Electronic cigarettes are harmless innovation!!

[Zeroi]

Electronic cigarettes are harmless innovation.

<The nicotine is a poison, there are other chemicals inside and is not proven safe, no one knows its affect on health in the long-term.>

I heard above from our Government, i think anyone should just reply them that Cigarette have been proven harmful and have long term side effect. isn't it simple?

 

[stubear62]

Moving to the Health, Safety and E-Smoking..

 

[Zeroi]

Thanks for the Post, I think no matter what reports we all have, Government still don't want to buy in, seriously they are really fooling us just by telling us Nicotine is Poison. I replied them that tobacco Cigarette already have them and they just kept silent for approx 5 sec before telling me that the
tobacco thing is different. Seriously they are just playing dumb

 

[rolygate]

Governments who ban e-cigarettes are worried about the loss of tax revenue from tobacco. Those governments who have reacted in this way are normally found to derive a greater than normal percentage of their revenues from tobacco - for example, Poland is one such country, where it is said that more than half of adults smoke. Loss of tobacco tax revenue would be a severe blow - imagine what would happen if 50% of smokers switched to an untaxed alternative.

There is no medical research anywhere that e-cigarettes are harmful or might possibly be harmful. This in addition to the fact they they have been used worldwide by millions of people for several years, and no adverse health implications have ever been reported by doctors.

It is impossible for e-cigarettes to be absolutely safe, but a global trial on that scale with no adverse results reported is almost certainly better than could be achieved by the 'safest' pharmaceuticals. Essentially, ecigarettes are a consumer product with no significant health implications. That is bad news for cash-starved governments.

The last person to welcome a safer way of smoking would be the head of a government tax department.

 

[Zeroi]

Point noted, thanks for the advise. Have learnt a new lesson here.

i like ur avatar.

Governments who ban e-cigarettes are worried about the loss of tax revenue from tobacco. Those governments who have reacted in this way are normally found to derive a greater than normal percentage of their revenues from tobacco - for example, Poland is one such country, where it is said that more than half of adults smoke. Loss of tobacco tax revenue would be a severe blow - imagine what would happen if 50% of smokers switched to an untaxed alternative.

There is no medical research anywhere that e-cigarettes are harmful or might possibly be harmful. This in addition to the fact they they have been used worldwide by millions of people for several years, and no adverse health implications have ever been reported by doctors.

It is impossible for e-cigarettes to be absolutely safe, but a global trial on that scale with no adverse results reported is almost certainly better than could be achieved by the 'safest' pharmaceuticals. Essentially, ecigarettes are a consumer product with no significant health implications. That is bad news for cash-starved governments.

The last person to welcome a safer way of smoking would be the head of a government tax department.

 

[rolygate]

Thank you. My avatar is the old Druid from the Asterix comics. Identical except I have more hair.

 

[Jim211]

I am sure they are not that safe but I am way healthier than when I used to smoke cigarettes As far as goverenment they are losing a huge tax base and funding from big tobacco imo.

 

[Drozd]

I just wanted to add that here in the states it's even a more complicated issue...because we've had a tobacco master settlement that the BT companies have paid to the states... several of those states have secritized those payments (sold the payments in the form of bonds for a 1 time payment up front).... and they've guaranteed those tobacco bonds... so if anti smoking groups get rid of smoking and the revenue from cigarettes go down, BT's payments go down and the states are on the hook for that money...
They also get money from the federal gov for tobacco cessation and prevention education and yet are chastized for not spending enough toward it... so they're getting money from both sides that are working at cross purposes of each other...which is fine when smoking cessation products and programs have such dismal failure rates...but now along come e-cigs and other options that are alternatives to cigs and it throws a monkey wrench into everyones plans gov, pharmaseutical companies, BT, the anti smoking movement...it hits everyone except the enlightened consumer in the pocket...

 

[BadThad]

To figure it all out.....simply follow the money.

 

[Zeroi]

Seriously i think we need to really start work things out.
In Singapore E-Cig is new to the government no doubt many years ago there are people who bought in but later was ban.
Currently i think the Government is still at Blur. (act Blur maybe) they may or already know that the E-Cig thing works. They do not want to test it as it will cause them money here and there hence there are 101 brands in the market, so they maybe still wandering which one to start with and so to ease the problem, Ban E-cig. Banning of e-cig is good in one way as to prevent any health issue. It may occurs due to some un-CE product from PRC etc. we not saying any brands here. but there are some really low QC on their E-cig making.
i think is also part of the Singaporean mindset thinking (will this really works. better don't risk it. cover their ... rather than in future anything happen, they maybe blame etc.)

I say if we don't risk it now, we will eventually risk more.

 

[AmyB66]

Honestly, if it comes down to it, I'll gladly pay taxes on my ejuice. Much rather do that and have them keep it as a smoking product than for esmoking to take the medical route because paying big pharma and getting scripts and paying for funding etc would be more expensive. Pharmaceuticals are big money companies and the profits that they make are mind blowing. Not to mention as my health benefits continue to decrease the cost of smoking related illness would hurt me too. Bottom line, tax me. I'll gladly pay tax over having them completely banned because no way to I ever want to go back to smoking cigs.

 

[KissMint]

It's not that easy...over 47 million american smokes (saw on FoxNews). I have no clue nowadays how much the average american smokes. Read some article many years ago it was slightly under a pack. I smoked a pack a day. BT will probably do watever it takes to get it banned. According to the link at the below, average tax per pack is $1.45 x47mill. OMG that's a lot of mooola per DAY.
http://www.tobaccofreekids.org/research/factsheets/pdf/0097.pdf

If not banned I'm afraid it'll be OMFG thru prescription just as the nic inhaler.

 

[Zeroi]

Hey, maybe u can post the link to the video here, that will be great.
btw, is ur avatar Vaping?

It's not that easy...over 47 million american smokes (saw on FoxNews). I have no clue nowadays how much the average american smokes. Read some article many years ago it was slightly under a pack. I smoked a pack a day. BT will probably do watever it takes to get it banned. According to the link at the below, average tax per pack is $1.45 x47mill. OMG that's a lot of mooola per DAY.
http://www.tobaccofreekids.org/research/factsheets/pdf/0097.pdf

If not banned I'm afraid it'll be OMFG thru prescription just as the nic inhaler.

 

[Zeroi]

Yes, i gladly would be the first to support to pay tax for my liquid. maybe suggest like this,
1000% tax on my 1 dollar 10ml e-liquid. that will be only 10dollars. <LOL> this can make alternative revenue for the country. but government have to make the liquid legal as the analog.

Honestly, if it comes down to it, I'll gladly pay taxes on my ejuice. Much rather do that and have them keep it as a smoking product than for esmoking to take the medical route because paying big pharma and getting scripts and paying for funding etc would be more expensive. Pharmaceuticals are big money companies and the profits that they make are mind blowing. Not to mention as my health benefits continue to decrease the cost of smoking related illness would hurt me too. Bottom line, tax me. I'll gladly pay tax over having them completely banned because no way to I ever want to go back to smoking cigs.

 

[kristin]

BT will probably do whatever it takes to get it banned. According to the link at the below, average tax per pack is $1.45 x47mill. OMG that's a lot of mooola per DAY.

BT will not attempt to ban e-cigarettes. If you think about it, BT controls the largest source of nicotine in the U.S. If e-cigs sales continue to rise, BT simply makes more money selling the nicotine.

BP (Big Pharmaceutical companies) and the government only stand to LOSE if e-cigarette sales continue to rise. BP doesn't control nicotine and if smokers switch to e-cigarettes, they are no longer using ineffective pharma products. BP loses a LOT of revenue. Additionally, BP is trying to get government permission to increase the use times of their products, so they can be touted as an "alternative" to smoking (used long-term rather than as a way to wean off nicotine) and compete against smokeless tobacco products by BT (and e-cigs.). E-cigs will kill that potential market because nicotine users who enjoy a smoking-like experience will choose e-cigarettes over gums, patches and lozenges.

The government is dependent upon huge tobacco tax revenues and will lose a ton of money if people switch to e-cigarettes. Even if the government taxes e-cigarettes, it could take years to get those taxes legally established and they couldn't apply the "sin tax" reason since they know that the sin-tax is applicable for products which are known to cause significant harm and e-cigarettes have not been shown to cause the same harm as cigarettes and most likely never will. So, they'll never get the same kind of taxes from e-cigarettes that they get from tobacco cigarettes.

Additionally, the public health groups fighting e-cigarettes receive funding from the pharmaceutical companies, so they have a vested interest in helping BP sell their products and e-cigarettes are a threat to BP profits.

So, it's not BT we need to worry about. In fact, a tobacco company has already released it's own e-cig.

Our enemies are BP, BP-funded anti-tobacco organizations and our own governments reliant upon tobacco tax dollars.

 

[Cyril Forget]

I see that in every country the same questions are asked and found the same answers.
How expensive is nicotine extraction from tobacco ?
"who" will do that in the future ?