Stop saying you quit smoking!

[JohnnyVapor]

I hate being that guy, but isn't it 'quitting smoking'? If I decided to use snuff, snus, or chew instead of smoking tobacco, haven't I quit smoking? I'm still using a tobacco product, not a drug device.

 

[ChipCurtis]

I see where people are going with this, but I honestly did quit smoking. The first 3 weeks with my PVs was torture. I'm not going to diminish the work I did, and the battle I won.

I do not crave my PV like I did a cigarette. Use of my PV is by deliberate choice every time, not compulsion as it was to light up a cigarette.

Sorry to hear about your going through 3 weeks of torture transitioning from analogs to PV's. At least you arrived, that's the important thing.

For me, and from comments I read here daily, it would seem that the majority, if not 90% of all vapers, had an easy transition to PV's. I quit analogs on my first day of vaping, and so have a lot of others, and it was relatively painless.

I consider my e-cig habit to be pretty much on-par with my old analog habit. I don't consider myself "off the habit of putting a stick up to my mouth and blowing something out". That habit remains but has simply been replaced by the PV.

I find it a bit disconcerting that you consider yourself as having gone through two unrelated steps: 1. quitting cigarettes, and 2. starting PVs which are "not compulsive". I find my PV just as compulsive as the old cigarettes, although I was never THAT compulsive a smoker to begin with.

 

[Haytoni]

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!

I tell them when asked what is that hanging on your neck referring to my V4L holder, that it is my PACIFIER ...at my age "Older than dirt" they believe me, and just smile.

 

[anim8r]

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!

I understand where you're coming from, but I have to respectfully disagree Kristin.

It's my opinion that the public would look MUCH MORE favorably and give more support to friends and family with a device that people are using to "Quit Smoking", than a device that is a "safer alternative to smoking". They'll lump the latter into the evil "smoking" arena.

And it seems like I'd spend a helluva lot more time educating people with the switch to vaping, only to have people think it's; still like smoking, is still dangerous, and that I should just quit altogether with something like the patch. Plus, I'll be contradicting everyone I've told and everyone that I've helped switch over (17 people are using e-cigs now and have completely quit smoking cigarettes).

I've quit smoking and am now vaping. I don't mind saying "I've gone digital", but I will always say I quit smoking and will eventually say I've quit nicotine when I wean myself off of it with these pv's.

I know that legaleze can screw things up and get people all twisted into several camps, but I'd rather not let the FDA control our actions and spin us around as they see fit. One way or another, they'll find a way to control this "safer alternative" or "drug delivery device" or "Electrically heated food injector" --they'll use whatever works for them, so I'm using what works best for me.

Personally, I think the non-smoking public, my co-workers, and employers look a LOT more favorably on my device if I say it helped me quit my 26-year smoking habit than they would if I said it's my "smoking alternative".

It won't matter what we or the public calls it. The FDA will still have us in our targets and their terms will be the ones they use in the courtroom.

What would people say if they're using 0 nic liquid? That they haven't quit smoking?

I honestly DO NOT want anyone saying that they haven't quit smoking and only switched to electronic cigarettes in my places of work. That would risk all of the respect I've earned for e-cigs here.

anyway... that's my rant.

 

[ChipCurtis]

I forsee a 2-pronged strategy for e-cigs. One is a publicity campaign for the general public, the other is the legalistic way in which to keep e-cigs on the market.

The publicity campaign would stress what anim8r has said above: go ahead and say that e-cigs helped you to "quit smoking". The legal strategy would be to defeat the FDA by stressing e-cigs as a tobacco product.

Yes, the 2 approaches are contradictory, but we shouldn't have to apologize for that. Look at what the state gov's and the FDA are doing... changing their tune constantly, "grasping at straws" as BigJimW always says. We can play Machiavellian political tactics too, and we may have to do exactly that.

Tactic #1 is an honest approach for the people. Tactic #2 is a Machiavellian approach to keep the corrupt politicians and Big Pharma off our backs. Tactic #2 is completely justified because of what they're trying to do to us (kill us).

 

[taz3cat]

It's a fun way to stop smoking analogs. This is what has the anti's pants all in a bunch. They just can't stand that there is a way to quit that makes it so easy and non-punishing, and also no way to receive $$ to keep their anti organizations afloat.

I don't think most anti groups are intelligent enough to even distinguish between smoking and nicotine. They don't. BOTH words are a forbidden concept in their lexicon.

I have to agree with most of what you say but, the Anti's have now went from anti smoking to ANTI NICOTINE and anti smoking.

Our watch groups keep a close watch on what the Anti's are actually saying and even attending Anti tobacco conventions, there they talked to people to get the latest information. (Know thy enemy).

The vaping community need to commit to a public policy that will achieve our goals. I know we can't agree on everything, but in the scheme of things just how important is you say "I quit smoking ?????????" and at same time your puffing away on a PV. People look at you and go duh and maybe a few words I can't say in polite company. Once they understand we are not giving them bull and telling the facts, we can get more people to come over to our side. The key is Harm Reduction Alternative to cigarettes.

We have some hard core Anti Smoking people (some of the doctors that are speaking out) that are trying to help us. They are reasonable people and can see that PV are a harm reduction alternative to cigarettes. Some of the rabid Anti's can be switched if they realize we are not telling them a bunch of bull. This requires we use words they understand and can grasp. Some of them can't see we are quitting while we are puffing on a PV. They can grasp we switched to PV from smoking for harm reduction.

The FDA controls, all food, all drugs and all consumables for humans and animals so it will control PV, that is a given how they control it is still up in the air, we need to influence their policy on the PV with the petitions, Tell them we want Harm Reduction Classification.

 

[kristin]

I understand where you're coming from, but I have to respectfully disagree Kristin.

It's my opinion that the public would look MUCH MORE favorably and give more support to friends and family with a device that people are using to "Quit Smoking", than a device that is a "safer alternative to smoking". They'll lump the latter into the evil "smoking" arena.

Unfortunately, then they say "When are you quitting that thing?"

Better to emphasize that vaping is an acceptable practice in and of itself, rather than a quit smoking tool.

I'd rather have people compare vaping to chewing gum than NRTs.

 

[DC2]

The publicity campaign would stress what anim8r has said above: go ahead and say that e-cigs helped you to "quit smoking". The legal strategy would be to defeat the FDA by stressing e-cigs as a tobacco product.

Yes, the 2 approaches are contradictory, but we shouldn't have to apologize for that.

When you think about it, the two are only contradictory because nothing like an electronic cigarette has come along before, and there is no "correct" category for it. It can be used to continue using tobacco products in a much less harmful way, and it can be used to quit smoking as well.

 

[TokenVapor]

I quit killing myself.

Instead of replacing "quit" with "switched". I replaced "smoking" with "killing myself".

 

[telsie]

I understand where you're coming from, but I have to respectfully disagree Kristin.

It's my opinion that the public would look MUCH MORE favorably and give more support to friends and family with a device that people are using to "Quit Smoking", than a device that is a "safer alternative to smoking". They'll lump the latter into the evil "smoking" arena.

I completely agree. The general non-smoking public wants all smokers to stop smoking and when they see e-cigs as being a product that does that very well for most who try it (obviously this is my unscientific opinion based on experiences on this board), I think we'll have their support. I've been very surprised at how well received my e-cig has been by friends and family. Oddly, it's only the former smokers in my family who think this doesn't count for anything.

I forsee a 2-pronged strategy for e-cigs. One is a publicity campaign for the general public, the other is the legalistic way in which to keep e-cigs on the market.

The publicity campaign would stress what anim8r has said above: go ahead and say that e-cigs helped you to "quit smoking". The legal strategy would be to defeat the FDA by stressing e-cigs as a tobacco product.

Part of that public campaign has to be that nicotine is not the great evil it's been touted as for so many years. That's a tough battle because nicotine has been so closely tied to "cigarettes" for so long.

 

[anim8r]

Unfortunately, then they say "When are you quitting that thing?"

Better to emphasize that vaping is an acceptable practice in and of itself, rather than a quit smoking tool.

I'd rather have people compare vaping to chewing gum than NRTs.

That's just it. They don't ask me that.

They say other things like:

"Wow, you're still using that and not smoking?"
"How long's it been now"
"Congrats man!"
"That smells awesome, is that 0 nic?" (many non-smokers like to try out the 0 nic flavors--try to get someone to puff on an "alternative to smoking". I doubt there would be any takers from the non-smoking crowd.)


They also say a lot of things like:

"I talked to my friend/relative/spouse/co-worker and s/he's going to send you an e-mail with some questions."

Not once have I had anyone ask when I'm going to quit the e-cigs.

I imagine even current smokers would be less prone to try out my "smoking alternative" since it's more of a pain in the ... to vape than it is to simply light up.

"Quitting Smoking" is a powerful phrase. It's a badge worth striving for.

"Smoking" or "Vaping" an alternative carries next to zero weight with me and I'm a proud vaper.

 

[yanks21]

Oddly, it's only the former smokers in my family who think this doesn't count for anything.

Ding, Ding, Ding!

As I've stated elsewhere semantics in politics matter VERY MUCH and if you don't think so you haven't been paying attention for the last 30 years.

So I agree with all of those who think it is wise to use one set of terminology with the public and another with the politcos.

 

[JLeigh]

Public, Average Joe, perception is a completely different thing from political, special-interest groups, perception. I've had nothing but good comments from my friends and family --some being smokers, some being former smokers, and some having never smoked. Yes, public perception can sway politics, but only if enough of the public puts pressure on them. Rarely does Average Joe fight for/against something that does not directly affect him. The guy who doesn't eat foie gras isn't going to get all up-in-arms because Chicago is banning it in restaurants. He couldn't care less, OR, because he has no interest in it, he hasn't heard anything about it.

As for political perception, well, that's an entirely different animal. The politicians can pay lip-service to increasing tobacco taxes to help get people off cigarettes for their health, all the while increasing state and federal coffers. But it's not really about our health. If it was really about our health, tobacco companies would be required to use pure tobacco and not be allowed to load cigarettes with tons of chemicals. We wouldn't have some states making FSC mandatory, even though FSC's are making people very sick. It's about money. That's why I never have high hopes (but appreciation nonetheless!) for what some of you are working so tirelessly to accomplish.

I hope I'm wrong.

 

[HighHeeledGoddess]

Sorry to hear about your going through 3 weeks of torture transitioning from analogs to PV's. At least you arrived, that's the important thing.

For me, and from comments I read here daily, it would seem that the majority, if not 90% of all vapers, had an easy transition to PV's. I quit analogs on my first day of vaping, and so have a lot of others, and it was relatively painless.

I consider my e-cig habit to be pretty much on-par with my old analog habit. I don't consider myself "off the habit of putting a stick up to my mouth and blowing something out". That habit remains but has simply been replaced by the PV.

I find it a bit disconcerting that you consider yourself as having gone through two unrelated steps: 1. quitting cigarettes, and 2. starting PVs which are "not compulsive". I find my PV just as compulsive as the old cigarettes, although I was never THAT compulsive a smoker to begin with.

My transition may have been easier had I not began it at the exact same time my doctor made a huge alteration in my birth control, and thus my hormones. I was like a teenager all over again, but worse! 8-o

The reason I was able to quit was because of the PVs. I would have never made the leap without them, nor kept up my determination. They were what kept my spirits going, and on the the quit wagon.

What I mean by "compulsion" is that I do not feel like I am going to panic after a meal in a restaurant anymore - I don't think about smoking after food anymore. I don't feel like I am going to die after an hour of shopping in the mall, etc. I have even discovered the joys of snuggling after spending "adult time" with my spouse - something I had never experienced before in my life, as a smoker.

The main times I use my PV are when I am on my PC, driving, while drinking, and at work.

Basically, I just don't like being told what to do and say, to put it bluntly. I don't believe the politicians listen after the first line, if even that long, anyway. I don't believe it really matters what we say.

I know, because I have been contacting them on issues forever. They send me replies that are pre-made, and never address my points in the slightest.

 

[telsie]

What I mean by "compulsion" is that I do not feel like I am going to panic after a meal in a restaurant anymore - I don't think about smoking after food anymore. I don't feel like I am going to die after an hour of shopping in the mall, etc. I have even discovered the joys of snuggling after spending "adult time" with my spouse - something I had never experienced before in my life, as a smoker.

Isn't it awesome? I feel the same way. I can sit in a restaurant and chit-chat without wishing the conversation would hurry up and end so I can get outside and smoke. I know it's giving me nicotine and I can tell that I still need that (and enjoy it), but it is such a different experience than the power that cigarettes had over me.

We have our lives back and we're not hurting anyone.

Long live the e-cig (or PV, if you prefer)!

 

[Pegasus7]

Well, for me, new to Vaping, I really not thought about it.
I must say this is a very good point and I agree. I also agree with others saying that Our wonderful FDA will find a way. They are notorious for restricting my habits. ...

 

[ChipCurtis]

"Quitting Smoking" is a powerful phrase. It's a badge worth striving for.

Correct. And this IMHO is what lies at the heart of the rabid anti's outrage against us. For them, it's not specifically about the taxes (that's more the FDA and gov't concerns) -- it's about the fact that e-cigs have stolen their thunder -- and, in effect, rendered their organizations obsolete in a very embarrasing way (becuase vaping is so enjoyable).

Rabid anti's truly believe that the entire concept of "Quit Smoking" is an intellectual property that belongs exclusively to them, and you haven't really "Quit Smoking" until you've done it on their terms and conditions.

 

[Snarkyone]

Double post sorry.

 

[Snarkyone]

It's all games, semantics, and PC thought police BS. Follow the money to see where the law is going to go on this. I quit smoking cigarettes, end of discussion. So much hand wringing over nothing you have any control over is a waste of time.

 

[PlanetScribbles]

So much hand wringing over nothing you have any control over is a waste of time.

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