Is the E-Cig gettting stomped by "big tobbacco"

[stormlock]

Sorry for the newbie type questions, bt hey, I a newbie.

I was noticing that in Canada, the gooberment types are not support the safer alternative to tobbacco; the e-cig and it got me wondering if perhap "big tobbacco' as partially to blame. can anone point me to some reading in the subject?

Thanks.

 

[swedishfish]

Lots of good information here
Electronic Cigarette News

Here as well
CASAA | The Consumer Advocates for Smoke-Free Alternatives Association

 

[dormouse]

And you could check the Canada section of ECF

Canada Forum

 

[JustaGuy]

+1 to fish & mouse.

Some governments obviously prefer the proven hazards (at least according to said governments) of cigarettes to the unproven but potentially hazardous yet vastly beneficial (by simply removing the former hazard) e-cig. Look around the world and you will see many countries restricting the sale of e-cigs or completely banning them. Meanwhile, sales of cigarettes is legal just about everywhere on earth, good source of tax revenue I might add. What do you think?

 

[DC2]

Big Pharmacy is one of the primary forces behind the anti-ecig movement.
Big tobacco, not so much.

 

[toddos]

Big Pharmacy is one of the primary forces behind the anti-ecig movement.
Big tobacco, not so much.

But let's take the conspiracy theory to its fullest.

• Big Pharma is invested in NRT technologies
• NRT technologies generally don't work, with a relapse rate pushing 90%
• Vaping works, with relapse rates significantly lower.
• BP can't control e-cigs
• Big Tobacco benefits every time an NRT user relapses back to analogs
• BT is invested in tobacco-based nicotine delivery systems, and thus are not seriously considering e-cigs where the nicotine comes from extract (which may be extracted from tobacco, but is far removed from the original tobacco itself)
• It is in BT's best interests to have BP crush e-cigs

Therefore, it's obvious that BT and BP are working together to keep people smoking cigarettes or paying premiums for ineffective NRTs that will lead them back to cigarettes eventually anyway.

I can has tinfoil hat now, plz?

 

[zerominusone]

Of course the "gooberment" (I like that, OP) is for Big Tobaccoo. They make TONS of money off of selling it, then TONS more from medicines stemed from tobacco use, and thousands of other things. Why would they be FOR e-cigs knowing the only thing they're getting from it is less money.

Todos, can I has one too?

 

[Carmiol]

Of course the "gooberment" (I like that, OP) is for Big Tobaccoo. They make TONS of money off of selling it, then TONS more from medicines stemed from tobacco use, and thousands of other things. Why would they be FOR e-cigs knowing the only thing they're getting from it is less money.

Todos, can I has one too?

I think both of them have so many "strings" in the government and stuff like FDA (or their counterparts in other govs) that they can just "lobby" whatever they want, hence the attack on ecigs.

I think I need one too now...

 

[tmcase]

Our government will be all for ecigs when the decide to slap huge taxes on all ecigs & ecigs supplies. It's just a matter of time.

 

[Pamdane]

Umm, the goobers will lose more than just taxes folks. And there is one other industry that stands to loose just as much, that no-one ever mentions. The medical industry. When folks stop smoking, they get healthier. Less doctors, less tests, less revenue. It is not in their best interest for anyone to stop smoking. Add to that the poor economies all over. People who smoke pay into all the social welfare taxes, but they dont live long enough to be a burden. If we live longer, we use more of our own tax money, and the Govt has less.

 

[wv2win]

Big Pharmacy is one of the primary forces behind the anti-ecig movement.
Big Tobacco, not so much.

Agreed. It's Big Pharm that pays all the "anti-smoking" groups to come out against vaping. I don't think BT cares one way or the other.

 

[DC2]

Let's just that almost nobody is in favor of electronic cigarettes.
Well, except us, and those who love us.

And that's why it's up to us, and those who love us, to stand up and be counted.
Making our voices heard is our best strategy.

This is the point where I repeat a suggestion from one of the posts above...
www.casaa.org

 

[paulsonlaw]

Umm, the goobers will lose more than just taxes folks. And there is one other industry that stands to loose just as much, that no-one ever mentions. The medical industry. When folks stop smoking, they get healthier. Less doctors, less tests, less revenue. It is not in their best interest for anyone to stop smoking. Add to that the poor economies all over. People who smoke pay into all the social welfare taxes, but they dont live long enough to be a burden. If we live longer, we use more of our own tax money, and the Govt has less.

^^^ This^^^

 

[Sophey]

The bottom line is powerful interests stand to lose billions if people really do get healthy. Personally, I don't think this is just a weird conspiracy theory.

What I don't understand is why anti-smoking groups aren't on board with e-cigs. What do they gain by supporting NRTs while pushing propoganda that e-cigs aren't safe? I get the whole "follow the money" idea, but I just don't see where the money leads back to with this one. Anyone?

 

[DC2]

What I don't understand is why anti-smoking groups aren't on board with e-cigs. What do they gain by supporting NRTs while pushing propoganda that e-cigs aren't safe? I get the whole "follow the money" idea, but I just don't see where the money leads back to with this one. Anyone?

Ask and ye shall receive...
The New Corporate America Business Model

It's Big Pharma, who funds groups like ALA, AHA, ACS, CTFK, ALF, and all the rest.

 

[Taniger1]

Mmmm most medical people on the front lines are totally FOR e-cigs if they have done ANY research at all. Now I'll admit you have the oddball doc, respiratory therapist or nurse out there who refuses to even do research and it's much easier to blather incessantly about what the FDA said on the news. My point being, don't lump the ENTIRE medical profession into this category.

We must have SOMEONE in the government who doesn't think this is a totally rotten idea, or personal steamers WOULD be illegal. Either that or folks in the government who sent their lackey's out to research and couldn't find anything hor-i-bad (the teenagers around here say this now) about them, so they aren't getting on this Trojan Horse.

I agree there are a lot of idiots out there. I talk to them everyday! (Remember I work in a prison). I think the key is to find out who SUPPORTS us and support THEM.

 

[JustaGuy]

The bottom line is powerful interests stand to lose billions if people really do get healthy. Personally, I don't think this is just a weird conspiracy theory.

What I don't understand is why anti-smoking groups aren't on board with e-cigs. What do they gain by supporting NRTs while pushing propoganda that e-cigs aren't safe? I get the whole "follow the money" idea, but I just don't see where the money leads back to with this one. Anyone?

It's more than just big business. It's prevailing, propagandized views. Even my mom says I'm still smoking every time I proudly tell her I've "quit".

 

[Shannon65]

I had read somewhere on here that Philip Morris bought some e-cigarette technology from someone in China, so tobacco companies are trying to get in on e-cigs.

 

[JustaGuy]

I had read somewhere on here that Philip Morris bought some e-cigarette technology from someone in China, so tobacco companies are trying to get in on e-cigs.

The end is nigh.

 

[swedishfish]

The bottom line is powerful interests stand to lose billions if people really do get healthy. Personally, I don't think this is just a weird conspiracy theory.

What I don't understand is why anti-smoking groups aren't on board with e-cigs. What do they gain by supporting NRTs while pushing propoganda that e-cigs aren't safe? I get the whole "follow the money" idea, but I just don't see where the money leads back to with this one. Anyone?

They're stanze seems to be that they can't endorse something that hasn't been researched. It kinda sorta makes sense. And since no large US corporation makes pvs they're isn't going to be a lot of research who would fund it? That's who usually funds research.

I think everyone is looking for the one big bad guy to blame in all this. And don't think there is one. It's a combination of factors.