Look at a new proposal: Should the US become the world leader in the fight to end the tobacco pandemic that kills 6 million members of the human race

Status
Not open for further replies.

dwainew

Full Member
Aug 6, 2013
17
14
CA

2coils

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Nov 29, 2012
1,504
2,500
New Jersey
Signed as well!!! I would love to give the finger to the administration by meeting the 100000 threshold. The only way to obtain is if this thing gets posted at the top of every page here on ECF, and gets posted on our vendors sites. I dont want the administration to feel justified by not answering the last one if we dont get the required signatures on this one! (not like they give two :censored: anyway, but still)
 

dwainew

Full Member
Aug 6, 2013
17
14
CA
Thanks Guys!

I need help, if you are willing. I'm new to the community and am not sure what's acceptable in terms of cross-posting, etc. (e.g., this post was moved by retired1 without any positive comments or suggestions, so I assumed it didn't have any merit in his/her eyes, just another misplaced post). I'm also at a loss as to how I, as one person, can spread this around enough to get traction, without appearing self-aggrandizing.

If even only a few think it's deserving, I'll try to push it, but would appreciate some informed advice as to how to make it happen.

I've read much about the dismal, partisan handling of the "we the people" proposals by the white house. But anything that's negative can, with some thinking, be used to one's advantage!

My intent is not to dilute any current petitions, but to create one of a more general nature. Something like "Hey, wake up, Obama, you can SPIN THIS! Save 6 million people a year!"

The administration picks and chooses these petitions based on what appeals to their public image, what might make them heroes. Someone needs to present the argument in a way that makes the white house look at the big picture and calculate this as a way to look like GOOD guys! Use their own tactics of partisanship to get what we want for a change. Use their vanity to further the cause of freedom of choice and even get the Fed thinking about it in a POSITIVE WAY using simply stated facts. Their nature is to see anything new as a problem, unless the potential for positive public attention is obvious.

Is it so hard to imagine a change in the fed's mindset to where they actually get EXCITED about the potential health benefits of this new technology, and promote it, spend money quickly to establish the FACTS, and then take CREDIT for their championing of the cause? I don't care who takes credit for bringing this thing to the worlds attention in a positive light, let Obama take the credit, just as long as it happens!

The purpose and, as I see it, limited appeal of the current petition is that it is a little dry, but for a very good reason. I don't imagine the average member of the public, or even an eCig user for that matter, reading it and getting excited and immediately signing it. It focuses on a SPECIFIC pending action by the FDA, and it assumes a public acceptance of the safety of eCigs, with none of the important, informative FACTS about the subject to dilute all the current fear mongering. This is expected due to the 800 character limit of a petition. It's HARD to make a fully articulated case in 800 characters!

I found no GENERAL petitions appealing to the administrations good will, pulling at their "heart strings;" thus the carefully worded title of my petition. I was hoping to create an overreaching, yet sensible proposal that presented facts as concisely as possible. I also wanted to present the idea that the administration has a chance to be a "hero" since Obama certainly needs as much of that as possible! I am not an Obama fan by any stretch of the imagination, but certainly won't hesitate to appeal to the administration's need for more "wins" to our advantage!

Think we can leverage the idea of Obamacare and HEALTHCARE reform!? I've been working on some copy based on this angle.

Please, anybody, if you agree with the petition, help me, give me ideas of how to push it! I didn't even post it on any of the vaping orgs like CASAA, etc., thinking it flopped here.
 
Last edited:

Stubby

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 22, 2009
2,104
1,992
Madison, WI USA
I have been unable to read the petition because of the shutdown so really can't comment in detail about it. If you could post the petition here that would be helpful.

Not having read it I can only guess at the content, but your premise that nicotine is not tobacco is not a good sign of things to come. I hope you do realize that tobacco is not the problem, it's smoking. Western smokeless tobacco has the same low risk as vaping and is certainly a tobacco product.

Nicotine is extracted from tobacco and is the main (and only) active ingredient in e-liquid. By claiming that nicotine is not tobacco is the same as someone saying ... is not really ......... I think the legal system would not look kindly on that. The big lie is that all tobacco products are equally risky. That is the fundamental lie that has plagued us for the last 40 years. By trying to distance yourself from tobacco you are in fact buying into the big lie.

Edit: I see the ECF censers have deleted parts of the above post, which makes it rather difficult to have an adult discussion among adults, but so it goes.....
 
Last edited:

dwainew

Full Member
Aug 6, 2013
17
14
CA
Yeh, Stubby, perfect timing, eh? See the petition copy below.

Believe me, I understand the difficulty in formulating this premise and in the final analysis the logic could either be flawed or simply indefensible no matter how logical. A society ultimately decides what is acceptable or not, regardless of what the minority thinks. That's the way it goes with complex social issues, but I won't stop trying to evolve the points of fact and how they relate to the issue until I'm convinced it's futile or have been convinced otherwise.

I agree that several of your points are viable (and welcome) against the premise and look forward to addressing them later after I have more time to consider them. But one thing's for sure, I'm not blindly buying into any lies, political or otherwise. In fact, I won't hesitate to help expand another person's side of a fair minded debate because I don't argue for the sake of argument, but to learn more about a subject of interest, especially differing points of view.

For instance, nicotine is addictive. That's a fact that can't be refuted. It doesn't appear in the petition because of lack of space to address the facts. But it does raise the parallel question, why does a society give its government the authority to regulate a substance; it's potential for harm, it's addictive properties, or some unacceptable combination of both? One could list many substances that exhibit one or the other that are not themselves regulated in any meaningful way.

Thus my inclusion of caffeine in the petition, if only to emphasize the fact that not all addictive substances are necessarily harmful in society's eyes. A chain smoker is generally vilified, while a chronic coffee user hardly raises an eyebrow. Vaping nicotine has really gummed up the ANTZ clock. It looks like smoking, but now has no second hand effects (to be fleshed out more) and affects the user in a way equivalent to a cup of coffee. This is why they are going nuts!

What if I vape only caffeine (or vitamin B12 or virgin juice)? Is my PV still a tobacco related device? Completely remove the 4700+ known carcinogens out of tobacco, leaving only a purified chemical similar in human toxicity to caffeine and ask "why would you regulate this?", simply for posterity, or is it all about the money? (of course it is)

Anyway, here's the petition. I hope you sign it unless you truly believe it will be detrimental to your view of the cause....

WE PETITION THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO:

Become the world leader in the fight to end the tobacco pandemic that kills 6 million members of the human race annually


Current research indicates that nicotine is a negligible contributing factor to tobacco related mortality.

Nicotine is toxicologically equivalent to caffeine and is NOT carcinogenic.

Delivery media of Electronic Cigarettes (EC) are demonstrably safe to humans after decades of research and use in myriad products we consume every day.

I propose:

The FDA immediately halt all attempts to associate ECs to [crap, a syntax error, should be WITH!] tobacco products or regulations before unbiased scientific review.

The US commit to immediately reallocate a substantial portion of tobacco related budgets towards the research of EC efficacy and to not impede citizens’ freedom of informed choice related to EC use.

The US invite other countries to join a concerted war on tobacco related deaths worldwide, with ECs as the new weapon.

Created:.Sep 30, 2013
 

dwainew

Full Member
Aug 6, 2013
17
14
CA
The only way to obtain is if this thing gets posted at the top of every page here on ECF

Please, educate me.... I submitted such a post in the general e-smoking section (with that exact intent) and retired1 not only moved it to this room, but closed it, simply stating it was SPAM!? Not only stiffing the message, but allowing one negative response, with no way to respond in kind. No further explanation, no suggestions on how to do it right, nada. This is not my first run-in with retired1, without a single kind word despite my posts being generally well accepted and lively. I'm pretty confused and starting to consider taking my ideas somewhere a little kinder.

I've added links from one post in another before without such an oppressive action being taken. Generally speaking, how is one supposed to reference back to a previous post without such a reaction?

In fact, I don't even want to include a link to the closed post, titled "Nicotine is NOT Tobacco", for fear of THIS thread being closed!
 

Stubby

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 22, 2009
2,104
1,992
Madison, WI USA
The problem is that the basic idea that tobacco is the problem is a lie. You are right that the recreational use of nicotine is not the major issue. What you don't appear to understand is that tobacco harm reduction (THR) is not limited to e-cigs. There is a whole range of tobacco products that are in fact very low risk equal to that of e-cigs. They would include snus, nasal snuff, dissolvables, and american style moist snuff (dip). The last one is likely the most controversial here in the US but the studies show that dip has essentially the same low risk as snus, which has the same low risk as vaping, if not lower.

By not distinguishing between tobacco and smoking you are inadvertently pushing the lie that has dominated the discussion on tobacco for decades and giving credence to the anti-tobacco zealots. Basically you are acknowledging that they are correct on smokeless tobacco. That would be a very bad move for the e-cig community to make. Trying to distance yourself from tobacco, as tempting as it first appears, is doomed to fail. The same lies that are being thrown at e-cigs are the same lies that have been thrown at smokeless tobacco for a very long time. You can try and draw a line in the sand, but don't expect the zealots to respect it. Just look at what is happening in the EU to show just how far they are willing to go.

Your war on tobacco related deaths (and really a war on tobacco) would likely not be to much appreciated by the 9 million of so smokeless tobacco users in the US, and need I even mention Sweden and Norway.
 

NorthOfAtlanta

Ultra Member
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Mar 27, 2011
1,616
3,582
Canton, GA
^^^^^^^^ This, replace tobacco with cigarettes and you have a petition I would sign. Wrapping tobacco in paper and selling it in packs is what started 99% of the health problems with it.

The ANTZ went from cigarettes bad to tobacco bad to evil nicotine instead of staying on the real killer, cigarettes.
 
Last edited:

Bill Godshall

Executive Director<br/> Smokefree Pennsylvania
ECF Veteran
Apr 2, 2009
5,171
13,288
67
The White House Petition website was shut down by the partial government shut down
We the People Temporarily Disabled | The White House

Stubby is correct, there is no tobacco pandemic, but rather a cigarette pandemic.

E-cigarette prohibitionists are the ones who have falsely claimed there is a tobacco pandemic, and they consider e-cigarettes part of the tobacco pandemic, which is why they've been trying to ban and/or excessively regulate e-cigs.

Finally, its best to call attention to Obama's failure to respond to our last White House Petition, which I'm not going to post since its not accessible on the White House Petition site.
 

2coils

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Nov 29, 2012
1,504
2,500
New Jersey
Please, educate me.... I submitted such a post in the general e-smoking section (with that exact intent) and retired1 not only moved it to this room, but closed it, simply stating it was SPAM!? Not only stiffing the message, but allowing one negative response, with no way to respond in kind. No further explanation, no suggestions on how to do it right, nada. This is not my first run-in with retired1, without a single kind word despite my posts being generally well accepted and lively. I'm pretty confused and starting to consider taking my ideas somewhere a little kinder.

I've added links from one post in another before without such an oppressive action being taken. Generally speaking, how is one supposed to reference back to a previous post without such a reaction?

In fact, I don't even want to include a link to the closed post, titled "Nicotine is NOT Tobacco", for fear of THIS thread being closed!

Apparently, you will not have the support of some here due to some wording issues. I agree, technically they are correct. Many veterans of the forum are more resourceful than myself, as I am still learning the right approach in this fight. AS for getting support from the mods and the forum, the best thing to do is ask them. Send them a PM if you are unclear on something. They are ALL here for the same purposes as we are. The ECF is a wonderful resource to get a message across. If you play by the rules ECF will support you. If the petition is well supported, you can ask them to make it a sticky at the top of a page. Good Luck! Hope this helps.
 

dwainew

Full Member
Aug 6, 2013
17
14
CA
Thanks for all the info and rational advice, folks. I obviously have a lot more to learn on the subject. Despite all the reading I've done, I never came across any research or discussion regarding the safer tobacco based products. That could have tempered my wording significantly. Apparently I'm another unwitting victim of the ANTZ warchest.

Any links to the best known sources of info on this specific aspect of the subject would be appreciated. I'll obviously do my own research, but would like to know if there are some concise, well organized sources to start with.

Back to the drawing board.

And next time, I promise to float any proposed copy for a sanity check before tattooing it to my forehead!:oops:
 

rothenbj

Vaping Master
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jul 23, 2009
8,285
7,707
Green Lane, Pa
Thanks for all the info and rational advice, folks. I obviously have a lot more to learn on the subject. Despite all the reading I've done, I never came across any research or discussion regarding the safer tobacco based products. That could have tempered my wording significantly. Apparently I'm another unwitting victim of the ANTZ warchest.

Any links to the best known sources of info on this specific aspect of the subject would be appreciated. I'll obviously do my own research, but would like to know if there are some concise, well organized sources to start with.

Back to the drawing board.

And next time, I promise to float any proposed copy for a sanity check before tattooing it to my forehead!:oops:

Don't be too hard on yourself. I started this journey over four years ago. I seriously reduced my smoking the first six months from 2-3 packs a day to around six cigarettes. However the constant dealing with batteries, atty maintenance and carrying around supplies had my cigarette consumption starting to rise. I also was missing something and started asking questions.

Smokeless was brought up and this strange thing called snus caught my attention. My first reaction was that vision of spitting into a bottle and that smokeless was worse than smoking. However, in less that 30 days of a lot of reading and questions on here, I realized that our leaders had sold us ideologically driven propaganda. Massive studies were done in Sweden showing clearly the reduced risk and the only argument the ANTZ could muster in the argument on why Sweden's smoking related illnesses were so much lower than the rest of the world was "Sweden's different". Really!

The EU is still doing everything possible to keep snus from being available throughout the EU and they'll soon be attacking E cigs on the same basis. Health decisions today have little basis in science as it relates to these products.
 

NorthOfAtlanta

Ultra Member
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Mar 27, 2011
1,616
3,582
Canton, GA
Thanks for all the info and rational advice, folks. I obviously have a lot more to learn on the subject. Despite all the reading I've done, I never came across any research or discussion regarding the safer tobacco based products. That could have tempered my wording significantly. Apparently I'm another unwitting victim of the ANTZ warchest.

Any links to the best known sources of info on this specific aspect of the subject would be appreciated. I'll obviously do my own research, but would like to know if there are some concise, well organized sources to start with.+



Back to the drawing board.

And next time, I promise to float any proposed copy for a sanity check before tattooing it to my forehead!:oops:

I was in the same boat having been brainwashed with the ANTZ BS over many years, CASAA has a good overview on ST with many links to studies and articles embedded in it. Smokefree Health Effects
 

kristin

ECF Guru
ECF Veteran
Aug 16, 2009
10,448
21,120
CASAA - Wisconsin
casaa.org
For instance, nicotine is addictive. That's a fact that can't be refuted.

Actually, it can and has been refuted. ;)

It hasn't been proven that nicotine is "addictive" outside of tobacco anymore than alcohol or caffeine are "addictive." And many smokers easily switching to low or zero nicotine e-liquid shows that not even all tobacco users are strongly or even addicted to the nicotine as much as the behavior.

Studies using nicotine patches (15 mg comparable nicotine to 15 cigarettes) to treat ulcerative colitis have shown that after 6 months of continuous use, the patients were not dependent upon nicotine:
No withdrawal symptoms suggesting nicotine addiction have been reported either after 4–6 weeks of therapy in short-term studies, or after a period of up to 6 months in the only long-term study available.
Nicotine treatment for ulcerative colitis

In this case, nicotine use is not only found to not be addictive, but actually beneficial.

There is also evidence that many smokers/tobacco users are "self-medicating" for stress, anxiety, mild depression and/or attention/memory/concentration disorder that is alleviated by the nicotine and/or other MAOIs in tobacco. In such cases, it is not nicotine withdrawal symptoms (addiction) keeping them "hooked," but rather the same effect as a patient going off of their medication for those conditions. (Meaning those nicotine users are experiencing the loss of the benefits of nicotine the same as they would had they discontinued taking a prescription drug. If someone stops taking anti-depression medicine and experiences symptoms, it is not called "withdrawal," it is considered a return of the symptoms of their condition.)
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread