Formidable new foe

[Vocalek]

The agency we need to look to as far as clean-air standards is not FDA, not EPA, but rather OSHA. As I understand it, OSHA does not actually perform testing. Private companies do the testing and report whether the air in a particular environment meets OSHA standards.

So does anyone on this forum test air quality, or have a friend, relative, or acquaintance who does so? Kevin Bacon, where are you when we need you?

 

[doots]

True TB and very good points made, but if we dont have iron clad proof SHV is SAFE, we are dead in the water to begin with and don't stand any chance against these ........

 

[TropicalBob]

Agreed. Work is underway to get that second-hand vapor proof. Gotta have your facts first. Then fight.

 

[Angela]

Agreed. Work is underway to get that second-hand vapor proof. Gotta have your facts first. Then fight.

Good o hear ...I presume that if you were at liberty to say any more than that, you would have done so TB?

 

[doots]

Good o hear ...I presume that if you were at liberty to say any more than that, you would have done so TB?

agreed. ? lol /TB

 

[ctruth]

Unfortunately, manufacturers HAVE supplied science (all be it not a lot, but there IS Science available). It simply does not matter what science is presented, this organization WILL NOT accept it. It's a wild goose chase.

Here do this... Ok... here you go. Oh... no wait... we want this... Ok... here you go... Well... we should have clarified we want this... It's a never ending presentation of science and NONE of it will ever prove what they want and that is that the electronic cigarette should just go away.

Ditto
Like shoveling s--- against the tide.
It just keeps coming back, and coming back.....

 

[Oliver]

I hate to say it, but I don't think scientific proof is the issue here.

What we're dealing here is memes - powerful, destructive memes, but memes that are immature and based on older ones. I think they can be dealt with - but science isn't going to come good for us on this. If you don't know about memetics I suggest you read up - the wiki article is a good start.

The "e-cigs as environmentally dangerous" meme originates, IMO, like this: The accepted wisdom is that 3rd hand smoking is dangerous - on further analysis, the evidence for this is clear: smoke contains a variety of chemicals that are dangerous when inhaled from the atmosphere (I don't know much about the current controversy over 3rd hand smoke safety, btw, although I think it's safe to say that no-one is truly meme-proof, not even the surgeon general). I doubt very much that nicotine is one of these chemicals - there are masses that are likely far more dangerous.

However, the meme itself is simply: "3rd hand smoking is dangerous" - the evidence doesn't matter; it has now become received wisdom.

The meme that is developing in the communities referenced above is: "3rd hand vaping is dangerous" - the evidence doesn't matter, because the evidence no longer matters where smoke is concerned. It's the received wisdom that gets copied across to the new meme, not the original, factual basis of the origin of the first meme.

Looked at this way, it seems to me that they best way to combat this is to repeatedly ask people what evidence shows that nicotine is dangerous in the atmosphere. Ask to be shown the evidence. Do not feel that the burden of proof is on you to show that e-cigs are safe to 3rd parties (an impossible task), but politely and reasonably question the logic.

And remember, this is not the same thing as insisting that they are safe - it's a question of thinking through the issues in a logical way, and not being tied to dogma.

As one of our esteemed health professionals stated before, following Neitsche, if we are not careful we become our enemies. In this case, ex-smokers become like the tobacco companies who for years obfuscated the growing body of evidence in favour of their own pre-created memes. "Smoking dangerous? Prove it!" they said, and despite overwhelming evidence that smoking is dangerous, they were able to deny it until a direct causal link was established. And even once smoking was proven to be dangerous, they created new memes: "OK, so smoking kills ya - but the cultural benefits far outweigh the dangers to individuals!" They paid for these memes too - Philosopher Roger Scruton was found to be on the payroll of Japanese Imperial Tobacco whilst pushing a pro-smoking message in the 80s. These memes are perpetuated today - Useful idiots like David Hockney claiming that smoking bans are destroying bohemia

But this applies to e-smokers too - our best strategy is to use critical thought and to be wary of received wisdom setting in. Listen to TropicalBob; when he says, we don't know e-smoking is safe, believe him. We don't and we may never know for sure. All we can do is to be logical and critical of ourselves and others - if we do this, I think vaping will come out on top.

And by the way, this and the other communities/organisations are the reason, IMHO, why the tide does seem to be turning towards e-cigs - the standard of critical thought set by many of our community is very high, and it does get heard above the din!

[/ Rant]

SJ

 

[unknwn]

Well it seems to be heating up folks, three instances of opposing propoganda from just as many major daily papers in a single day does not bode well for our adopted alternative to smoking.
If Judge Leon's decision magically appears before the end of the week, and happens to bow toward the anti's viewpoint, these same daily papers will be capitalizing on an "I told you so" soapbox so quickly, that your head will just keep spinning ('ala "The Exorcist").

We just got to hope that the hoopla has a chance to die down a little bit.
If not, we just might be witnessing that "death knell" occurring before our disbelieving ears. 8-o

 

[JustMeAgain]

What about people using no-nic in their pv? How can someone possibly ban that?

But if I get migraines from people wearing who bathe in perfume, that's just my tough luck.

 

[LaceyUnderall]

One thing is for certain and I believe, gets overlooked quite a bit here on ECF: Even though this has been an extremely difficult battle thus far, we are doing pretty damn good.

We have seen a reduction in the hard speaking points from ASH, ALF, and even the FDA. ASH UK just came out in our favor. We are seeing new organizations come out against the ecig and they will eventually be pushed off as the others were. We are seeing the ECA interviewed and quoted more often and we are seeing more articles, not opinion pieces, that are geared towards the ridiculousness of fighting the ecig. Consumers are being interviewed on a regular basis and instead of "I love my ecig" interviews, they are packed with facts... an educated smoker? Good god. We also have quite a troop of medical/scientific experts who seem to be saying the same thing: Let's give the ecig some time and a try!

We have seen a governor veto a ban and even though we are seeing smoking bans begin to include the electronic cigarette, there are smoking bans across the nation that are being fought right now that are not including the ecig. We saw Montana include the ecig in their definition of smoking bans after the fact, and then due to persistent community members, retract their original message and exclude the ecig.

A TON has been accomplished. Considering how we are really in the very early stages of this, we are all certainly doing very well.

At this point, many in the eSmoking/Vaping community who have been on this train for awhile now, have left the emotion behind and are fighting this with level headed, organized and scientifically backed responses.

We have a real chance here... And thus far, as "doom and gloom" as some might think... the picture really is quite bright thus far. Tiresome... but bright.

And the future vapor tests that should be around here shortly, will only give us more footing.

 

[rothenbj]

But I do agree with this point:
Lets hope the manufacturers follow this lead and prove to these groups once and for all that the e-cig is a safe alternative and harmless to others around a user. The manufacturers need to step up to the plate if we're ever going to achieve our goals.

BigJim,

I hate to be a naysayer here, but the ecig as we know it will never get FDA approval. The process is too long and too expensive for it to survive through it. The manufacturers aren't big pharma with the money that backs big pharma through the process.

That is the whole point to predetermining that this is a drug delivery medical device. A sad shame and a big sham.

 

[whistlrr]

[...]If there are scientific test results showing that the exhaled vapour is benign, then we really have the high ground, and there can be no logcal reason for groups to call for bans.[...]

You're trying to apply logic to an illogical situation and illogical people

when the science can show its okay, you're still got the insane complete illogical opinion stupidities "only children are allowed to partake in flavored-anything" 'it just looks and acts too much like smoking" "kids will naturally want to (and magically be able to) spend the wads of cash it takes to first start up vaping. Vaping is a gateway drug for the children to smoking .. and then onto their drinking.. and then illegal drugs!" and just on and on...

 

[whistlrr]

I really think the biggest obstacle to acceptance of e-smoking by antis is .. perception. They cannot tolerate the thought of adults mimicking smoking by sucking on white tubes and then blowing vapor out. The antis have spent years making that image go away in all public places. They will not easily accept a replacement that looks like the dreaded, demonized practice they have succeeded in banishing from public view.[...]

Then there is that too.. now that they have pretty much banned smoking.. anti smoking groups have to have a 'reason' or a cause to in order t even continue to exist.. and it seems they've picked us

 

[ECS-Mike]

These people have a certain point though. There is no real testing that has been done on vaping. Technically all of the ingredients have been tested in various realms, but not together, and not as in vaping. Testing in timbuktu doesnt count if you want the stamp of the USFDA. They dont care if it passes korea, china an eu standards, those standards are not u.s. standards.

And in many ways the standards that the fda is asking for such as equalization of nicotine amounts across the various manufacturers arent all that outrageous.

Its like this folks, this is not going to be a free ride. If we want ecigs and pv's to be a legitimate product, then it has to meet all the requirements of all the other legitmate products.

We need a manufacturer or even something like the ECA here to step up, get unbiased testing done, set standards for the entire industry and then there will be nothing to gripe about. But right now everyone is short sighted by making money selling or screaming about their personal rights being violated that nobody is actually adressing the issues keeping this from becoming more legitmate.


just my .02

 

[LaceyUnderall]

These people have a certain point though. There is no real testing that has been done on vaping. Technically all of the ingredients have been tested in various realms, but not together, and not as in vaping. Testing in timbuktu doesnt count if you want the stamp of the USFDA. They dont care if it passes korea, china an eu standards, those standards are not u.s. standards.

And in many ways the standards that the fda is asking for such as equalization of nicotine amounts across the various manufacturers arent all that outrageous.

Its like this folks, this is not going to be a free ride. If we want ecigs and pv's to be a legitimate product, then it has to meet all the requirements of all the other legitmate products.

We need a manufacturer or even something like the ECA here to step up, get unbiased testing done, set standards for the entire industry and then there will be nothing to gripe about. But right now everyone is short sighted by making money selling or screaming about their personal rights being violated that nobody is actually adressing the issues keeping this from becoming more legitmate.


just my .02

So New Zealand is considered Timbucktu? And Dr. Laugesen who has been an avid anti-smoking advocate and has done health studies on smoking for years is not worth consideration? I have over 15 studies on my hard drive of various liquids and some do include testing of the vapor... oh wait... now that I think about it... Johnson Creek just did a test on their vapor.

Non-partial testing was done by a lab here in the US to refute the claims as presented by the FDA and it got ZERO attention. This wasn't some sham lab either, this was one of the FDA's top listed labs. But because it was funded by a manufacturer it simply doesn't count. So in this article they say that the manufacturer's need to prove their products safety but when they do, it's ignored.

These people aren't making a point... there giving us the run around. The only reason we should comply, is to ensure that OUR consumers are safe. We don't owe the FDA or the anti-smoking groups jack ****.

IMO - I think the issues are being addressed quite well. The consumers and suppliers who are fighting this... are doing an awesome job. People are starting to listen... there is traction being made.

 

[whistlrr]

[...]And in many ways the standards that the fda is asking for such as equalization of nicotine amounts across the various manufacturers arent all that outrageous.[...]

Based an an email exchange somebody in another thread had with the FDA I think we're gonna be real lucky if by the time its all said and done we're allowed to even have e-cigarettes at all (or at least without a prescription),

and real real lucky if we're allowed to have nicotine liquid, and then if we are, you can expect it to be something like 10 mg/mL or .5 mL per inhale (the same as whats in the existing NRT device nasal spray and mouth piece)

 

[Sun Vaporer]

These people have a certain point though. There is no real testing that has been done on vaping. Technically all of the ingredients have been tested in various realms, but not together, and not as in vaping. Testing in timbuktu doesnt count if you want the stamp of the USFDA. They dont care if it passes korea, china an eu standards, those standards are not u.s. standards.

And in many ways the standards that the fda is asking for such as equalization of nicotine amounts across the various manufacturers arent all that outrageous.

Its like this folks, this is not going to be a free ride. If we want ecigs and pv's to be a legitimate product, then it has to meet all the requirements of all the other legitmate products.

We need a manufacturer or even something like the ECA here to step up, get unbiased testing done, set standards for the entire industry and then there will be nothing to gripe about. But right now everyone is short sighted by making money selling or screaming about their personal rights being violated that nobody is actually adressing the issues keeping this from becoming more legitmate.


just my .02

Mike--When it comes to me you are preaching to the Choir. I concur with you and do hope these issues are truly addressed. And the E-cig does not have to go off the market by any means while these studies and standards are put into place.


Sun

 

[ECS-Mike]

So New Zealand is considered Timbucktu? And Dr. Laugesen who has been an avid anti-smoking advocate and has done health studies on smoking for years is not worth consideration? I have over 15 studies on my hard drive of various liquids and some do include testing of the vapor... oh wait... now that I think about it... Johnson Creek just did a test on their vapor.

When you think of 'high standards in health' is new zealand the first place that comes to mind? Had you ever heard of Dr Laugesen and his organization before being involved in ecigs? Is he the only Dr. thats put his stamp of approval on this?

Non-partial testing was done by a lab here in the US to refute the claims as presented by the FDA and it got ZERO attention. This wasn't some sham lab either, this was one of the FDA's top listed labs. But because it was funded by a manufacturer it simply doesn't count. So in this article they say that the manufacturer's need to prove their products safety but when they do, it's ignored.

Then those tests needs to be OUR war shield. Where is it? Is it readily available?

These people aren't making a point... there giving us the run around. The only reason we should comply, is to ensure that OUR consumers are safe. We don't owe the FDA or the anti-smoking groups jack ****.

You said it yourself right there. I couldnt care less about what the FDA or some non smoker group thinks. I do however care about the people i sell this to and want to be sure that when i stick my name on this that there is no question of its safety. I dont even want the chance that anyone's health is at risk because of this product just to make a buck.

IMO - I think the issues are being addressed quite well. The consumers and suppliers who are fighting this... are doing an awesome job. People are starting to listen... there is traction being made.

I agree to a certain extent. But if we want to be heard, its going to have to be louder.

And safety isnt the only issue. Standarization needs to be addressed

 

[LaceyUnderall]

Then those tests needs to be OUR war shield. Where is it? Is it readily available?

http://e-cig.org/pdfs/Response-to-the-FDA-Summary.pdf

I totally agree... standardization definitely needs to be addressed...

Edit:

Is he the only Dr. thats put his stamp of approval on this?

No. Dr. Nitzkin, Dr. Radu, Dr. Siegel and Dr. Whelan

All worth investigating further if you haven't already. These four mentioned have not done their own "studies" but based on the scientific data that is available today, they have given it their go. Granted, they as well would love more studies done and are actually providing further guidance for upcoming studies.

 

[Territoo]

Lacey,

Do you have links to those 15 studies you mentioned? I probably have some of them, but I sure don't have them all.