine consumption. They have since thanked me.