Prominent Doctors Respond to the FDA

[newbutt]

That idea of John Stossel is great,he would shred!
OK, so how about this idea? Everyone of us drop him a email & "request" he take a little time to research the matter. JohnStossel@abcnews.com
Now I believe this might work as long as none of us go on a rant,(which a lot you are notorious for), just state who you are, how long you smoked,your success with e-cigs, how much better you feel,etc. I just think we need to check anger at the door. Don't use the C word, or you come off like a nut job right off the bat.Plead for his assistance,let him know we need his help.
Some of you that keep track with every news report & government reports,get together,split them up & send important links a few at a time. You understand what I mean? Like Lacy start off with a couple important links, someone else follow with a couple more, & so on. This way we're not repeating ourselves.
My feeling is the "link posters" should be a small group that organize before hand as what they are going to post & who will post what. The rest of us just post our personal experience with e-cigarettes.
IMHO,I also feel in these correspondences, we should refrain from using the term "vape'. It makes us sound like a bunch of old hippies,again IMO. Lets face it, it's a made up word.
This is how "movements" are successful, they organize,they do their homework,cross all T's & dot the I's. They don't just join a forum & start ranting about getting screwed over by the man. This creates nothing but anger,IMO.
We also need to unite, with other forums, with the vendors, consumers, family members of smokers, etc. We all have the same basic agenda, to save the E- cigarette. I'm on a couple of these forums & have watched all the petty arguments & flame wars. All that shint needs to go out the window,NOW! After we win this battle, y'all can go back to being ...... of about the vendor that was rude to you & the poster that gave you bad info, etc. You ALL know what I'm talking about. I know there's a lot of passion on this subject, but there are ways to raise awareness without money or attack everyone that's against the cause.

I'm on board if someone wants to organize it & I'll do what ever I can do.

NB
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/JohnStossel@abcnews.com <JohnStossel@abcnews.com>

 

[DuneBuggy]

Funny thing happened on November 2nd.A majority of people in this great land thought moving towards socialism was a good idea.

Isn't the unrepresented taxation of the masses to support social programs socialism? I thought we were supposed to be capitolists over here...

 

[Kate51]

Lacey, you are once again my hero! Thanks, I needed that one!

 

[Kate51]

Oh, CandyGirl I hear ya, but we're not near done yet. Something that is happening off our shores is fodder for a little talk around here, and has gone quite un-noticed, and that is the approval of e-cigs in New Zealand. They are going to play a role here too, Canada will be deemed as safe as well, may take some time, so, in view of all the negative and frightening news that seems unsurmountable right now, it is happening. Tens of Thousands of us cannot be wrong. I am betting my very life on that. Our government can test away. Tests are ongoing elsewhere in this country too, it will all come out in the wash, so to speak. ECA? Well, there are good people working their hearts out there too, we need to at least give them a chance. Right now there are some gold-diggers advertising their over-priced e-cigs with some rather racey statements how you can quit smoking, vape anywhere cigarettes are banned, made in USA, and it goes on. Those places are going to be the first banned, mark my words. But the concept, the technology, will stand, I'm sure of it. The first Technoelectronic Cigarette Replacement Therapy is here. And I'm feeling terrific! Cigarette smoke is out of my eyes and my lungs as well.
newbutt, that's a great idea, to streamline the links, but this place is getting so big, it would take forever to pre-plan. Things happen too fast! There should be a way to "pick" out all the links, clean up the duplicates, and have a stickey just for those, but in a short time it would be hard and too time-consuming to go through that list as well!

 

[newbutt]

newbutt, that's a great idea, to streamline the links, but this place is getting so big, it would take forever to pre-plan. Things happen too fast! There should be a way to "pick" out all the links, clean up the duplicates, and have a stickey just for those, but in a short time it would be hard and too time-consuming to go through that list as well!

Well I'm a noob,but it seems there are a half a dozen or so posters that are keeping folders of the different news articles & studies. It shouldn't been that hard to organize a half doz peeps, it will however take do or die commitment from that group & somebody(ies) to organize it. I mean, think about it . . . We are all on this forum everyday anyway. All it would take is : Ok I've got this, this, & this. OK & i've got this, this & this. Hey so & so has this,lets get him/her. Then you have someone(s) go over it & say OK you send these 2 with your story & you send these with yours & we'll start send this day,that same week, we have the "here's my story" peeps start sending their emails. Again like I said "we're here anyway"
Hell, I'd organize it, but I'm a noob & don't know that many people here & I'm not that versed in the tech end, but I'll toss my hat in the ring. I am on the other hand, very passionate about this subject(I guess,it's after 3 AM) & have chaired many committees over the years.( And I'm fun at parties)
Again, IMHO, we do want to flood anyone with anger,rants,& ramblings,but with concern & pleads, but most of all, "organized facts & numbers,as in supporters. What we don't need is "Dude! The FDA totally bites it, man!" or to try to make this into constitutional freedoms thing. Not saying that's wrong, just saying it won't get us anywhere.
NB

PS: just noticed I'll be 60 days by the time most of y'all read this! I'm very proud of myself

 

[Porphy]

Newbutt,

Excellent idea on needing organization! That's been by biggest concern so far. The disorganization of information (even here) is beginning to degrade into straight disinformation... which is exactly what we don't need.

We at a minimum need a forum or thread with the organized data in one place.

 

[Closet Toker]

Obesity Medical Costs Balloon to $147 Billion

In other health news, researchers warned Monday that obesity is a major reason for the nation’s rising health costs. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said medical costs of treating obesity-related diseases soared as high as $147 billion last year, or nine percent of all US medical costs. In the eight years leading up to 2006, the proportion of Americans weighing in as obese shot up 37 percent. Doctors said the average healthcare costs for obese individuals are nearly twice as high as those for individuals who are not obese. The average American is about twenty-three pounds overweight. Proposals to counteract obesity have included banning televisions from children’s bedrooms, taxing sugar-sweetened beverages, and making it easier for people to buy fresh produce.

Taken from: http://www.democracynow.org/2009/7/28/headlines#3

 

[TheIllustratedMan]

Introducing... SPEC.

Well I'm a noob,but it seems there are a half a dozen or so posters that are keeping folders of the different news articles & studies. It shouldn't been that hard to organize a half doz peeps, it will however take do or die commitment from that group & somebody(ies) to organize it. I mean, think about it . . . We are all on this forum everyday anyway. All it would take is : Ok I've got this, this, & this. OK & i've got this, this & this. Hey so & so has this,lets get him/her. Then you have someone(s) go over it & say OK you send these 2 with your story & you send these with yours & we'll start send this day,that same week, we have the "here's my story" peeps start sending their emails. Again like I said "we're here anyway"
Hell, I'd organize it, but I'm a noob & don't know that many people here & I'm not that versed in the tech end, but I'll toss my hat in the ring. I am on the other hand, very passionate about this subject(I guess,it's after 3 AM) & have chaired many committees over the years.( And I'm fun at parties)
Again, IMHO, we do want to flood anyone with anger,rants,& ramblings,but with concern & pleads, but most of all, "organized facts & numbers,as in supporters. What we don't need is "Dude! The FDA totally bites it, man!" or to try to make this into constitutional freedoms thing. Not saying that's wrong, just saying it won't get us anywhere.
NB

PS: just noticed I'll be 60 days by the time most of y'all read this! I'm very proud of myself

 

[ladyraj]

...of what the doctors had to say, I disagree with their statements:

"Regrettably, the FDA has used biased reporting of this small and inconclusive study, the complete results of which have not been made public, to secure the vocal support of groups such as the American Academy of Pediatrics Tobacco Consortium, the Institute for Global Health, and the American Lung Association in their attack on electronic cigarettes."

I think the docs have it backwards. It was the pressure brought to bear on the FDA by such groups (especially the ALA) that caused all this nonsense in the first place.

The FDA report gives teeth to the allegations of these various groups against e-cigs. The FDA is forced to evaluate any formal complaint launched by any individual or group. The Doc is alluding to the fact that the FDA hurried to hold a press conference because ASH and their ilk were threatening to attack the FDA for not acting on the complaints about e-cigs.

 

[Sar]

... PS: just noticed I'll be 60 days by the time most of y'all read this! I'm very proud of myself

NB, congratulations to your big 60 !!

I think that PV users are unfortunately small enough minority to be easily dismissed by political agendas. Perhaps the way to deal with the FDA and get more people involved is to expand our "goals" to not only keep PVs available but to also ban cigarettes completely. (BTW, I can't believe that I just wrote this!)

When FDA got the authority to oversee tobacco, why were they not allowed to ban cigarettes? It seems that money clearly won over concerns of public health. Somehow I think this fact should be exploited. FDA's own report on ecigs could be used nicely to compare the dangers to cigarettes if the agenda was to keep PVs available AND ban cigarettes.

Often people get engaged in an issue only when it affects them personally. I am not really sure how something like this could play out -- it is too early in the morning for me. But it seems that this would be a good way to move FDA's talking points away from discussing how unsafe e-cigs are into discussing how much safer they are than cigarettes. It would also be a good attention-grabber for some headlines to present these points in the media.

 

[Angela]

.... to also ban cigarettes completely. (BTW, I can't believe that I just wrote this!)

Nor can I!

....Often people get engaged in an issue only when it affects them personally.

Yes, so now that the issue of cigarettes don't affect you, ban them.

I am amazed at how many vapers on this forum are starting to make the worst antis sound moderate!

 

[ladyraj]

Nor can I!
Yes, so now that the issue of cigarettes don't affect you, ban them.

I am amazed at how many vapers on this forum are starting to make the worst antis sound moderate!

Angela your my new hero...thanks!

 

[Sar]

Nor can I!
Yes, so now that the issue of cigarettes don't affect you, ban them.

I am amazed at how many vapers on this forum are starting to make the worst antis sound moderate!

Angela, I was cringing when I wrote that. Didn't even realize how hypocritical my suggestion could sound until you pointed out that "now issue of cigarettes don't affect you". Ouch!

I am certainly not a new anti. I made the suggestion not because I want to ban cigs, but because I'd like to get the powers-that-be away from comparing the safety of PVs to some abstract ideal and compare the safety to what it should be compared to: analogs.

But I also fully realize that hurting one minority group to benefit another is rather immoral.

Hope they allow PVs in hell.

 

[TropicalBob]

Cigarettes are not going to be banned - in our lifetime. They have history on their side. They have too many users to send into ballistic fury by a ban. They are a cash cow of the first rank. No, cigs are safe. It's their USE that will be increasingly banned. Smokers are being driven into an ever-smaller corral and fewer are able to pay Uncle for their expensive habit.

In the past two days, Orange County (Florida) decreed a $25 per paycheck added cost for all smokers on the county payroll. And Edison State College in Charlotte County (Florida) went tobacco-free with great public fanfare. Absolutely no tobacco product can be used on campus.

The big fear is that the new tobacco bill will ban Reduced Risk Tobacco Products. Read it carefully and ask if smokers will be able to turn to far safer alternatives such as snus, dissolvables and snuff. Those are likely to be on the chopping block within three years.

Take away e-cigs (that's coming very soon) and then ban the alternative tobacco products as taxes and product prices are jacked even higher. Addicts will have only the two choices government wants: cigarettes or NRT products.

Given the demands on tobacco companies under the new law, don't be surprised to see a pack of cigarettes at $10 within two years. Given the economic pressures on state governments, additional taxes seem likely, since the fewest voters are angered by such a move.

Cigs will be safe. But can anyone but the rich afford to smoke them in the privacy of their island home?

 

[Angela]

No probs, Sar. I had read several 'anti-smoking' posts in relatively quick succession and had bitten my tongue, so your post was really just the straw that broke the camel's back, so to speak!

Hope they allow PVs in hell.

Well, I'll be right beside you vaping away...
bring a good selection of liquids and we can trade flavours!

 

[TheIllustratedMan]

I don't advocate calling for a ban of cigarettes.

That said, I do think that we necessarily have to point out the differences between the risks associated with smoking and the risks associated with "vaping". That means pointing out things like: smoking kills 400,000 Americans a year, there are thousands of chemicals and dozens of carcinogens in cigarette smoke, and so on. These are all things that we've all known for a long time, and accepted the risks over the benefits (even if that decision was encouraged by a chemical). It is not the same as being anti-smoking, it's just being pro-reduced-harm. In order to advocate using alternatives to smoking with the goal of reducing the harm to yourself and others, you need to acknowledge that that harm exists in the first place. If we just say "smoking's not all that bad, but this thing's pretty cool and tastes nice so I don't want you to take away my new toy" we're just spinning our wheels and nothing good is going to happen.

-Nate

 

[LaceyUnderall]

In response to the FDA analysis of the electronic cigarette, nJoy had an Independent lab analyze the data put forth in the FDA's toxicology report. Their results were very interesting and call into question the validity of the FDA's report.

Contained in this blog post is the actual PDF so you can read what the independent lab has to say regarding the study and the findings. Please feel free to disperse the post or the PDF internet wide as journalists who are promoting the idea that the FDA study is quality, can possibly do a follow up story like the one recently posted in the Washington Times.

Technical Review and Analysis of FDA Report: Evaluation of e-cigarettes

 

[l_____l]

Here is a good read (subject line)

It's quite en-depth. Way beyond my chemistry 101 8-o