Has anyone else read this? FDA and e-cigarettes: Nicotine addiction must not be the norm
Last edited:
New vaping article
- Thread starter Govt Mule
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Wow that's the most biased thing I've read in a long time! Hopefully people will read the comments in addition to the article.
This was just an opinion piece. It DOES NOT indicate what the FDA is going to do. I hope this doesn't turn into another "the sky if falling" thread.
I couldn't contain myself to write something about the article as a whole so here's my commentary/rage on a few lines that make me want to do nasty things to the writer. From what I understand this is an independantly published article by someone of the Christian Science Monitor and not by the FDA. OP should edit the thread topic.
"These battery-powered devices, which heat a nicotine solution and create an inhalable vapor, are exploding in popularity – driven mostly by a tobacco industry in search of new addicts."
ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR MIND?! Excuse my use of cruise control but this is downright ridiculous.
"Indeed, the tobacco industry does not claim e-cigarettes are a temporary tool for ending tobacco addiction."
Who the hell did this person speak to? A BAT representative? I'm starting to doubt he/she even spoke to anyone.
"Yearly sales of e-cigarettes are already approaching $1 billion."
Just pull some numbers out of your *** while you're at it.
"These battery-powered devices, which heat a nicotine solution and create an inhalable vapor, are exploding in popularity – driven mostly by a tobacco industry in search of new addicts."
ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR MIND?! Excuse my use of cruise control but this is downright ridiculous.
"Indeed, the tobacco industry does not claim e-cigarettes are a temporary tool for ending tobacco addiction."
Who the hell did this person speak to? A BAT representative? I'm starting to doubt he/she even spoke to anyone.
"Yearly sales of e-cigarettes are already approaching $1 billion."
Just pull some numbers out of your *** while you're at it.
Stupid people. I am getting very angry when 4-5 people decide for my choice which is safer and basically decides for all the world
Maybe at some level big tobacco is pushing e-cigs but i just don't see it. To me, it seems like the community is what is driving them, other than nicotine itself, I haven't seen anyone on here promoting or even backing any products connected to the tobacco industry.
Just another ignorant article completely devoid of facts, written by an obvious ..... wishing for more government nanny regulations "for our own good".
I wonder how that nitwit would feel if the government decided that religion is harmful and passed regulations to ban it "for our own good'? Somehow I think they might decide that the Nanny State isn't such a good idea after all.
I wonder how that nitwit would feel if the government decided that religion is harmful and passed regulations to ban it "for our own good'? Somehow I think they might decide that the Nanny State isn't such a good idea after all.
I seemed like a Run-of-the-Mill Non e-Cigarette article to me. Nothing to get too Irate about.
I didn't see much talk in the article about Harm Reduction?
Seems like that is a Fundamental Component of e-Cigarettes. And the Overwhelming Reason that Most Smoking wish to Switch, or have Switched, to using an e-Cigarette.
I didn't see much talk in the article about Harm Reduction?
Seems like that is a Fundamental Component of e-Cigarettes. And the Overwhelming Reason that Most Smoking wish to Switch, or have Switched, to using an e-Cigarette.
The comments made me smile though. Don't worry I know the car the writer owns. I have Vito "Bully Bat" Bonano taking care of it, and don't worry his little prius doesn't have a metal plate under the driver seat. Mwahahaha.
So an article that has nothing positive to state about vaping and instead implies that a safer nicotine delivery system is not a good option, is nothing to be concerned about.
The path to severe restrictions is paved with this thinking.
Try Posting my FULL Post next time.
It will be Harder for you to Try and Twist my Words into something you think is Cutting.
You stated the article hand nothing to be irate about. After that you simply stated the article mentioned nothing about Harm Reduction and why people vape.
Since you see nothing to be "irate" about in that article, I stand by my comment.
zoidman, I'm not going to play this "game" with you. Everyone who posted in this thread found the article to be negative about vaping except you who found it nothing to be "irate" about. Since you can't figure it out by reading the article as everyone else did then me trying to "dumb" down the article will not help.
It seemed like a Straight Forward Question of you.
You got Mad because I wasn't Irate about some Silly Anti E-cigarette Article from a Source that I don't have much Respect for. I have read Dozens and Dozens of Such Articles.
Maybe if there had been More Substance to the Article. Or the Source had Carried a Little More Weight. But It was just your Garden Variety Anti e-Cigarette article you read on Page 18 of a Local News Paper.
Of course it was Negative about e-Cigarettes. Hello? I think that was the Point of the Article.
So Fill me in hear, what didn't You Find so Offensive about this Article?
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
