Potential Ally for E-Cigs

[TheBandit]

Hey all, wow, it feels great to be freed from the newbie forum I thought of an interesting idea today and acted on it. I sent some links about the recent negative publicity on e-cigs to a guy by the name of Neal Boortz, who is a political shock jock out of Atlanta, GA (My hometown, What 'up!!).

After Jaclyn came here yesterday, I thought this might be another avenue to get our side of this story out. I have a feeling Boortz would be on our side, as a staunch libertarian, or just brush the subject aside.

So, I thought it might be a good idea for other people, who are concerned with the potential governmental interference with e-cigs, to contact a local talk radio host to see if they are interested in representing us by picking up this topic.

Maybe we could even start hounding local news stations and newspapers with the benefits of vaping and encouraging them to cover this in a positive way. These kind of outlets are, after all, the most efficient way to get a message out to a bunch of people. This is what we need, more positive awareness of this to spread before it's brushed under the rug, or worse, painted in a negative light by the government and control freaks.

 

[VapeAllDay]

Hey all, wow, it feels great to be freed from the newbie forum I thought of an interesting idea today and acted on it. I sent some links about the recent negative publicity on e-cigs to a guy by the name of Neal Boortz, who is a political shock jock out of Atlanta, GA (My hometown, What 'up!!).

After Jaclyn came here yesterday, I thought this might be another avenue to get our side of this story out. I have a feeling Boortz would be on our side, as a staunch libertarian, or just brush the subject aside.

So, I thought it might be a good idea for other people, who are concerned with the potential governmental interference with e-cigs, to contact a local talk radio host to see if they are interested in representing us by picking up this topic.

Maybe we could even start hounding local news stations and newspapers with the benefits of vaping and encouraging them to cover this in a positive way. These kind of outlets are, after all, the most efficient way to get a message out to a bunch of people. This is what we need, more positive awareness of this to spread before it's brushed under the rug, or worse, painted in a negative light by the government and control freaks.

Bandit,

I listen to Neal everyday, they have it on our local station here an Jacksonville. Basically anything that the government wants to control other than basic laws and regulations, he will fight.

However, he is an outspoken person who does not tip-toe around things and could piss off the wrong people too. Especially since conservatives like him & myself our on the outs these days!

Anyways, I agree with you that people like him could be an asset, but I am a little nervous at the same time.

 

[puff-puff-pass]

....So, I thought it might be a good idea for other people, who are concerned with the potential governmental interference with e-cigs, to contact a local talk radio host to see if they are interested in representing us by picking up this topic.

Maybe we could even start hounding local news stations and newspapers with the benefits of vaping and encouraging them to cover this in a positive way. These kind of outlets are, after all, the most efficient way to get a message out to a bunch of people. This is what we need, more positive awareness of this to spread before it's brushed under the rug, or worse, painted in a negative light by the government and control freaks.

Great idea...but one small problem. Since no clinical trials have been run on esmoking, there are not much of a "positive message" to give people without some certified backing. YES...4000 less chemicals. YES...millions of analog butts not sent to landfills/sewers (next time you're in the left lane at a red light, poke your head out the window and look in the gutter 8-o ). THe list of PROs goes on and on, but without a backbone to support it, it is only blowing smoke (pardon the pun )

Our biggest dilemma is the method of delivery and the stigma associated with it. Chewing gum is normal...as is wearing band-aids. Hence Nic gum and nic patches are "ok"....but do you think those products would have been as well received by the public if you had to smoke them to help quit analogs???

 

[strayling]

Our biggest dilemma is the method of delivery and the stigma associated with it. Chewing gum is normal...as is wearing band-aids. Hence Nic gum and nic patches are "ok"....but do you think those products would have been as well received by the public if you had to smoke them to help quit analogs???

Too true. The thing is there's a pressure to categorise PVs as Nicotine Replacement Therapy intended to help you give up and there are at least two problems with this:

• The old puritan mindset that says you're not supposed to enjoy your therapy.
• The people like me who don't want to give up nicotine and are happy to use PVs as an enjoyable Tobacco Replacement Therapy.

They'll never forgive us for enjoying vaping these things.

 

[KDMickey]

To me, it seems the FDA could never regulate nic-free e-juice. So, all we have to do is go over the radar with the nic free, and keep the nicotine on the down-low...

I was reading on the FDA site. I cannot see any grounds for them to control the actual vaping device. We can make our own juice, right? I've even heard of methods of extracting the nic from patches and the like. So I think our best bet is to wait for the FDA to make a move. When that happens, we will actually have a stance to oppose--as it is, we are opposing an undefined, which boils down to a "War on Terror." It just does not work.

Anyways, I do think we want to get public support as much as possible. And the best way to do that is to highlight the undeniable positive in everyone's mind: I don't smoke analogs, and there's no second hand to worry about. On top of that, I like that less of my money is going to my strange Uncle Sam.

Cheers,
-Mickey

P.S.- A shout out to Bandit, the first e-smoker in Colorado I've seen so far!

 

[Rorschach]

Unfortunately I know we can't really talk about benefits in an official sense without clinical trials.

I work in the big pharma space and things are very particular.

However, publicity may result in a company with $$ to do clinical trials.

Other than that, we really can't (and shouldn't because honestly don't know) say anything about "benefit."

 

[TheBandit]

Thanks for the replies, all. Regardless of whether or not you agree with my zeal and methods, I do appreciate a good dialog and welcome opposing opinions especially.

I have been reading alot of the posts on these topics and I seem to detect a general feeling of "better wait to see what happens". Please allow me to present my current view, and the thought process behind it. I will try to be as concise as possible, so as to avoid an intimidating wall of text.

To begin with, there are two choices. Act on behalf of my beliefs, or don't. The latter allows forces outside of my control to mold the path that this takes, and I am less comfortable with that then the possible negative effects of my action.

So, choosing to act, the next question becomes how. The most obvious/popular ones are a few:

1. Contact political representation in the hope that they will represent me as a constituant - I believe politicians, regardless of party affiliation, act in their own best interests first, and in the people's, just enough to get re-elected.

2. Contact media in the hopes of positive representation - Does run the risk of the opposite happening.

3. Help make a clinical study a reality - I personally do not have the funds, education, or connections to achieve this.

Number 1 is out of the question in my opinion. You can call me a paranoid conspiracy theorist if you wish, but tax revenue and big tobacco have way more clout in the political arena than e-smokers will ever have.

Number 2, obviously, is the one that I am in most favor of, because the potential help that positive coverage of this would far out-weigh the potential negative. Besides, there are already groups (FDA, WHO, governmental bodies outside of the US, Anti-smoking freaks, etc.) that are already trying to cast vaping in a negative light.

Number 3, I would definately be in favor of, but the only effective things that I could do is help this process along by sourcing a company/group that would be willing to do this. Or, Contribute money to, or help organize a donation organization to help fund the cost. Or both. These options I may still act upon, but I am putting a little more effort into number 2 at the moment.

The media involvement appeals the most to me, because I do not feel that a clinical trial currently carries as much weight as increased, positive popular opinion. In a way, WE, as current vapers, are conducting that trial. We are using these devices, and people are not ending up in the hospital, or growing extra limbs, so there is very little that can be shown to uphold the supposition that these devices are bad for people. In addition, nicotine is already a known to science and the general populous, and has, in the public's view, already been shown as being acceptable by the government simply by the continued existence of tobacco products being available.

Sorry, I seemed to have failed in my goal of NOT erecting a massive wall of text. I can't help it, I am currently enjoying the new-car smell of my e-cig, and refuse to let some pompous politicians get in the way of my future enjoyment.

Short version is that anyone that sees this issue can obviously conclude that this invention is a brilliant alternative to smoking traditional cigarettes, and I think that the more people that see it, the better fighting chance we have.

 

[jamie]

Sounds like another good fit for Right To Vape

 

[Spikey]

So once again...

who stands the most to lose if PV's are found to be essentially harmless?

Big Tobacco.

With the tax rates increasing... analogs WILL be phased out.. so the analog companies NEED another option to keep their nic addicts and make $.

Write to the analog company who made your old brand and tell them you want them to help fund a study on inhaling PG and content of exhaled vapor and explain that once proven relatively harmless... they should start manufacturing PV's because they are the cig of the future.

They have enough $ to do the studies nec, buy any patents nec and improve on the designs (although I doubt they would make any parts last LONGER.. that will only cost them $).

 

[TheBandit]

Sounds like another good fit for Right To Vape

Ya, I know. I saw this site recently, and I was thinking that it might be more appropriate for me to voice these opinions there. I am going to go register with them.

I have noticed, however, that there are quite a few people here that like a good discussion like this, so I figured what the heck.

Sorry, if I've come across as being "over the top" here.

 

[jamie]

You didn't seem over the top to me. It's hard to tell who knows about RTV and who doesn't.

It does seem, sometimes, that this site chews up a lot of the energy that Right To Vape could use... when it comes to folks with a passion to work this issue.

 

[Kate]

It's gone very quiet over there again since this site came back online. A few active and assertive people would go a long way.

 

[KDMickey]

To me, it sounds like maybe RTV should come over here. This is, seemingly, the e-cig place, period. So why not set up an "Activism" forum for everyone?

I have an imagination. That said, I kinda sorta had a way out there idea... I know this sounds crazy, but... what if all the e-smokers, suppliers, manufacturers, etc. were to form a united e-smoking USA front? One that collects funds, lobbies, and so on and so forth. Hell, let's get Vaping themed T-Shirts made and sent out with EVERY order of e-cigs to the US. Let's actively (in a nice way) recruit smokers to e-smoking. Let's invest in at least a small study that gets us on the map. Hell, let's get Brad Pitt's help on this one ! I mean, if anyone is an appropriate ally against big tobacco, it's the Screen Actors Guild (or, ..., in Team America). I just think we should start a bit of a grassroots network.

Cheers,

-Mickey

 

[Kate]

The US forum would be the place for that.

 

[taukimada]

we already have Leonardo DiCaprio

 

[Lithium1330]

To me, it sounds like maybe RTV should come over here. This is, seemingly, the e-cig place, period. So why not set up an "Activism" forum for everyone?

I have an imagination. That said, I kinda sorta had a way out there idea... I know this sounds crazy, but... what if all the e-smokers, suppliers, manufacturers, etc. were to form a united e-smoking USA front? One that collects funds, lobbies, and so on and so forth. Hell, let's get Vaping themed T-Shirts made and sent out with EVERY order of e-cigs to the US. Let's actively (in a nice way) recruit smokers to e-smoking. Let's invest in at least a small study that gets us on the map. Hell, let's get Brad Pitt's help on this one ! I mean, if anyone is an appropriate ally against big tobacco, it's the Screen Actors Guild (or, ..., in Team America). I just think we should start a bit of a grassroots network.

Cheers,

-Mickey

The problem is that not very much users in this forum want to be proactive, for those who want to be, there is RTV, activism has been discussed here and as a result of one of that discussion RTV was made, but very few people wants to go proactive.

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-australian-ban-egar-illegal-8.html#post76756

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...australian-ban-egar-illegal-16.html#post77313

Look how RTV was created, proactivism is not an easy task, it takes to do something in "the real world" to make a change, it is easy to argue in a forum, but it takes some efford to make real things to happen.