Stop saying you quit smoking!

[Ninotschka]

I don't know what it is like in the US. And this is only my personal oppinion. But I think the UK government is so tax driven that they are trying to squeeze it out as many things as possible. I am sure they are ...... off because they have not found a way to put the extortionate tax they put on smokes onto e-liquid. It also seems they would rather take the e-liquid away and drive all of us back to smoking analogs so they get more money from taxes.

All I hear here is that the NHS helps you to give up smoking and whatnot but after having tried almost everything other than hypnosis, I can safely say that the only thing that has worked for me is vaping. The NHS does not give a .... about the smoker. Because most of their funding comes from the tax they put on cigarettes. If everybody started vaping, the NHS would go .... up and so would other government funded organizations. And that wouldn't be good for the already pretty much bancrupt UK.

That is my oppinion anyway. And I feel better now that I got it off my chest. At least for now, I am sure there will be more rants before this is hopefully all sorted out in our favour.

 

[blondeambition3]

Instead say "I switched to vaping."

Why?

Because the "powers that be" are trying to turn ecigs into a drug device and our only alternative at this time is "tobacco product."

Every time someone says that they "quit smoking" using ecigs, they re-enforce the idea that ecigs are smoking cessation devices ie. drugs, and/or confuse people who can't get past the fact that it still "looks like" smoking.

Instead, re-enforce the concept of "reduced harm alternatives to smoking" and say that you switched to a safer habit vs. just "quit smoking."

CASAA and other groups are advocating the acceptance of the "reduced harm" concept, which is currently not recognized across the board as a valid category for products. We feel that, in the absence of quitting nicotine altogether, smokers should have safer alternatives other than to "quit or die."

The more people (non-smokers, politicians, physicians) who are told about this concept and understand it, the better the chances of a future category for ecigs as "reduced harm products," which could be lobbied to be free from the strict regulation of drugs (expensive & time-consuming clinical testing, reduced nicotine strength, removal from the market, Big Pharma prices) and traditional tobacco (no non-tobacco flavors, high taxes, indoor bans).

So spread the word - you may have quit smoking inadvertently, but instead of actually saying you "quit," stress the importance of the fact that you switched to a reduced harm product.

Use this terminology both in real life situations, on this forum and when making comments on other forums and news articles. Whenever you can, substitute the word "switched" for the word "quit." This would imply that "switching to vaping" is as good as "quitting smoking."

This is one situation where the power of the word can really influence people!

Great point. I'm a stealth vaper actually... I don't like the "attention" I get in Public, so I steer rather clear of it to begin with (most of the time!... lol), but if anyone ever asks I'll tell them I 'switched'.....

 

[Ninotschka]

It is unfortunate what is going on, so you should stay abreast of all the legal changes. You are also affected. Check the following link:

Read it, it has links to the sites where you can fill in petitions to try to stop your UK regulatory authorities from classifying this as a drug delivery device, and thus pulling it from the market.

Thanks for that Chip. I do understand what is going on, but I don't understand what anyone would gain from these changes. I guess that is what my initial quesiton was. I already filled in the petitions but will check again to see if I missed one. Thanks

 

[(So) Jersey Girl]

I don't know what it is like in the US. And this is only my personal oppinion. But I think the UK government is so tax driven that they are trying to squeeze it out as many things as possible. I am sure they are ...... off because they have not found a way to put the extortionate tax they put on smokes onto e-liquid. It also seems they would rather take the e-liquid away and drive all of us back to smoking analogs so they get more money from taxes.

All I hear here is that the NHS helps you to give up smoking and whatnot but after having tried almost everything other than hypnosis, I can safely say that the only thing that has worked for me is vaping. The NHS does not give a .... about the smoker. Because most of their funding comes from the tax they put on cigarettes. If everybody started vaping, the NHS would go .... up and so would other government funded organizations. And that wouldn't be good for the already pretty much bancrupt UK.

That is my oppinion anyway. And I feel better now that I got it off my chest. At least for now, I am sure there will be more rants before this is hopefully all sorted out in our favour.

That pretty much sums up what's happening here.

 

[HaploVoss]

I can see how using different language would help, but where does it end? Everything we say and do these days must be PC or there is hell to pay. I'm not trying to offend the OP or the content of the OP, however my point is that many people on this forum have varying ideas of what should / should not be used, etc.

As far as my doctor is concerned... I 'quit smoking' 2 years ago - I already posted this in another thread. After explaining it all to him, showing him the device, (801 at the time) and why my health had improved as he'd commented... he just said 'good choice. I don't really care as long as I'm not listening to whistles and squeaks with my stethy anymore.'
He did not have a way to classify vaping at the time so .. my insurance went down as I am now classified as a 'non-smoker'.

If I am technically a 'non-smoker' now... things are really confusing if I just 'switched to vaping' - and still trying to explain to people 'well I do still vape, but technically I really am a non-smoker!! honest!'

See what I'm saying? Bah, I suck at these kinds of discussions. Anyway - I see both sides of the coin and hope it all works out in the end.

 

[e-pipeman]

The courts and authorities are addressing our practice of vaping rather than the words we use to describe our activity. Because the activity involves nicotine which is a powerful toxin when misused they are right to be considering the issue. I'm also unsure how far we can say that our use of vaping is "recreational" - for me it is an alternative habit to my old one (smoking tobacco). I personally believe that it is better for me in that I feel much healthier vaping than I did when smoking - but that's just my opinion. I would hope that on the basis of vaping probably being the lesser of two evils that we will be allowed to continue to use our devices, but some form of regulation is surely likely.

 

[Ninotschka]

I do agree, it should be regulated in some way, but to be honest, i have no idea what the best way is for everybody involved. it don't think it should be classed as medicinal because to me, it is an alternative to smoking tobacco. i still feel like i am smoking, my brain still thinks i am smoking, even though i am vaping. i am struggling to explain it fully to people because something like this just brings all kinds of different opinions out in people. and rightly so, everybody should have their own opinion. mine is this. if they regulate e-liquid in such a harsh way, then they need to ban cigarettes as well. betters till, ban tobacco products and sell e-cigs instead. i would love to buy my water melon e-liquid off the shelf at tesco lol

 

[e-pipeman]

if they regulate e-liquid in such a harsh way, then they need to ban cigarettes as well. betters till, ban tobacco products and sell e-cigs instead. i would love to buy my water melon e-liquid off the shelf at tesco lol

My hope is that the authorities will ban neither. This is largely because I believe that adult people have the right to make decisions for themselves on these matters without the state examining all of their habits under a microscope. Prohibition of any kind is usually an ineffective tool.

It would be great to be able to buy e-liquid at Tesco - we'd get club card points!

 

[JerryRM]

My hope is that the authorities will ban neither. This is largely because I believe that adult people have the right to make decisions for themselves on these matters without the state examining all of their habits under a microscope. Prohibition of any kind is usually an ineffective tool.

It would be great to be able to buy e-liquid at Tesco - we'd get club card points!

I hope that your leaders in the UK see the logic and the truth in that statement. Unfortunately, here in the US, they won't.

 

[Snarkyone]

So you have no control over laws that are wielded against you and your best interests? So much for the tenet that Govt works for the people. It appears that the people of the US are now merely pawns for big business interests, ruled over by a non-compromising imperialist system. I weep that democracy in your country seems to be in it's final death throes
Our govt in the UK tried to push some cash making agenda for compulsory insurance on pet dogs recently, and the public dissaproval was so vitriolic that they backtracked last week. The public should get first say, ALWAYS.
It appears to me that you get no say on nothing. Ever. That ain't right.
Even when govt tries to work for the wider public interest, the special interest lobby destroys it. JMHO

Couldn't agree with you more. The US has lost it's way and is in for a major re-engineering of it's oppressive and corrupt government that's run more by corporate interest than the interest of the people or it's going to be hell.

 

[basic_atheist]

You say tomato, Judge Leon said tobacco.

LOL... Yep. And you know, it's not often you find a Judge with some common sense judgement like that. Most of the ones I run into are just potato-head members of the "tater" family... agitater, irritater, hesitater, dictater.

I completely agree, and hope you are right about it being a lost cause for the FDA... But just last night we proved that our government doesn't give up on lost causes. :-S

Yeah, and by the time my oldest childless step-son qualifies in 2014 the bill is going to be torn up and burned... It's just another TV show to me.

According to Dr. Eisenberg's study, the unlit cigarette "pacifier" is just as effective at "drug delivery". Fortunately, Dr. E only looked at the first 10 puffs and most e-cig users eventually figure out how to use them properly.

I hate it when PV newbies try to run a study. Makes me wonder what the heck Eisenberg is smoking.

And don't forget smoke. The PV is missing smoke. With no combustion, there is no smoke, with no smoke, you aren't smoking. If you stop using something with smoke because you prefer using something with no smoke you have quit smoking.

True that. No smoke = not smoking. But what still doesn't make any sense is that somehow a non-smoking product = a drug/delivery combo device according to the FDA and they want to yank it away from us. If that's true, then I would like to see them explain Ariva and Stonewall... they are created in a laboratory, many of the TSNA's are stripped out of the tobacco, they only activate upon contact with saliva, they still cause mouth ulcers, the process has been running on government funding, and they have been allowed to be sold to the public since 2001. However, star scientific just recently filed with the FDA to categorize their products as "modified risk" tobacco products. We don't hear much of a fuss about them and most likely the FDA will grant them passage due to the government connection "buddy-buddy" system... So, Is it just because the PV uses electricity? Is that what is blowing their mind? Or is it the illusion of smoking in general that's blowing their mind?. OR, is it because there's not enough "hanky-panky" going with the PV market? What's the deal here? I smell a fish.

Here's a nice analogy: Remember the infamous Great White concert and subsequent fire at The Station in 2003? Lets say instead of using pyro, they just use fog machines. Technically, they would have "stopped smoking" and in fact might consider the harm reducing fog machines to be a fire prevention method--does that mean fog machines should be regulated by the NFPA?

Ssshhh... Don't give them any ideas.

 

[blondeambition3]

The US has lost it's way and is in for a major re-engineering of it's oppressive and corrupt government that's run more by corporate interest than the interest of the people or it's going to be hell.

beautifully said!

 

[trailblazer6]

Well this has been a very interesting read. And allot of good valid points of view have been brought up. Thank you Kristen for starting this thread and I do see your point. But, I do not believe we need to tippy toe around this. To all of the people who quit smoking analogs because of vaping Great!!!
And if you want to bang your drum and tell the world of your success. Bang away The public will notice too. Not just the FDA , BT, and BP. They all have a agenda. And the public is not stupid, they know it too. Besides, I take what the FDA has to say with a pinch of salt, a wedge of lime, and a shot of tequila At work people see me take my PV and put it in my pocket and they ask " did you just put a lit cigarette in your pocket ?" I use that opportunity to show them my Joye 510. And explain how I can still get the Nicotine my brain craves and the flavors my taste buds love with out smelling like an ash tray or killing myself. Most give me a nod of approval and or the thumb up. For the smokers, the wheels start turning you can see it in there eyes. You get the smile and the bobble head nod. I don't try to convert them. If they come back with questions, and some do. I try to answer them based on my personal experiences. No sugar added. And as for the wacktavest anti.'s who just say "why don't you just quit ?" I tell them since I don't take any public funds I have no intentions of giving up any of my vices. That shuts them up in short order or I will tell them politely where they can kiss me. And to all of my friends who like to twist my short hairs by telling me to "Man up and have a real cigarette " I tell them" No thank you, I want to be around to be one of your Paulbearers."

 

[kristin]

A thread that supports my position: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...792-you-havent-really-quit-3.html#post1205231

 

[Thulium]

A thread that supports my position: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...792-you-havent-really-quit-3.html#post1205231

I think you and I are on different edges of the same side of the coin. I am certainly aware of the importance and am absolutely a proponent of the strategic use of language on these issues. Considering that my suggested verbiage was "Smoking Replacement", I wholeheartedly agree that it is more correct and politically advantageous to say "I switched to e-cigarettes" or "I replaced smoking with e-cigs" than to use the "Q" word.

HOWEVER (and this is a big point), I think we do our cause a disservice if we shrink away completely from the words espoused by "the antis". Although I tell people that I have switched, I do not hesitate to point out that I have stopped smoking--which is a feat that I could not accomplish with "FDA approved" quitting methods. ...If someone wants to argue semantics at that point, they will not win. I quit smoking accidentally. To paraphrase the beer commercial, "I don't always use tobacco products, but when I do...I prefer 'those PVs'. Stay smoke-free my friend."

 

[mini_art]

I see your point Kristen, however I look at it slightly differently.
the companies selling the devises have to play the political game with the word symantics due to the regulations and laws. This is understood.

However us being the public, and wanting the public to see this in a positive light as many of us here do, I don't feel that we should limit ourselves in how we describe this new experience.

Our doctors, friends and family seem to look at is as though we have stopped smoking.
Yes we have stopped smoking. Kind of hard to tell someone that my bright pink pv is a cig and I haven't stopped smoking.

The more the public understands pvs the harder it will be for the FDA to ban them.
I say , shout it from the rooftops, tell anyone who will listen how you stopped smoking so easily and quickly. If the word spreads far enough and fast enough the FDA wont have a chance to do much. No more stealth vaping and hiding.

If they are going to ban them there is no amount of word symantics that will stop them, but judges hearing so many good things about them just might. Only if they actually get to hear it though.

 

[Sun Vaporer]

If they are going to ban them there is no amount of word symantics that will stop them, but judges hearing so many good things about them just might. Only if they actually get to hear it though.

Hi Mini--

Nothing inhibits you or any of our Members from writting the Justices and voicing your concens. That way you know your voice was heard. Law Clerks do read letters and pass sediments along to the Justices.


Sun

 

[lonercom]

I wonder how many of the leaders of these anti-smoking groups ever smoked.

 

[let_there_be_vaping]

Myself and everyone I know equate "smoking" with a cigarette or tobacco that is lit, smokes and stinks. I have QUIT smoking.
Paint it any way you like but those in charge and the public will call it what they want no matter what spin we try to put on it.
I "smoked" for more than 40 years. I no longer "smoke".

This is what I logged on to say. Only difference is that I smoked for more than 30 years. I too no longer smoke.

And, just for the record, going completely ecig was not easy for me as I was also addicted to the other chemicals in analogs. After 10 months of both smoking and vaping, I am now at 1 month and 3 weeks totally ecigs!

 

[jpargana]

I see your point Kristen, but would not the public be more supportive if he saw the e-cig as a life-saving device, one that actually helps people, semantics apart, quit smoking? (Every non-smoker worries about some smoker relative/friend, and would like to see him/her quit... no matter how). I've had that experience here in Portugal (e-cigs are somewhat new around here): after explaining the whole concept of the e-cig to interested people who come across, many will say something like 'How cool! And does it work? Does it really keep you from smoking? Or do you still smoke a normal cigarette now and then...?' To those people, the distinction is clear: No smoke (the main cause of health problems) = no 'smoker'; just as you cannot be called an alchoolic if you drink a lot of non-alchoolic beer... no matter what it looks like 'real beer'. Those people understand the relevant issue here: you may be still addicted to nicotine, but even so they will congratulate you because you 'quit smoking', and no longer give prejudice to your own health and of those around you... I've had this kind of conversation with ex-smokers - cold turkey - who ask me 'Dont you feel better now? Do you not breathe better?, and so on...