Minors and Vaping...bad news

[ladyraj]

We knew it would happen sooner or later. Frankly, I was surprised when a 13 year old started participating on this very forum. But it is definitely bad when a news agency sends minors on an undercover sting operation to bust a PV kiosk:

E-Cigarettes Under Fire - NBC Action News KSHB-TV 41

Excerpts:
"Despite ECA goals, we were clearly told it's a healthy alternative at Independence Center and Oak Park Mall kiosks by companies that are not part of the ECA membership.

At Smoke51, the owner calls it a "healthy alternative."

His salesman says, "It's not harmful to you."

The salesman went on to say, "You're getting a cigarette with all the pros and not the cons. It saves your life and it saves your health."

In Independence Center, the flavors were pushed to a minor we sent to the kiosk.

"Most girls really like it again my wife absolutely loves the blueberry. It gives you Vitamin D and it gives you the exact same thing you get out of a regular cigarette the only difference it's not killing you," the salesman said at Smoking Everywhere."

More:
John Wickwire says his 17-year-old son came home from the mall and talked all about electronic cigarettes. John says his son was with a group of teens who were all under age 18 except for one.

"He came home all excited, and I was like, freaked, and I think he was surprised by how I reacted.

Last excerpt:
"However, when our minor and intern went to his kiosk, they were offered an e-cigarette with no nicotine.

Our intern asked, "So what's the point of that?"

The salesman answered, "An oral fixation. It just feels like a cigarette if you want to try the zero one I'll let you try it."

A few seconds later, our minor was puffing away on a product that looked like a cigarette but supposedly has no nicotine."
--------------------------------

I understand the concept that if kids are going to smoke...vaping is safer. I understand that some venders say stupid things (example-blueberry eliquid gives vitamin D). I understand that teens look older than their age.

I understand, but the majority of nonsmoking/nonvaping society we live in, do not.

 

[saphic]

wow. legally, if they have no nicotine it should be fine, but still.

 

[mcl5000]

Another stupid move by SE. Worthless company ruining things for everybody.

There is absolutely NO reason for these kiosks to be allowed in malls. The dude working the register at 7-11 isn't puffing away on a cigarette telling you to try it, so why do we need clowns pushing e-cigs in malls. People working at grocery stores aren't pouring shots for people to sample as they're walking through the store.

Bottom line - you don't need to give out samples of minor-prohibited products, and things will turn bad if they continue to do so.

 

[PlanetScribbles]

Any individuals can easily discredit any product they choose to. At will. It doesn't make the claims warranted, if it is based on just the actions of a few misguided salesmen looking for a boost in their commission based sales.
I could easily play the same card by saying that childrens buggies dismember minors. But I won't, because it is clearly an over-reaction based on a few isolated incidents caused by plain stupidity, or possibly just a simple oversight, on the part of the parent.
Anyone who would use a story like this to discredit the whole industry merely discredit themselves.

 

[suhrim21]

Great this is just what we need to give the D**n FDA more fuel for the fire. What the hell were the employees thinking letting minors try it. Yea we are all screwed now because of SE and smoke51.

 

[kristin]

Employees are not the same thing as companies. I've seen restaurants where the employees take shortcuts and/or ignore health standards. Not the policy of the company, but they can only do so much.

Same thing with this situation. The owner of the kiosk here said he would make a lesson by firing the employee.

I think it was actually a well-rounded article and gave voice to both sides of the issue.

But I now agree with keeping these kiosks out of malls - they should be off on their own like tobacco shops and liquor stores.

 

[hizen]

Another stupid move by SE. Worthless company ruining things for everybody.

There is absolutely NO reason for these kiosks to be allowed in malls. The dude working the register at 7-11 isn't puffing away on a cigarette telling you to try it, so why do we need clowns pushing e-cigs in malls. People working at grocery stores aren't pouring shots for people to sample as they're walking through the store.

Bottom line - you don't need to give out samples of minor-prohibited products, and things will turn bad if they continue to do so.

Couldn't agree more ...........the day that Smoking Everywhere is out of business will be a big step toward legitimizing this business in this country.

 

[gooney0]

I disagree a bit. Employees are the company.

These things would be very unlikely if the company made more effort to prevent them. The salesmen are motivated by greed. This is by design not by accident.

The cashier at 7-11 doesn't personally care if you buy cigarettes. In fact both the company and the state have given him motivation to not sell to minors. So much so that I sometimes get checked for ID at 36 years old!

Company "culture" spreads all the way to employees. Every employee is attempting to make their boss happy.

If I owned that kiosk would this have happened? No. I would have prevented this.

I own my own company and take my reputation very seriously. I would never let someone represent me poorly. SE clearly doesn't feel this way. I've seen their kiosks and I was offended.

SE needs to go out of business and quickly.

-Gooney0

 

[ladyraj]

Kristen, an employee is the company (for all intents and purposes) in the public view. Therefore, the company is only as good as it's worst employee. The public could care less that a single vendor is not the status quo. One bad article where a minor was "engaged" can take 10, 50, or 100 articles to rectify, if the error could be resolved effectively in the non-vaping public. We can be comforted that more of these stories haven't been published for widespread perusal, but even a few can be detrimental to our cause. 8-o

I'm not sure where the fair and balanced part comes in...Why shouldn't a legal product be sold at a mall?

 

[Our House]

If I owned that kiosk would this have happened? No. I would have prevented this.

Bad analogy.

If you owned SE, could that have happened at one of your kiosks? Yes. You couldn't have prevented it. The bigger a company gets, the more "leakage" there is to be expected.

For example, NJOY products are on display in many retail stores, truck stops, etc. Is NJOY (the company) responsible for what every snot-nosed punk cashier claims about the products at every Pilot truck stop across America? I don't think so. They can do their best to protect against it, or punish for it, but only after it happens.

 

[suhrim21]

here is the thing. the FDA wants these banned. They are already saying the flavors are made to be marketed to kids. Now you have employees selling these things to minors. now the FDA has another thing they can argue about. Now they can say that the 0mg liquid is designed to get children hooked on it so when they are legal age they will smoke. they also now have some "scandolous" but nonetheless ground to say and give proof that these are being marketed to children. and that is what scares me. you bring that up in court and bam It doesnt matter what we say they will be shut down.

 

[ladyraj]

Any individuals can easily discredit any product they choose to. At will. It doesn't make the claims warranted, if it is based on just the actions of a few misguided salesmen looking for a boost in their commission based sales.
I could easily play the same card by saying that childrens buggies dismember minors. But I won't, because it is clearly an over-reaction based on a few isolated incidents caused by plain stupidity, or possibly just a simple oversight, on the part of the parent.
Anyone who would use a story like this to discredit the whole industry merely discredit themselves.

I agree with the sentiment of your statements but disagree with the logic that anyone discrediting an industry for various incidents discredit themselves. The non-vaping community might understand a few product defects but they have been programmed to believe that anything related to nicotine/smoking/simulated smoking is mere corruption of the Nation's children for profit. (training wheels etc even if it's non-nic). Over-reaction it may be but that is the clime we must operate in.

Vendors should know this and act accordingly...if they don't the result is more far-reaching than a mere kiosk in a mall.

 

[Our House]

Just like cigarettes, there should be hefty fines in place for anyone caught selling these to minors.

Problem is -- IT VIRTUALLY NEVER HAPPENS -- so the people who stand to benefit from the penalties won't make any money!!

Funny, right?

 

[PlanetScribbles]

The non-vaping community might understand a few product defects but they have been programmed to believe that anything related to nicotine/smoking/simulated smoking is mere corruption of the Nation's children for profit. (training wheels etc even if it's non-nic). Over-reaction it may be but that is the clime we must operate in.

This is the whole reason why 12 stupid parents letting their kids amputate a finger on a buggy, from a vast sample of 300m Americans, can cost a company like MacLaren $$$m through sheer carelessness and improper use of said product. Over-reaction.
But that over-reaction does not make MacLaren buggys a dangerous, flawed product. No more than it makes e-cigarettes dangerous to minors. It is a product of nanny-state political correctness gone mad, driven into the public with brute force, that causes the zealous pursuit of anyone who even gets within 100yds of a minor whilst holding anything that resembles a cigarette. Ever see 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers'? The analogy is too close for comfort
The discredit I speak of is attributable to the majority of right-wing media outlets, and the state, for it's relentless pursuit of 100% perfection and zero risk across the board. What's next? Ban bubble gum because minors can choke on it?
There is a huge difference between dangerous product and careless/improper use of a product. This is a point we need to be making to the 300m Americans I spoke of earlier. 'Stuff' is allowed to happen, even if it shouldn't have, and someone or something doesn't always have to be held responsible and taken to task. Accidents happen. Sometimes that fact just has to be accepted and lived with. The climate may be whats at fault, not e-cigs? Is that a possibility?

 

[taz3cat]

My concern is all those thousands of underage children that are nooked on cigarettes before they can legally buy cigarettes. Do we make them wait to get of cigarettes till they are 18 or 19,(what every the age). The news media fail to take into account the underage additction to smoking and the need to get these children off tobacco cigarettes. That is just something for everyone to think about. and my 2 cents worth

 

[Territoo]

My response:

As an electronic cigarette user, I find this article to be very good, fair and balanced. It is also very disturbing because of the facts it reveals. Selling e-cigarettes to minors should not be permitted, and placing these kiosks in malls where minors frequent is going to do nothing but raise their curiosity about the products. It is sad that the efforts of ECA to ensure the availibility of this wonderful product as a smoking alternative for adults is being undermined by a few greedy companies. It is because of the actions of such companies as Smoking Everywhere, permitting the sale to minors and making unproved health claims, that these products that the e-cigarette's future is in jepordy.
True, there is little scientific data proving the e-cigarette to be safe and an effective smoking cessation, but there is evidence that it might be both. The FDA's own study indicates while there are carcinogens in the nicotine liquid, the levels were comparable to the approved Nicotrol inhaler and far less than cigarettes. Recently there was an online petition in favor of the e-cigarette and it gathered over 13,000 signatures. Every comment on that petition told how e-cigarettes helped to quit smoking and improve their life and/or their health. What is needed is the research necessary to prove or refute these observations. If the e-cigarette is banned, it is highly improbable that this research will be done. Responsible vendors, such as the members of ECA, will not have resources to fund it.
Make the e-cigarette illegal to sell to minors, keep it available as an alternative for smoking adults, and determine that which common sense suggests, that it probably safer than smoking cigarettes, might help you quit smoking, and could save the lives of millions of smokers.

 

[hizen]

I have a question for you. If preventing the sale to minors meant the banning any of internet sales period ..................would you be in favor of that?

 

[ladyraj]

Banning internet sales of enticing flavors to children is next on the Anti's hit list. We all know what happens next....

 

[JustJulie]

Personally, I think suggestions that e-cigs shouldn't be sold at kiosks is premature and perhaps a bit of a knee-jerk reaction.

I've never been a big fan of SE, but, by the same token, I'm willing to give the devil its due. Time and time again we hear from people who say that their first exposure to e-cigs was at a kiosk.

Not only is a kiosk often the first time someone learns about e-cigs, it also provides an opportunity for someone to actually touch and use an e-cig. For some people, this is a very important consideration because they're unlikely to buy a product like this on the internet without having had the chance to see it.

Having said all of this, I think we would all agree that it's vital that e-cig companies make a serious commitment to not sell to minors. Period. But the fact that a SE kiosk got "caught" with its pants around its ankles is really not significantly different than the current state of affairs with retailers getting caught selling tobacco products to minors.

FayObserver.com - Clerks cited for selling tobacco to minors

Actually, the biggest difference is that right now, it's not against the law to sell e-cigs containing nicotine to minors in most jurisdictions. And to put things in a bit more perspective, the minor was offered an e-cig WITHOUT nicotine.

Great press for us? Of course not. But it seems to me that the owner of the kiosk is taking this issue seriously.

As for the flavors, I don't know what to say. In his talk at Vapersplace, Mr. Salmon, President of the ECA, opined that our battle would perhaps be easier if we were to eliminate the sale of flavors. That might be right, but I personally feel it's a red herring. The anti's are going to hate just about everything associated with e-cigs. Let's focus on reminding the public that we serve fruity alcohol drinks to adults, and adults are able to get GOVERNMENT APPROVED flavored nicotine products. I can go out and buy "Fruit Chill" Nicorette gum, or "Cappuccino" or "Cherry" Commit lozenges.

 

[TaketheRedPill]

My concern is all those thousands of underage children that are nooked on cigarettes before they can legally buy cigarettes. Do we make them wait to get of cigarettes till they are 18 or 19,(what every the age). The news media fail to take into account the underage additction to smoking and the need to get these children off tobacco cigarettes. That is just something for everyone to think about. and my 2 cents worth

Are we going to use the 'for the children' argument for our side, too? I say we do make them wait. And for several very good reasons.

Adult activities should be reinforced as 'adult' activities every chance a parent (or big brother or big sister) can get. Smoking is not a civil right - it's an adult privilege. It's our moral responsibility as adults to discourage minors from engaging in adult activities.

While the lack of carcenogens is played up mightly, other effects of nicotine are generally ignored or not discussed by salespeople chasing commissions. (and how much do we actually even know about the various niquids? seen any ingredient labels lately? ) If we're truely concerned about the health of our youth, it's a much better idea to gather more information and user-based research from an older age group, who, quite frankly, have less to risk, before we allow our youth anywhere near unmonitored intake of nicotine liquid.

There are thousands of posts about 'throat hit' being related to nicotine level, along with a lot of enthusiastic encouragement to try higher nicotine levels when starting to vape, as if 'throat hit' is the only element of vaping that matters. I've seen 6mg/ml described as 'wimpy' or 'no throat hit', yet it seems to be a goal strength for many people using PV's to reduce their nicotine intake. A minor probably won't realize the significance of nicotine levels or recognize tolerance building because, unlike cigarettes, there's no immediate physical clue you're getting too much nicotine. Minors do recognize what the 'in crowd' touts as acceptable, tho. So a combination of inexperience, misinformation and lack of packaging information could quickly lead to even stronger addictions than could be obtained from smoking. How many minors even know what 1ml of 24mg is equal to in analogs? or how to safely measure the 1ml in a sterile manner? or have parents that would be 'cool' with the minor having syringes floating around? The post comes to mind of the young poster who, out of nicquid, smoked 4 packs of cigarettes in two hours trying to satisfy his nicotine craving. Will we end up with twen-teens hopelessly addicted, perhaps far deeper than the 40/50/60yo'ds this product is helping? I often ask, if you used PVs to get off analogs, what will you use to get off PVs?

Minors also aren't best known for being consciencious about things they do, and that would most certainly translate into carelessness with nicotine liquid and the behavior of vaping in general, such as vaping around 2-yo'ds, or leaving bottles within reach of their siblings, or spilling a bottle on the couch and not vacuuming it out - they just don't think about it. Their rooms are all the evidence we need. Not really their fault - it's biology - their brains haven't fully developed critical thinking synapses until their early 20's. But is this the end result we want? Is this a risk we want to take as a society with our youth?

Finally, and maybe even one of the most important points for the chances of public acceptance of PVs, is the attitude of the 'me' generation towards PV's. More than a few believe that because a Chinese instructioned box and a commissioned kiosk person says 'smoke anywhere,' that it's true, and they tend to run with it, to the complete disregard of any sense of propriety or timing already imposed by society. The 'in your face' attitude jeapordizes the ability of those who really do truely need this product, and for whom the product is not a fad: the 'experienced' (and usually, desperate) smoker, willing to shell out $300 for a kit and supplies.

For every story of a 20 or 30 or 40 year smoker breaking the bonds of slavery to analogs, is another story of some young buck or dudette blowing smoke in their boss's face, or talking about how somehow they're completely incapable of sitting thru a lecture or picking up a loaf of bread at the supermarket without a dose of nicotine. If there is some element to niquid that compells folks to need to vape every several minutes, as opposed to the usual every half to full hour or more for analogs, we need to more fully explore what it is, because it's a pretty alarming behavior that casts a very negative shadow on vaping in general, even to older vapers. Today we have the twen-teen challenging professors with their vaping, tomorrow will we have pre-teens challenging their JrHi teachers? because it's 'legal' according to some kiosk guy?? Again, is this the end result we want?

Where do we draw the line? Is it not our responsibility as adults, to wholeheartedly reinforce that vaping a poison more dangerous than rattlesnake venom is an adult activity, perhaps a less-unsafe activity than smoking analogs, but certainly not a carte blanche 'safe' activity? That vaping is an activity that has appropriate times and places to engage in? Or even that vaping is an activity that's much more targeted to those who've tried other means to quit analogs over a period of years, than to those who just want another way to challenge 'the man' or look 'cool'? Which approach is going to get us more widespread public acceptance? just sayin...

TTRP