Poll Shows Consumers' Doubts About E-Cigarettes
- Thread starter mpetva
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
And they're not waiting for scientific evidence that there are no adverse health effects either. They see something that looks like smoking, so it must be the same as smoking. Typical kneejerk reaction imo.
People will believe anything. Just about any product related to smoking is going to get bad press right off the bat. Maybe as more time passes and family members see their loved ones finally kicking the habit they will become more accepted.
If this is true it just means the alphabet soup's propaganda is working which means we have to work harder.
Articles, usually with negative overtones and a lot of ignorance about eCigs, are becoming quite commonplace. My local newspaper has run at least 8 such articles in the last 2 weeks. It is a little disheartening. It would be nice if those writing the articles would do a little research, and interview more people with a broad knowledge of the subject. I can't help but believe that there are a lot of special interests behind this campaign of misinformation.......
I would bet money that the results of the poll would be different if the devices were referred to as Personal Vaporizors. It is so easy to manipulate polls simply by the phrasing of the questions.
I've come to terms with the fact that the average citizen is an absolute ..... so I'm not surprised by the poll.
Well, here we have the population's assumption of harm even without scientific evidence where, in reality, it is at least harm reduction for nicotine addicts and thus less harm (aka beneficial). The article does say that sales should be restricted to adults, which is find by me, and that testing should be performed. I won't mind them being tested, if done with proper peer-reviewed objective science and not used as a manipulative tactic.
Yeah, and beer leads to ....... If you don't like something in this country, find a way to say that a kid might use it, or will be harmed by it, to get it banned. This argument has been growing for all sorts of things, some without merit. That's not to say that kids shouldn't be kept safe (like I said, I'm in favor or 18+), but rather, to note that it is a typical manipulation. See the argument against using flavors for another example. They don't try to ban beer... kids get it all the time and it often kills them, especially when combined with driving. The adult voting population doesn't want their alcohol touched, but anything with nicotine.... watch out! Hypocrites!
<edit> P.S. Note the biased journalism... There is a link to the FDA warning letters, no link to the wording of the poll, and no balance in quoting or representing the vaper's viewpoint. "Proponents argue that...." isn't properly represented. I'm willing to give the doctor the benefit of the doubt for his poll... although you have to be careful about wording on these things.... however, if I were a journalist these days, I'd have to resign and hang my head in shame for writing unbalanced articles and contributing to tabloid journalism and sensationalism. Shame!!!
Last edited:
Potentially? That sounds good actually because analogs are already CONFIRMED to be bad for your health!
Anyway, what are they waiting for to test them? It feels like it's been over 2 years and they haven't tested it yet, talk about being lazy...
From a Wikipedia article (yeah, yeah, I know)
Nobody should take a site like this seriously. This kind of site makes money every time someone views one of their articles. They intentionally publish BS articles about controversial subjects, hoping to get noticed by a big site like ECF. They will probably get thousands of page views just from this thread.
Nobody should take a site like this seriously. This kind of site makes money every time someone views one of their articles. They intentionally publish BS articles about controversial subjects, hoping to get noticed by a big site like ECF. They will probably get thousands of page views just from this thread.
Last edited:
Problem I see here weather or not this particular site is of good repute or not, Is the fact the mainstream media is VERY biased against E-cigarettes. They have all taken the FDA line on it and none of them have had real balanced reporting from what I have seen. Even CNN, whom I normally respect has had articles on their site pretty much bashing E-cigarettes.
My boss smokes e-cigarettes in the office. Is this safe? – The Chart - CNN.com Blogs
Study: 'Electronic cigarettes' don't deliver - CNN.com
My fear is our voice is not being heard at all. We don't have any real science on our side and that is hurting us quite a bit. Smokers are interested in these, but I know quite a few that are afraid, not because of the safety but because they fear they are gonna be banned and they would be right back where they started.
My boss smokes e-cigarettes in the office. Is this safe? – The Chart - CNN.com Blogs
Study: 'Electronic cigarettes' don't deliver - CNN.com
My fear is our voice is not being heard at all. We don't have any real science on our side and that is hurting us quite a bit. Smokers are interested in these, but I know quite a few that are afraid, not because of the safety but because they fear they are gonna be banned and they would be right back where they started.
Actually there are several intelligent rebuttals beneath the articles. However I find most people do not read those, they will read the article and that's about it. Its more of the fact that the media doesn't do any real investigative reporting anymore. they take the FDA line, give a couple of quotes from E-cigarette users and go back to the FDA line again and call it a day. If they were really interested in truth, they would visit manufactures and get in depth with the FDA. Ask the FDA some hard questions like why all of a sudden even though these have been available for almost 7 years are they just taking action now. Ask them about the testing they did and how the harmful chemicals they found were so minute that car exhaust give of more and it was found in only ONE sample. I have seen Anderson Cooper grill the hell out of government officials. Why are they just accepting the FDA line on this? They should not just take a few testimonials. As anyone can have a good testimonial about just about anything.
We are losing in the court of public opinion and the FDA knows it. Court cases and letters won't matter if they can generate enough public outcry against us.
Last edited:
Polls can be and most ofter are skewed by whomever created them just by the way the questions are asked and the options given for answers.
Poll 1: What do you think of Bernie Madoff?
Poll 2: What do you think of Bernie Madoff in relation to Charles Manson?
Bernie's going to look alot better in Poll 2 or at lest the lessor of 2 evils.
Odds are the majority of the poll takers are neither e-cig or analog users so of course when the question is asked without it relating to the alternative it's going to get negative results as it should. What should be asked is questions in comparison since it is an alternative, then see what kind of results come out of it.
Poll 1: What do you think of Bernie Madoff?
Poll 2: What do you think of Bernie Madoff in relation to Charles Manson?
Bernie's going to look alot better in Poll 2 or at lest the lessor of 2 evils.
Odds are the majority of the poll takers are neither e-cig or analog users so of course when the question is asked without it relating to the alternative it's going to get negative results as it should. What should be asked is questions in comparison since it is an alternative, then see what kind of results come out of it.
Is it just me or is anyone else tired of hearing the same old rhetoric from both sides on this argument? It has worked for me I have looked at the evidence and made my choice. If I'm wrong and it's just as bad as smoking no gain but no loss either, if I'm right then I live longer and pay more tax and cost the country less in hospital bills.
If people are worried about it getting banned or taxed stock up now slowly cut back on the nic to zero.
Devil's advocate.
If people are worried about it getting banned or taxed stock up now slowly cut back on the nic to zero.
Devil's advocate.
The rhetoric being used by the other side is only part of the underhanded tactics that are being employed. They will gain public support for a ban on selling to minors, but the actual bill will contain language that will prohibit sales to adults, as well. They will gain support for a reasonable amount of "testing for safety", then claim that they have public support for a ban on nicotine, because it is unsafe. On and on, over and over, drip, drip, drip. It's what they do for a living, in this twisted world we live in.
There in lies the problem. It's about freedom of choice, and the right or lack of right that we have to make that choice. Your saying oh just stock up or caught down, good point. However why should we have another option taken away from us? Why should that be okay with us?
It's not just about vaping or not vaping, that's part of it, but its about our right to choose and the right of people to hear both sides, and make a reasoned decision based on fact and GOOD arguments.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
