Should Electronic Cigarettes be Regulated as a Medicine? Like the Nicotrol Inhaler or the Nicotine Patches and Gums?

[stevegmu]

And apparently a lot do not think vaping is making them sick. I`m not sure what your point is.
The question remains, how many people get sick every year from vaping.
Is that number not a fundamental benchmark to determining how large a problem lack of regulation is or if there even is a problem.

No idea, but apparently quite a few do- just on this forum alone...

 

[Jman8]

here's why I think our disagreement is important (though not resolvable). By viewing any claims that smoking causes long-term damage to people's healths as mere ANTZ rhetoric, you undercut your own credibility. Claiming that smoking doesn't cause death makes you appear to be delusional to a large majority of the population, including many vapers and smokers.

I appear delusional because I ask for evidence of the real science variety to back such a claim up? Find me this evidence that smoking is deadly. I believe what you are very likely to find is scientific opinion, and probably written from ANTZ-leaning sources. Meaning, what you will likely cite is sources that if one looks into their views on vaping, it will be "they are harmful / hazardous. They absolutely must be regulated." ANTZ-leaning scientists have provided 'evidence' to show harms of vaping. Here on ECF we call that junk science. Not because we are in denial, but because we have looked very carefully at what is purported or the methodology involved and determined that it is using questionable methods or downright deceit to reach its conclusions.

And I am saying this has been done with smoking and evidence that "smoking kills." So, you or anyone reading this can feel free to cite whatever studies you feel backs up the claim that smoking is deadly. I am always interested in reviewing that type of evidence.

I also think this very much relates to this topic. Currently the meme for vaping is "we don't know" and/or "long term data is needed." Those are statements that are as neutral as ANTZ gets on the topic of harms associated with vaping. Yet, we also are aware of many other scientific studies / opinions from ANTZ leaning people that 'show' vaping is (very) harmful. I strongly believe that will only grow and become more prevalent as we move along, especially if the smoking kills meme is not dealt with by critical thinking and more neutral analysis.

And to be clear, I am not saying smoking is a harmless activity. This would be akin to what vapers are up against in political reality. If we argue that it isn't as bad as some make it out to be (isn't very harmful), then those on the other side will put forth the card you did with me that says, "oh so you are saying it is harmless. Wow, you really are delusional."

I personally don't think that perception will help us when public sentiment is important. The whole notion that smoking is not harmful is so patently absurd to most people that anything you say after that is automatically dubious. It's like those people who claim they were abducted by aliens or claim that the holocaust never happened. Even if you're right (which I don't think is really provable one way or the other at this point), you aren't going to win the hearts and minds of many potential supporters by making those claims.

I am challenging, and will continue to challenge, the "smoking kills" meme. As noted above, I very much would like to see the evidence that backs that up. And here on vaping forum, I feel comfortable noting that the sources that fellow vapers are very likely to cite will also very likely be sources that have several to dozens of articles about the harms of vaping. So, if I were ANTZ, I would think that if they bought into the smoking kills meme, and aren't willing to refute that, then they know we are right. They think we are wrong about eCigs, but give it a little time, and a little more of our brand of science, and they will see that we are right about vaping, that it is very harmful, arguably deadly (as surely vapers will one day die). And even if vapers don't buy into this as a whole, the public will. And together with the mass public, we can make those vapers look like delusional addicts.

The ironic thing is that if an ex-smoking vaper dies of something that looks like smoke related health issue, they will likely be noted as another victim of tobacco. I'm not sure how much longer that will go on, but one day when vapers are dying of things smokers use to die of (along with non-smokers, but eh, who cares about real science), then it will be vaping-related deaths that are tallied.

Also interesting about "smoking kills" are the vapers who smoked for 20, 30 and 40 years as much as 3 PAD, and are magically alive to talk about it. And after just 1 year of being smoke free are in "great health." So very interesting how that works out when smoking is so deadly. Though not as interesting as the centenarians who smoked up to age 104 and were magically alive to talk about it. It's as if smoking is deadly in the same way that orange juice, bread and eggs are deadly. I'm sure if we had Anti-bread activists running around, getting grant money for their research, we could convince a whole bunch of people that those greedy bread makers put stuff in their product to keep people coming back for more and that eventually these people died 50 years after their first taste. So very very deadly.

 

[Lessifer]

I Can't see how this could be a problem with Most People.

I should really be quoting Tutu here, but I don't feel like going back. I wouldn't have an issue with these two, I just realize that they wouldn't accomplish what they intend to accomplish. Unless the intent is to just make the general public feel a little bit better about the products.

 

[sub4me]

Your lack of uncertainty is exactly why you are frightening... and BTW your reply is FUD

OMG the sky is falling we need regulations to solve the huge problem with e-cig_stuff
No I don`t have any idea in actual numbers how big this problem is or if there even is one ...
We need to be saved we need regulations.

I asked you to tell me how many people get sick from vaping every year.
It is a simple question you chose not to answer, the truth is you don`t know!
All you have is FUD and opinions.

Lots of rhetoric there. Seems like the sky is falling scenario fits your foot better.

Since I have not done a tally of those complaining of illness I wouldn't be able to tell you, however neither can you which makes the point useless like a lot of silliness I see posted. Care to post something with merit instead if innuendo??

 

[Lessifer]

Here it is:

- Thou shalt not sell vapes to anyone under the age of (legal age for tobacco + 1).

I know I'm a minority opinion(though not the only one) but I don't agree with this. I started smoking when I was 12, I wish I had been able to start vaping instead.

 

[WillyZee]

My personal concern about the pending regulations is more about the present smokers who will be cut off from the choices we have today.

For myself? ... I don't really care what they do ... I've already prepared for the worst case scenario.

If I have to become the Black Market for my family and friends who vape so they can avoid heavily taxed BT eLiquid ... I'm prepared.

And for all the ANTZY posts and whining for regulations in this thread ... careful what you wish for.

For me, I've secured my own vape future ... I already make eJuice that is far safer than anything regulated BT is going to mix up.



Sent via iPhone

 

[sub4me]

I know I'm a minority opinion(though not the only one) but I don't agree with this. I started smoking when I was 12, I wish I had been able to start vaping instead.

Wouldn't it have been better to have done neither??

I know there's a small number here who have openly stated they would let kids vape but that's such a hard sell for most. I do understand the thinking but I just couldn't get onboard that ship. Handing over a addictive substance to a kid just seems irrational to me.

 

[ItTechy]

I feel that vaping was never introduced or intended as a smoking cessation avenue.

Moreover it was introduced as a safer method of nicotine delivery without combustion, and less harmful than the effects caused by combusting tobacco products (burning the stuff).

Regulation for vaping as such would be ignorant and force a black market of e-juice manufactures / suppliers.

Regulation of e-juice manufacturers for quality and adherence to preparation of substances for human consumption is again different and I personally have mixed views on this; the less government involvement, the better.

The vaping / e-liquid manufacturing companies are capable of self-regulations and perhaps industry set standards (not yet established).

The fact is there will probably be some sort of regulations imposed on E-liquid suppliers / manufacturers, not necessarily the mod or atty makers.

Bottom line, the less regulation the better!

IMHO

BTW: I am trying to address the OP, not the many tangents brought into the mix!

 

[sub4me]

My personal concern about the pending regulations is more about the present smokers who will be cut off from the choices we have today.

For myself? ... I don't really care what they do ... I've already prepared for the worst case scenario.

If I have to become the Black Market for my family and friends who vape so they can avoid heavily taxed BT eLiquid ... I'm prepared.

And for all the ANTZY posts and whining for regulations in this thread ... careful what you wish for.

For me, I've secured my own vape future ... I already make eJuice that is far safer than anything regulated BT is going to mix up.



Sent via iPhone

No offense as I have no problem with anything someone does in their home but aren't you even a bit concerned that the people you may supply if you choose to may become ill from something you made them?? I mean even with the best intentions the possibility of harm or error is there.

 

[The Ocelot]

I know the what you mean.

Best to Not Read some of these Posts after you have Eaten Pepperoni and Green Onion Pizza. Or any Spicy Food for that matter.

Keeps the Vurps to a Minimum.

BTW - A "Vurp" is a combination of Vomit and a Burp. JSYK

Is that like Vass?

I hate to Reveal how Tragically Un-Hip I am.

But what is a "Vass"?

Think about it.

 

[vincom]

No offense as I have no problem with anything someone does in their home but aren't you even a bit concerned that the people you may supply if you choose to may become ill from something you made them?? I mean even with the best intentions the possibility of harm or error is there.

really? that's your concern , guess it would be better to stay on analogues then, not.

 

[Lessifer]

Wouldn't it have been better to have done neither??

I know there's a small number here who have openly stated they would let kids vape but that's such a hard sell for most. I do understand the thinking but I just couldn't get onboard that ship. Handing over a addictive substance to a kid just seems irrational to me.

We hand over caffeine and sugar to kids daily, both of those have shown addictive properties similar to nicotine. We prescribe amphetamines to hundreds of thousands of kids, to help them focus. Nicotine absent tobacco is not the addictive monster people think it is, and before you bring up the fact that all of us here are/were nicotine addicts, we all started with smoking which changes the way the brain reacts to nicotine, because of the other properties of tobacco.

Vaping isn't about smoking cessation to me, that was a very nice side effect. Vaping is a way of consuming nicotine, in a way that is much more enjoyable than the patch or gum, and probably(by most current data) about as harmful as drinking a soda or a frappuccino.

 

[Lessifer]

No offense as I have no problem with anything someone does in their home but aren't you even a bit concerned that the people you may supply if you choose to may become ill from something you made them?? I mean even with the best intentions the possibility of harm or error is there.

Do you ever prepare a meal for anyone else?

 

[beckdg]

Why must you constantly insult others?? If you don't agree with his anyones views fine don't agree but there's no need for that behavior.

It's not an insult. It's a question pertaining directly to the context of the post that includes socialist behavior.

Sent from my device.

 

[ItTechy]

I think many are deviating from the OP!

No vaping and E-cigarettes should not be regulated as they are not, and never have been intended as smoking cessation devices.

Agreed some sort of industry standards are needed: Label ingredients like food products, Child Proof caps. for instance..

Outside of the above I cannot see all the debate over "it made my dog puke", "what if it causes this or that", or the like!

Domino's Pizza gives me ........, do we need to regulate Pizza now!

Aside from that IMHO we do not need any more government regulations as soon we will be being told when and where to go to the bathroom!

 

[beckdg]

Write a "sensible regulation" and then post it. We will see,.

I'm not sensible enough. I thought that was obvious.

Sent from my device.

 

[beckdg]

Here's two:

Ingredients labels comparable to food labels.

Childproof caps with the option to request regular caps.

I would argue to sub the word comparable for contrastable.

Food labels are for the most part, a ruse. Faux Information. Not necessarily false depending on your stance on information omition for the sake of pulling one over on the public.

Add a complete chemical analysis and maybe...

Sent from my device.

 

[beckdg]

Dumb ? If we want to be taken seriously we must stop with those type of statements. Vaping as been tremendously successful in replacing cigarettes. It is a most pleasant tool to supply us with the nicotine that our bodies strive. Should we miss our timely intake intake of nic we all suffer from discomforts that can be quite serious. All of us here have been though it countless times. Everytime we fly we feel it.

We must stop being in denial, stop trying to justify our dependency with all those ludic theories that no serious person will take seriously.

Repeat after me: '' My name is **** I am an addict to nicotine '' '' that is why I vape''

This is NOT a condition we wish on anyone, least of all on our children., our families, our friends or on any human being. Only when we come clean with ourself can the healing start.

My name is ****** I am an addict to tobacco. nicotine satiates my cravings and keeps me level headed and clear of mind. that is why I vape.

Sent from my device.

 

[PapaSloth]

Sensible regulation: All people who desire to vape must submit to a mandatory blood test. If that blood test shows traces of conicotine, the individual will be given a lifetime, non-transferable prescription to buy whatever the hell they want to buy, and the government can F the hell off. Everyone else who doesn't show traces of conicotine in their blood can also F the hell off. Any tax revenues collected on the sale of vaping paraphernalia or eliquid will be designated to provide free blood testing services for those who want to apply for a vaping prescription. Excess taxes will be deposited into a special fund that's used to throw us annual pizza and beer parties.

 

[beckdg]

Simple answer because there foods.

So potentially deadly foods (food... you know... everyone... is the target market... Everyone eats food... because it's a necessity)

They get a free pass.

But... that thing you choose to do HAS to be regulated because there Might be something dangerous?!?!?!

What would that say of the priorities of an individual?

Sent from my device.