News article from BBC re: ecigs
- Thread starter farmer_bric
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Haha. So now it's "Somebody think of the adults!!!!!!!!!!!" instead of children.
Interesting, this is the first article I've seen mentioning the fallout from the purchase of Blu. It's biased as always, but it has some interesting points about changing the cultural perceptions of "smoking" or nicotine use. I had considerate a resurgence of nicotine use, but I hadn't really thought of the psychology of marketing e-cigarettes as glamorous or rebellious against an anti-smoking society. 
I had to laugh at this; "Could undermine smoking cessation efforts".
I think like most Canadians, I hope that law the changes to just prohibit the sale of nicotine to minors and the law stops there, but it'll still be a while before we know.
I had to laugh at this; "Could undermine smoking cessation efforts".
I think like most Canadians, I hope that law the changes to just prohibit the sale of nicotine to minors and the law stops there, but it'll still be a while before we know.
Last edited:
Interesting article. Being from England, it's also good to see one from this side of the pond, positive or negative.
Awesome! A news piece with some clear stating about them using vapour instead of smoke. But then...
and
For shame.
I really feel that that is one of the main distinctions that needs to be pushed further and made clearer in the public eye. Especially in articles like these (these quote are written by the author, not quotes from interviewed persons). I am sure one of the main hurdles people face of vaping in public is the assumption that the cloud coming from your mouth is harmful smoke, which I understand because it looks the same. If a non-smoker (read: non-nicotine-user) sees the BBC writing that it is "smoke", it becomes that much harder for the same people to believe some guy on the street that has already (accidentally) slighted them and their well-being.
Awesome! A news piece with some clear stating about them using vapour instead of smoke. But then...
and
For shame.
I really feel that that is one of the main distinctions that needs to be pushed further and made clearer in the public eye. Especially in articles like these (these quote are written by the author, not quotes from interviewed persons). I am sure one of the main hurdles people face of vaping in public is the assumption that the cloud coming from your mouth is harmful smoke, which I understand because it looks the same. If a non-smoker (read: non-nicotine-user) sees the BBC writing that it is "smoke", it becomes that much harder for the same people to believe some guy on the street that has already (accidentally) slighted them and their well-being.
p.s. I came here from the "new posts" tab and didn't realise it was in the Canadian Forum.
Call me a pessimist but I have concerns about big tobacco's in your face approach to marketing E-cigs. Any product that is associated with them is bound to get a knee jerk reaction from regulators and anti-smoking groups.
I live in the US and from what I've seen forcing the FDA to determine the saftey standards of a product by careless marketing leads to strict regulation.
The purchase of Blu was great for big tobacco, they get to:
-capitalize on a young, unregulated industry with the tactics that they where forced to retire 30 years ago
-when they cause enough trouble and force regulations they will be able to monopolize the market because of their endless funding, armies of attorneys/lobbyist and decades of experience with manipulating regulations.
It's gonna be a shame to watch all of my favorite small vendors get pushed out of the way and e-cigs get taxed beyond belief.
On a lighter note Hello from down south!
I live in the US and from what I've seen forcing the FDA to determine the saftey standards of a product by careless marketing leads to strict regulation.
The purchase of Blu was great for big tobacco, they get to:
-capitalize on a young, unregulated industry with the tactics that they where forced to retire 30 years ago
-when they cause enough trouble and force regulations they will be able to monopolize the market because of their endless funding, armies of attorneys/lobbyist and decades of experience with manipulating regulations.
It's gonna be a shame to watch all of my favorite small vendors get pushed out of the way and e-cigs get taxed beyond belief.
On a lighter note Hello from down south!
Interesting that such an article should come from the Beeb, who are in a country that has already approved self-regulation and market authorization as general merchandise (rather than as a tobacco product or drug delivery device). It felt like the article was slanted a little to the right ("cigarettes in any form are bad, mmkay?") but they gave time to the "open minded" end of things, so it wasn't all bad.
Even so however, it's more of a balanced article than we've seen in the past, so maybe the mainstream media is starting to shift towards the left end of the spectrum, and perhaps that may be a small indicator of a shift in public opinion, too. Certainly it's a bit more evidence that E-cigs are gaining ground in the mainstream consciousness.
Even so however, it's more of a balanced article than we've seen in the past, so maybe the mainstream media is starting to shift towards the left end of the spectrum, and perhaps that may be a small indicator of a shift in public opinion, too. Certainly it's a bit more evidence that E-cigs are gaining ground in the mainstream consciousness.
We have good stuff here too, Marob.
Hey, I'm a fan! Lobsterbacks gotta stick together...
WRONG. Studies *have* now been conducted.... and they concluded that there is no significant risk to humans associated with the use of e-cigs. So there.
New Report Shows No Danger from E-Cigarette Vapour Exposure
It might just be my pessimism, but a big tobacco company playing in the field of vaping leaves me wondering. Are they looking to the future? Are they setting up it for failure? Look at what they do with cigarettes to make them more addictive. Would they mess with our E-liquid enough that the government steps in to regulate it, creating an approval process with a steep barrier to entry, locking out the mom and pop shops? We all know that it is always about money, but just where do they see the money coming from in the future? is it in a product line that could cut into the sales of their existing product... or are they trying to destroy a threat to their existing product from the inside?
yep..if I believed there were any signs of toxins I wouldn't allow my kids in my room when i'm vaping..furthermore I would go outside to vape..
also the article claims there are no risks yet imply there are risks, but they are just not known yet..sure there are risks..are they as bad as eating a daily double down from KFC? most definitely not..man let us live a bit..
Last edited:
I still think that there is significant risk to vaping to believe otherwise is foolish. I just believe it to be less harmful than smoking. these studies are not done on the juice i am vaping on the wick im using.
Either way I don't think it makes a difference to the final outcome. Big tobacco's entry into vaping can only be bad news imo.
If everyone continues to buy from their current vendors and not switch over to the big tobacco companies juices etc, the mom and pop shops can survive... and we are already skirting the current regulations so new regs can also be skirted.
Every notable independent study conducted so far (CHANGE, IVAQS, ClearStream) agrees that there is no statistically significant risk from second-hand vapor.
i thought id see this article pop up a few times in the forums. undoubtably causing quite a storm. it all boils down to money my friends. something that cuts into one mans pocket to line anothers, is the enemy . vaping is the enemy of tobacco and it is therefore the enemy of taxating countries also . just be happy you can vape all you like and that the media didnt scare you off
I wonder if vaping (and vapers) would have an easier go of it if it had been invented 10 years earlier, when public (restaurant, bar, etc) smoking was still pretty common and, if not readily accepted, at least tolerated/allowed.
It just seems like people today freak the eff out if they get even a whiff of cigarette smoke when exiting a building. I think some of these people just see something that looks like evil, deadly, kill-you-on-the-spot smoke, and they can't handle it being okay.
I also think there's a segment of society who is always looking for something new to regulate. Right now, having pretty much won the smoke battle, junk food is the current thing to be destroyed. Maybe e-cigs will be next...
It just seems like people today freak the eff out if they get even a whiff of cigarette smoke when exiting a building. I think some of these people just see something that looks like evil, deadly, kill-you-on-the-spot smoke, and they can't handle it being okay.
I also think there's a segment of society who is always looking for something new to regulate. Right now, having pretty much won the smoke battle, junk food is the current thing to be destroyed. Maybe e-cigs will be next...
Personally I'm assuming there is some risk, but comparable to unhealthy eating or excess caffeine or alcohol consumption. I'm still a tad worried about long term effects personally, since there are *no* long term statistics. Despite the tests on the exhaled vapour, understanding exactly how vapour may affect heavy users is a bit different. There really does need to be more testing done in my opinion.
You've gotta remember not too long ago diacetyl and acetoin were common and fairly quickly removed once they were found to be harmful. I can't recall, but wasn't PEG found to be dangerous as well or was it simply impurities in the processing ?
I'm hoping for a positive outcome with Blu, in that they will put money towards positive American perceptions and regulations, which will push Canada into regulation. At some point this gray area we're in is going to be gone and everyone's just hoping for a favourable outcome. In a perfect world, nicotine liquid would just be restricted from being sold to minors and nothing else.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
