Obama Receiving an E-Cig For Valentine’s Day

[skullsoup432]

I just started vaping and have given this some thought. The government does not want us to quit analogs, there is way to much cash in it for them. Easy cash at that. How can anyone argue that people should not smoke? If they wanted us to really quit, why don't we have free nicotine patches, gum etc? Again, money. To much cash is generated for our drug companies. Why not sell nicotine addiction products at cost if they really cared about our health? Money. When vaping is made accessible to all, it still will not be "correct" with the nonsmoking zealots. Thus, there will be a huge push to regulate us in some way. Regulation will of course cost, and while were at it lets also raise some cash for (insert government whim).
The dealers pulling these self serving stunts should be boycotted. Their suppliers should refuse to deal with them, as it will affect their bottom line also.

 

[surbitonPete]

I think we are in for a very interesting year ...E-cigarettes are going to cause so much arguing.....Government's will be panicking about the loss of tax if they 'don't' put a stop to it but honest scientist's and health people are already making reports that vaping is healthier than tobacco, even doctors can't help saying its better than smoking.... so the governments are going to have a real problem in justifying a ban....even a lot of anti-smokers will actually be supporting vaping...... tobacco companies are going to be panicking.....there is so much money involved. I have no idea what the end game of this one is going to be.

 

[Sun Vaporer]

The dealers pulling these self serving stunts should be boycotted. Their suppliers should refuse to deal with them, as it will affect their bottom line also.

Good Point Skull. How about going one step further. The manufactures should ban the Suppliers who make false claims use self serving stunts to promote their product. It is too bad that the devises come out of China as China could careless--but they also should be concerend about a ban--or maybe they have enough of a market right in their own country. I have not scene many posts that referance use of our devices in China, but I imagine there are a lot of users--It looks like an uphill battle all the way and I sure hope that we are not headed down the "Nicotine Water" trail as that was a long and windy one---Sun

 

[Sun Vaporer]

Look at what happened in Australia as a preview of things to come. Understand first that the FDA doesn't have to prove a thing. It doesn't normally test things, either. It reviews the tests of others seeking to market a drug. All burden of proof is on the maker/marketer/applicant. The FDA considers our e-thingies to be "drug delivery devices" and the form of nicotine to be a "new drug." Nothing has been approved. Notices are being made now that they must be approved.

Start from that point and see what you extrapolate.

TB--missed your chimming in here as I did not see your post and unfortunatly you are right on mark as usual--I see no way around it other then Suppliers selling the devices with 0 nicotine cartridges and selling the nicotine cartridges seperatly till they get pulled. That way the burden shifts to the FDA to explain banning a device that contains "no new drug"---Sun

 

[skullsoup432]

You are correct, Sun. China could care less about false claims, again, money. It is just to bad that the US isn't leading the way in vaping technology. I wouldn't mind paying a small regulation fee if we had say 75% of smokers vaping. But with 1/2% of us vaping (anyone got an idea of how many people vape) we are easy targets. Hmm, we can put a man on the moon, but ....Just think what "legitimate" (US EU) countries could do for vaping technology if we put our rescources and minds to it.
Vaping, as I see it compared to analogs, would be a BENIFIT to mankind. Then too, I try to think for myself, and the US government hates that!

 

[K.P.]

I think people are being a little paranoid. People in government do all kinds of dumb things for dumb reasons--they quite often do something just to be seen to be "doing something." But the revenue from tobacco taxes is a very small slice of the tax pie. If they lose money there, they'll just raise taxes somewhere else. Pharmacutical companies do make money from nicotine gum and inhalers, but that's peanuts compared to what they make on all their other drugs. Whatever they might lose to e-cigs will be covered by next year's new SSRI (which will be virtually identical to last year's new wonder-SSRI). Tobacco companies, yes, may be scared but without Jesse Helms they're really on the back foot. They can't manage to keep the government from raising taxes on cigarettes every other year, after all.

A much more likely scenario is that pharmacutical companies will want a piece of the action, and government agencies will decide the devices and liquids need to be regulated in the interests of consumer safety. The devices and liquid will be legal, but only approved models and mixtures. These will initially be made by Western pharmacutical companies and be quite expensive until competition drives them down.

And people who are web-savvy enough to look online for a bargain will still be able to get the cheap stuff from China and Hong Kong. The same way they get cheap computer parts from Hong Kong through eBay instead of driving to Radio Shack or Maplin.

 

[Sun Vaporer]

I think people are being a little paranoid. People in government do all kinds of dumb things for dumb reasons--they quite often do something just to be seen to be "doing something." But the revenue from tobacco taxes is a very small slice of the tax pie. If they lose money there, they'll just raise taxes somewhere else. Pharmacutical companies do make money from nicotine gum and inhalers, but that's peanuts compared to what they make on all their other drugs. Whatever they might lose to e-cigs will be covered by next year's new SSRI (which will be virtually identical to last year's new wonder-SSRI). Tobacco companies, yes, may be scared but without Jesse Helms they're really on the back foot. They can't manage to keep the government from raising taxes on cigarettes every other year, after all.

A much more likely scenario is that pharmacutical companies will want a piece of the action, and government agencies will decide the devices and liquids need to be regulated in the interests of consumer safety. The devices and liquid will be legal, but only approved models and mixtures. These will initially be made by Western pharmacutical companies and be quite expensive until competition drives them down.

And people who are web-savvy enough to look online for a bargain will still be able to get the cheap stuff from China and Hong Kong. The same way they get cheap computer parts from Hong Kong through eBay instead of driving to Radio Shack or Maplin.

KP--I can not concur with you on these points as (1)The tax revenue is a Big issue here in the US as there is a lot of revenue for the States in cigarette taxation (2) Big Tobacco still has a lot of clout and Big Pharma has even more clout and do not want to see any lost revenue; (3) Customs will flag the device like white on rice if a ban is instilled; (4) E-Bay will not allow an illicet sales on their site if there is a ban; and (5) In my opinion it is not being a little paranoid when you have clown Suppliers out there doing stupid things like sending Obama an e-cig, another putting up a billboard, and some making false claims. The treat of a ban is very real and as for regulation--well what are we all suppose to due in the years that it takes to any kind of approval--go back to Analogs?? That is not being paraniod--that is facing reality and I for one do not what to ever smoke another analog again in my lifetime---Sun

 

[zagleft1]

I can hear the esteemed Senators now: "This will confuse our children and lead them down the road to perdition. Their innocent young minds will not be able to make the distinction between e and analog and they will think we are condoning this Satanic practice. We must protect the Children!"

We're screwed, Kids. Smoke 'em while you got 'em.

 

[Sun Vaporer]

I can hear the esteemed Senators now: "This will confuse our children and lead them down the road to perdition. Their innocent young minds will not be able to make the distinction between e and analog and they will think we are condoning this Satanic practice. We must protect the Children!"

We're screwed, Kids. Smoke 'em while you got 'em.

Zag--that is so true. Forget about that it might be benifical to us and just let kids keep going out and getting their hands on Analogs--there is no logic to the "children" argument at all so long as analogs are readily available to them. How about a little relief for us grown up law abiding citizens that what off cigarettes???????Sun

 

[TropicalBob]

Their logic is that they want to prevent another generation becoming addicted to nicotine. Besides tobacco products, all nicotine sources now offered are to quit cigarettes and phrase out nicotine addiction. Their campaign to stomp cigarette smokers into oblivion is steamrolling along nicely. They hope to prevent young people from taking up cigarette smoking.

So here we come with "blings" and "juice" that comes in more flavors than an old Howard Johnson ice cream parlor. We show ads with glamorous people puffing away around a restaurant table. Looks attractive, doesn't it? Looks like a way to introduce a whole new generation to the joys of nicotine. Looks like a way for savvy teen rebels to "up the establishment" with its anti-personal-choice smoking bans. Looks like trouble in a metal tube from China. Looks like a techno toy that no can say is safe, but everyone can agree is addictive. Ooooooo ....

That's what they'll want to stop. And that's why "children" and "e-cigs" will be spoken in the same sentence many times in months to come.

 

[devonschmoker]

While I hope "good press" continues, don't lose sight of the fact that Nicorette gum is an FDA-approved NRT treatment and is made in America, with strict regulations on content and safety, etc. Where was your e-cig made? What regulations did it follow? Who approved it for sale and marketing?

Back to earth with the turkeys and their crushed e-cigs.

Nicorette is an FDA approved NRT. However, I believe it is made in Sweden also some generics are rumored to be made in china.
Nicorette started out in a similer fashion as e-cigs. It was origanally made as a way to get your nic fix when you couldn't smoke. Nicotrol - a generic Nicorette made by the original manufacturers
Here is a quote from this page.
"Nicorette was originally developed in Sweden to assist submariners who were smokers manage their nicotine intake/addiction when they were unable to smoke cigarettes. The possibilities as a nicotine replacement mechanism to help smokers control and reduce their nicotine intake (whilst also avoiding the major harmful effects associated with the byproducts from burning a cigarette) were obvious.
"
Sound familiar?

 

[surbitonPete]

TBob is quite right ....It isn't the problem of tobacco smokers taking up vaping that will cause all the fuss........it's the prospect of new generations being addicted to nicotine in the form of E-cigarettes that is going to be their biggest fear and that's why they are most likely going to go down the road of bans and total control over Vaping. ....but at the same time ...it's already passing the point where control is going to be easy.

 

[Sun Vaporer]

TBob is quite right ....It isn't the problem of tobacco smokers taking up vaping that will cause all the fuss........it's the prospect of new generations being addicted to nicotine in the form of E-cigarettes that is going to be their biggest fear and that's why they are most likely going to go down the road of bans and total control over Vaping. ....but at the same time ...it's already passing the point where control is going to be easy.

Pete you are right, but an argument like that from them is totally misplaced unless they stop selling cigarettes altogether. The lasted polls show college age smoking is way up and on the rise--so in essence the anti's are saying "No No we can not have kids doing that" which is the same as saying "let the kids keep smoking what we know will kill them"--their argument is fatally flawed--Sun

 

[surbitonPete]

Pete you are right, but an argument like that from them is totally misplaced unless they stop selling cigarettes altogether. The lasted polls show college age smoking is way up and on the rise--so in essence the anti's are saying "No No we can not have kids doing that" which is the same as saying "let the kids keep smoking what we know will kill them"--their argument is fatally flawed--Sun

sun you are totally right too.....and that's the other side of the argument that is going to rage......that's why I really don't know where this is all going to end.......I can only say get stocked up on juice, batteries and atomizers and loads of bags of popcorn and get ready for the show.

 

[Sun Vaporer]

sun you are totally right too.....and that's the other side of the argument that is going to rage......that's why I really don't know where this is all going to end.......I can only say get stocked up on juice, batteries and atomizers and loads of bags of popcorn and get ready for the show.

Pete--I way I see it the rage is going to hit sooner then we think and I think it will start with Customs--so I ordered 500 lbs of popcorn!!! LOL--that should last me the 2 years I fiqure it will take for them to sort things out--Sun

 

[cdnick]

This is a fascinating thread, but logical argument seems to disappear when confronted with the sort of governmental 'mother-knows-best' attitude that prevails in both the US and UK.
On this side of the pond we have a government who ignore the findings of their own committees when certain illegal drugs are recommended for a downgrading of classification, as this would 'give out the wrong message to our young people', and whilst I have no wish to argue for the merits or otherwise of these particular decisions, I fear it is exactly this sort of reasoning that will be given for the restriction or banning of electronic cigarettes.
At the same time, they will allow analogues to be sold at countless outlets, gratefully accepting tax revenue and the tacit support of the pharmaceutical companies who make money on the back of smoking - not only on the patches/gum etc that they have been hawking for years, but also on the vast quatities of drugs that are used to treat smoking related illnesses.
If our governments really cared about our young people, they would ban all tobacco products tomorrow. They don't. They won't. But I'm afraid they might well ban what seems, on admittedly sparce evidence so far, to be a healthy alternative. Still, mother knows best...

 

[Sun Vaporer]

This is a fascinating thread, but logical argument seems to disappear when confronted with the sort of governmental 'mother-knows-best' attitude that prevails in both the US and UK.
On this side of the pond we have a government who ignore the findings of their own committees when certain illegal drugs are recommended for a downgrading of classification, as this would 'give out the wrong message to our young people', and whilst I have no wish to argue for the merits or otherwise of these particular decisions, I fear it is exactly this sort of reasoning that will be given for the restriction or banning of electronic cigarettes.
At the same time, they will allow analogues to be sold at countless outlets, gratefully accepting tax revenue and the tacit support of the pharmaceutical companies who make money on the back of smoking - not only on the patches/gum etc that they have been hawking for years, but also on the vast quatities of drugs that are used to treat smoking related illnesses.
If our governments really cared about our young people, they would ban all tobacco products tomorrow. They don't. They won't. But I'm afraid they might well ban what seems, on admittedly sparce evidence so far, to be a healthy alternative. Still, mother knows best...

CD--I concur in full. Nothing ever seems to be logical and it is because money will always beat out logic---Sun

 

[GoldenP51]

Has anyone considered that the e-cig could put a serious dent in the tobacco companies profits? I do not think they will go quietly into the night without a fight. I suspect covert propaganda operations will start soon.

I agree...instead of fighting it though they will have to adapt to the changing market and develop their own e-cigarettes...and there will still be a market and plenty demand for analogues that they will have too.

 

[skullsoup432]

Not to be argumentative, but if the tax is so small compared to others, with the next increase they will pay for SCHIP. That is not small change. I wonder what they do with the taxes they collect now. It doesn't go towards anti smoking/recovery. Michigan is set for a state increase also. Where is the cash going?
The drug companies would lose mass amounts if we quit smoking. High blood pressure meds (and ......-Levitra-......, if high blood pressure leads to ED) are huge moneymakers. Not that all elevated pressure is do to smoking, but then why not provide patches and such at cost? Look at the price on patches. Like most "drugs", a few pennies of active ingredients, 99 1/2 inert ingredients. Jeez, if they truly cared, they would give them away.
As far as future generations of smokers, some politicians are concerned, but I believe they are just giving (or will give) lip service. I may be pessimistic, but it is about money, not health. Yes, tax something else. What would the population do if a fast food meal went from $4.00 to $8.00? Never happen. You don't need nicotine to live, and you don't need a McBlockedarteries. Not paranoid, just tired of being pushed around.

 

[Sun Vaporer]

Not to be argumentative, but if the tax is so small compared to others, with the next increase they will pay for SCHIP. That is not small change. I wonder what they do with the taxes they collect now. It doesn't go towards anti smoking/recovery. Michigan is set for a state increase also. Where is the cash going?
The drug companies would lose mass amounts if we quit smoking. High blood pressure meds (and ......-Levitra-......, if high blood pressure leads to ED) are huge moneymakers. Not that all elevated pressure is do to smoking, but then why not provide patches and such at cost? Look at the price on patches. Like most "drugs", a few pennies of active ingredients, 99 1/2 inert ingredients. Jeez, if they truly cared, they would give them away.
As far as future generations of smokers, some politicians are concerned, but I believe they are just giving (or will give) lip service. I may be pessimistic, but it is about money, not health. Yes, tax something else. What would the population do if a fast food meal went from $4.00 to $8.00? Never happen. You don't need nicotine to live, and you don't need a McBlockedarteries. Not paranoid, just tired of being pushed around.

Skull --very well stated.