Now WE get tough .. Damnit!

[sunnyday]

Most of us are paying attention and feeling victimized by the half truth statements of the FDA driven by a few Special Interest groups with deep pockets. Thus, the non smoking community sees only the negative side of our potentially lifesaving tools of the trade-off. "If it looks like a cigarette, looks like you're smoking a cigarette then it's a cigarette ... of some kind." "Yeah, I saw that on the news, in the paper, those aren't good for you". We keep our cool, calmly explain and describe and to an analog smoker there is usually some interest, to a non smoker it's "OK, whatever, I just know it's a bad thing and should be illegal."
The following is a very direct, no Bulls**t statement/comparison using US government statistics to make our case and clarify the misleading media spew regarding e-cigs. Let this be the 1st of our mantras to equalize the fight for our rights to use a tobacco alternative.​

​

Electric Cigarettes (e-cig) vs. tobacco Choice

Let the smoker decide, not the government. The FDA released a statement on July 22, 2009 recommending people not use electronic cigarettes and proposed a ban until they can be regulated and deemed profitable by the government, as with tobacco products (in my opinion). Nicotine is a drug, ...... is a drug, and Caffeine is a drug. People should not use drugs. You will probably be a healthier person if you do NOT use these drugs. ...., as a cigarette smoker you have rights. If addicted to Nicotine shouldn’t YOU have the right to decide on a possible tobacco alternative if available?
Since 2004 an estimated 440,000 people per year die from tobacco related use. Since 2004 “0” (none) reported deaths have occurred from electronic cigarette use.

In my opinion, the healthy choice is clear. LET THE SMOKER DECIDE!
Paul Ferguson​

 

[Vocalek]

...When "medical experts" are more concerned about nicotine addiction than they are with my getting COPD, lung cancer, heart disease, etc. etc.

Example:

Gregory Connolly, director of tobacco control research at Harvard School of Public Health:
"We shouldn't be out there promoting harm," Connolly says, "even reduced harm."

And here is an interesting dialog on Harm Reduction
http://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/tobacco/documents/ctcpharmreductproceedcompletebooklet.pdf

Remember when they used to carefully control doses of pain medication for people dying of cancer, because they didn't want the dying person to become addicted?

 

[dragonpuff]

It's all the other chemicals in cigarette smoke that are killing people. No one is going to be healthy after a steady dose of carbon monoxide, formaldehyde, etc. pumped into their lungs on a daily basis for decades.

In normal doses, nicotine is about as hazardous as drinking coffee every day.

The sad part is, just about all doctors that i've ever heard of would agree with a permanent form of NRT if it gets and keeps them off cigarettes. And yet we keep seeing "experts" on TV saying just the opposite.

Remember when big tobacco was under fire and they paid several doctors to say in court "nicotine is not addictive"?

It makes me wonder, about these "experts" we see on TV today:
Who is paying THEM?

 

[LaceyUnderall]

People should not use drugs. You will probably be a healthier person if you do NOT use these drugs.

True statement. And the fact that people ARE going to do drugs because they choose to... then we should help adults make more responsible decisions. Just like with children and safe sex. Did anyone see Bristol Palin's interview where she flat out said: Teaching children abstinence does not work! I am proof.

Gregory Connolly, director of tobacco control research at Harvard School of Public Health:
"We shouldn't be out there promoting harm," Connolly says, "even reduced harm."

And here is an interesting dialog on Harm Reduction
http://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/tobacco/documents/ctcpharmreductproceedcompletebooklet.pdf

Remember when they used to carefully control doses of pain medication for people dying of cancer, because they didn't want the dying person to become addicted?

That's the most disgusting thing I have ever heard come from a doctor. Let me guess, when a patient comes to him and says "Doc, I want to have sex" his response is "No. You shouldn't. Abstain. And if you can't, don't use anything because if you get pregnant or you get a disease, it's your fault."

In normal doses, nicotine is about as hazardous as drinking coffee every day.

Totally with you on this one.

Here is an interesting read regarding caffeine: The Truth About Caffeine - Book Review

What I find slightly ridiculous is that caffeine is really no different than nicotine (when you remove the harmful side effects of nicotine's usual delivery mechanism). Same side effects. However, caffeine is openly sold to children... including in soda machines in schools. (I must say, this movement towards removing soda from schools is wonderful).

Honestly, would we have so many children who are ADD and ADHD if caffeine were considered an adult drug? IMHO, children are PRONE to have a minimal amount of attention deficit issues because they are children and need to learn to reign in their focus. That's part of becoming an adult. (Disclaimer: I do also believe that there are some children who really DO have serious attention issues and this is not belittling them or their parents in any way.) However, how many children are misdiagnosed with attention disorders when it could easily be that their caffeine riddled diets are causing the issue?

 

[C2Girl]

Actually I have a son who is ADHD, and the meds he takes are a stimulant. A cup of coffee for me is what I need to get started in the morning for a wake up, but he has it and is calmed. Sugar, chocolate, etc work the opposite in his brain. It also acts as an appetite suppressant, so why we do monthly weigh ins. Although he eats like a horse, he does not gain weight quickly.

Just sayin.....

 

[LaceyUnderall]

C2Girl - That is very interesting to know. Hmmm...

Something to ponder as I explore more about caffeine...

Thanks