New ecig politics website online

[rolygate]

A confession: it's mine

http://www.ecigarette-politics.com

If you can help me by giving the site a link on a website, Facebook or other social sites, and so on - thanks.

You are also most welcome to contribute in any way: comment on the blog (it uses the Disqus system so you don't need an account on the website); or write a guest blog post on anything in the general topic area: politics, legal, regulation, health, THR science (please contact me); or even contribute an article or resource of some kind.

If someone wants to take over a specific topic area such as USA tobacco/health politics on the site, we'll create a specific section for that, and it's yours.

 

[AgentAnia]

The term "awesome" is overused, so I'll say: Your initial articles are awe-inspiring! Seldom, if ever, have I seen the entire vaping-THR issue so beautifully summarized. I hope everyone will go directly to this site and participate!

(Speaking of which, would someone be kind enough to explain Disqus to me? My inability to comment or access comments on blogs using Disqus has frustrated me in the past. Now it's become essential that I be able to use it. I look forward to any help provided and thank you for your patience and understanding...)

 

[rolygate]

Thank you, your opinion is very welcome.

Like you, I sometimes get locked up by these comment systems. Perhaps you could go directly to the Disqus site, create an account there, and maybe choose an alternative username if the original seems blocked perhaps due to an email issue.

http://disqus.com
https://disqus.com/profile/signup/

I recommend creating a new account not linked to Facebook etc.

 

[tommy2bad]

Good site Rolly.
You might want to include Ireland in the list of EU countries. Current situation is erectly no regulation imposed. Not due to the lack of regulation but because the two departments concerned cant decide which of them has jurisdiction. Health say not our concern unless they are a medicine and trade say not our concern as e-cigs would be a health matter.

 

[AgentAnia]

Like you, I sometimes get locked up by these comment systems. Perhaps you could go directly to the Disqus site, create an account there, and maybe choose an alternative username if the original seems blocked perhaps due to an email issue.

http://disqus.com
https://disqus.com/profile/signup/

I recommend creating a new account not linked to Facebook etc.

Thank you. Rolygate. I checked the Disqus site (have done so many times) and got promptly lost. However, I finally found a simple "click here to register with Disquis" link on your site, and have signed up.

Since my first post, have been perusing your inner-page articles. More awe.

 

[rolygate]

Thanks Tommy.

I've no idea why Ireland wasn't on there, but I blame Vapers Network who did the original info

It's on there now.

 

[Zurd]

great site, good work you did there !

May I suggest adding Canada on that page :
electronic-cigarettes-global-legal-status-2

Right now the legality is that it is illegal to sell ecig with nicotine in it :
To All Persons Interested in Importing, Advertising or Selling Electronic Smoking Products in Canada - Health Canada Notice 2009-03-27

edit : my bad there was also a page 1 with Canada, thanks for doing the site

 

[rolygate]

Zurd,

I have taken Paul Bergen's advice regarding what to put in the Canada entry. Basically, what he says is that Health Canada says it's illegal, but actually there is no law on the issue so they cannot prosecute anyone - essentially, they don't like the idea so they hassle vendors. It is legal because there is no law or case law or regulation or other reason why it is illegal; the only people saying it is illegal are HC and, basically, they don't count. They can make trouble for people, but that's about it. Some vendors shut down to avoid the hassle.

HC won't go to court because they would lose (as there is no law on this subject). Anyway, every law has been overturned whenever it has been challenged in court in every country. It seems that, at least in this area, the courts do not support one industry (pharma) using the law to remove a competing industry (ecigs) when there is no justifiable reason for doing so.

It appears that what is needed is for the trade to take out an injunction to stop HC from interfering illegally.

Thank you for the link and I will add that.

[edit]
That link is already in the Canada entry.

And, above, when I said "there is no law on the subject" (to paraphrase it), I meant that there is no specific law. HC are trying to apply other laws, but presumably they realise that this won't fly in court, as they haven't prosecuted anyone (as far as I am aware).

 

[2coils]

I have posted a link on my FB page with that great quote from your home page. Great stuff! Efforts like this and all that work hard to promote THR and e-cigs hopefully will be enough to win this ridicules fight we are all in. It ruins my day when I start thinking about all of the political nonsense that is attached to e-cigs. (so every day pretty much sucks in that sense)!! I am on my way to one of the only vape shops in jersey. I absolutely do not need any more vaping supplies, but I will go in and say thanks to the owners who put their .... on the line opening up a shop in this horrible climate. I will buy some stuff from them in support!!!

 

[Zurd]

Don't know much about disqus, but it would be great to have a plugin for it that will let people subscribe with an email, then, when any new article appears they get an alert by email. Like "subscribe2" for wordpress.

 

[Elnroth]

I've only read the front page of your site, and what a wonderful, concise, and easily understood explanation of THR and the opposition it's facing. Great job roly. I'm linking it everywhere I can, got to boost your juice

I'm going to take some time today to peruse the rest of the site.

 

[Vocalek]

You know, I'm thinking that we should stop calling it "tobacco harm reduction" in view of the fact that most tobacco products are nowhere near as harmful as smoking. The ANTZ have tried to demonize all tobacco products by substituting the word "tobacco" in sentences where the topic they are discussing is really smoking.

I'm thinking that next year the CDC page that was once called Smoking-Related Mortality but is now titled Tobacco-Related Mortality will be renamed Nicotine-Related Mortality.

Why not call it smoking harm reduction?

 

[Petrodus]

You know, I'm thinking that we should stop calling it "tobacco harm reduction" in view of the fact that most tobacco products are nowhere near as harmful as smoking. The ANTZ have tried to demonize all tobacco products by substituting the word "tobacco" in sentences where the topic they are discussing is really smoking.

I'm thinking that next year the CDC page that was once called Smoking-Related Mortality but is now titled Tobacco-Related Mortality will be renamed Nicotine-Related Mortality.

Why not call it smoking harm reduction?

Makes sense to me


I remember a discussion last year where we agreed
to stop saying "Less Hazardous" and substitute "Low Risk"
when comparing e-cigarettes to analogs ... LINK

 

[rolygate]

You're right Elaine. This might however be one of those 'e-cigarette vs PV' issues where we know what the answer is but can't go there anyway (a PV is what we use and it's not a cigarette in any way including an e- one, but for various practical reasons we can't change).

It's worth seriously thinking about, especially now that government organisations are starting to look as if they will try to 'own' THR for propaganda purposes. I'll make sure that this is clarified wherever I can, any way. As you say, the zealots are hardening up everywhere. Try finding the CDC's clinical trial of 800 subjects where everyone tested positive for nicotine as it is a natural part of the diet. They have buried that as deep as they can. I expect if you asked them for a copy they would deny it ever took place, or say it was 'unavailable' at present.