Guardian- call for ecig debate in UK

[Spazmelda]

I found this posted on twitter this morning. The comments are really the star of this article. Please read the fabulous comments. Such articulate responses!

http://www.theguardian.com/local-go...bate-needed-safety-e-cigarettes-public-health

AgentAnia- please feel free to c/p your response to this from legislative news, where I accidentally posted this article earlier this morning.

 

[AgentAnia]

I was going to comment about this, from the article by Jim McManus, director of public health at the Hertfordshire county council:

It's time we elucidated some principles for a debate. We need to establish whether we want people to be tobacco or nicotine free, and we should ask ourselves how we identity what will and won't work. We need to ask ourselves whether regulation should always be in favour of using products such as e-cigarettes and how true it is that these products can lead people on to smoking.

It's in the nature of public health that we come across challenges where we end up in less well-charted territory. This is precisely where we need to discuss and think together, and disagree respectfully.

My comment was about the "we," which doesn't seem to include actual users of ecigs. However, one of the commenters, Johnd2000, says it better than I would have:

Personally, as a vaper, I would welcome a debate about how best to regulate Ecigs. I don't know anyone who would strongly object to age-restrictions on sales, or better (clearer) labelling requirements. However, the MHRA insistence on full medicines regulation will be disastrous for public health as it will take all existing products off the market overnight. Existing users, who have been completely ignored by the MHRA, the tobacco-control industry and politicians so far, will have no choice but to return to smoking lit tobacco, or take other (unknown) risks on the black market.

So yes, let's have a proper debate about ecig regulation, but please....can we leave the propaganda at the door and....just once....can we please include Vapers? We are the stakeholders who stand to lose the most, if our politicians and PH experts get it wrong, so please...NOTHING ABOUT US WITHOUT US.

 

[AgentAnia]

Another incisive comment, from "olddodderer (whose hand I would love to shake!):

It is one of life's little ironies (or God's little jokes) that all non-smokers know how to stop smoking, but no smokers do. Ecigs change that game - we now know how to stop but the non-smokers don't understand them and distrust them. Unfortunately the non-smokers hold all the levers of power and those in power never admit they were wrong.

If you accept that smoking kills, you must also accept that stopping people stop smoking is equally fatal.

 

[Spazmelda]

I'd really have a hard time picking out specific comments to highlight. There were so many good ones. I hope that those of us here in the US will be able to get some good points for dealing with opponents of THR.

 

[Spazmelda]

Here's another from olddodderer:


I think you'll find BAT at least would like medregs considering they bought the only ecig company seeking a licence.
You mention 'harm' from ecigs but provide no evidence - there is none.Experts estimate they are 95-99% safer than cigarettes.Given that the NHS have achieved one-year quit rates in single figures from the 6-7m quit dates set,is not continually pursuing an ineffective strategy not more dangerous?
Over the last 6 years smoking prevalence has fallen from 21% to 20% and we spend nearly £150m per year on staff and prescriptions.The population-wide data from Sweden regarding snus is compelling yet the rest of the EU still ban it.The people are speaking - will no-one listen?

 

[AgentAnia]

I dont have time right now to go back to the article to find the exact quote, but another comment questions the statement that for every person who successfully switches from smoking to ecigs, two other people try ecigs but go back to smoking. The comment asks, how about looking at this: that for every person who successfully quits smoking using NRTs, FIFTEEN try NRTs and go back to smoking?

Ah HA!

 

[Orb Skewer]

I dont have time right now to go back to the article to find the exact quote, but another comment questions the statement that for every person who successfully switches from smoking to ecigs, two other people try ecigs but go back to smoking. The comment asks, how about looking at this: that for every person who successfully quits smoking using NRTs, FIFTEEN try NRTs and go back to smoking?

Ah HA!

FergusM1970
20 November 2013 10:35am

Recommend
10
"At the moment for every one smoker who use e-cigarettes there are two who have tried but not continued."

On the other hand, for every smoker who quit using licensed NRTs there are FIFTEEN who have tried but not continued. NRTs don't work - the difference between them and placebo is practically lost in the statistical noise. E-cigs DO work, as an emerging body of literature shows.



And here is some of that 'statistical noise' dating back to 2005

http://www.mhra.gov.uk/home/groups/pl-a/documents/websiteresources/con2023239.pdf