Contact the radio station and provide them this link: Bill Godshall and Smokefree Pennsylvania submit 158 pages of comments to FDA on e-cigarette evidence | E-Cigarette Forum
I would not show it to anybody. Badly written, too political and partisan. "Obama administration is responsible..." - you see it everywhere. It looks like not pro-vaping piece, but like anti-Obama proclamation. I'd bury it somewhere far away and forget it completely.Contact the radio station and provide them this link: Bill Godshall and Smokefree Pennsylvania submit 158 pages of comments to FDA on e-cigarette evidence | E-Cigarette Forum
The way I see it, reducing 50% of smoked cigarettes has a great impact on cancer-related diseases, but not so much on cardiovascular diseases.
Of course, greatly reducing the risk of cancer-related diseases alone, when you cut smoking to an half with the help of an e-cig is *still* a good thing that most ANTI's refuse to see. To a great deal of smokers, "quitting cold-turkey" means stopping smoking for a fer weeks or months only, and then returning to the *full* risks of tobbaco smoke. Even if you do not stop smoking completely with an e-cig, I thinks it's best to accept the *lower* risk permanently, than simply having "no-risk" for a little while and then returning to *full* risk again.
On the other hand, the not-so-reduced cardiovascular risk is *still* related to tobacco smoke, not nicotine by itself. Not a problem when people completely quit smoking with e-cigs(*).
Just my 2 cents.
(*) ETA:
From my personal experience (for example, a close friend and family, ALL heavy smokers of them, where EVERYONE has managed to completely quit smoking - and one of them has stopped smoking AND vaping after smoking 2-3 PADS for more than 20 years), I'm pretty sure that for each whiner complaining that "Poor me, e-cigs are not an effective quitting method [for *me*, in *my* specific case]", that radio station could easily have found 10 more people who were sucessful at their quitting attempts.
But of course, spreading the truth by telling those testimonies does *not* help the agenda of people or organizations who have not-so-covered economic interests against the e-cigarette.![]()
Some commercials I have heard are now stating smoking 1 or 2 cigarettes a day is not enough and the same as a pack a day or whatever/

I would not show it to anybody. Badly written, too political and partisan. "Obama administration is responsible..." - you see it everywhere. It looks like not pro-vaping piece, but like anti-Obama proclamation. I'd bury it somewhere far away and forget it completely.
Instead of picking another group of folks to throw under the bus how about we just try to fight our own battles. If that substance that will not be mentioned here is taxed as much as the powers that be want it to be, to line their own pockets, then the ones that truly need it will not be able to afford it anyway. Much like the one thing our devices are useless without (the liquid). If they get their way with taxes the price will go through the roof.If our state had any brains and started to properly tax a certain "medical industry" thats really thriving here like they should be, instead of hassling the people going about it in the proper lawfully stated way, most of our tax problems would be easily solved in like a year.
If the shoe fits.
Regardless of what many refuse to believe, much of the anti-vaping stance IS political and has absolutely nothing to do with factual science.
I have to agree in this case.Regardless of what many refuse to believe, much of the anti-vaping stance IS political and has absolutely nothing to do with factual science.
So, you want alienate all democrats? What good it will bring to vapers?If the shoe fits.
Regardless of what many refuse to believe, much of the anti-vaping stance IS political and has absolutely nothing to do with factual science.
I have to agree in this case.
I am a democrat. I do not talk about it much here because of stances that I generally see.
But in the case of vaping, it has become a political pawn as most things do tend to have happen to them.
Do not want to steer thread in political direction, but it is common American misconception.Always remember:
We do not elect "leaders".
We do not elect "deciders".
We elect representatives of the will of the people.
Their job is to represent what "WE" want, whether they personally like it or not, as long as it in accordance with the constitution.
.
Do not want to steer thread in political direction, but is common American misconception.
"We" elect those approved by establishment (politicians, media, corporations...)
Wow im still in shock. I was sitting on the grass at my local county pool vaping away listening to my local radio station play. Next thing i know I hear a commercial with a woman saying "I tried to vape in order to quit smoking and only ended up smoking both." The basic point was dont try vaping because cold turkey is the only way that works. If you could have seen my face! I was in shock and disgust all at once. Still cant believe it.
Do you remember what or who was the source of the commercial?I am going back to the pool today so maybe i will hear it again and catch the station. The oddest thing was it came on just as i had sat down from asking the pool owner if i could vape and he was like sure. Ive had to explain to people around me who dont smoke that vaping isnt worse which is what they are believing i guess from ads like these. My sister told me there are really harmful chemicals in ejuices and i asked like what? She had no idea. I explained to her that i have no idea what is in my cigs but i do know what and how much is in my juice. crazyness i tell you.I was shocked to see e cig commercials on TV. Now they are spouting anti-vaping propagandaDo you remember what or who was the source of the commercial?
My sister told me there are really harmful chemicals in ejuices and i asked like what? She had no idea. I explained to her that i have no idea what is in my cigs but i do know what and how much is in my juice. crazyness i tell you.