The FDA is afraid of money loss, not health risks!

[chzhed5]

I had spent a lot of time researching electronic cigarettes before I decided to purchase one.
In all of my countless hours of reading about the possible health risks of the e-cig, I was never able to find one documented case of ANY reported cases.
The more I thought about it, it became clear to me that the FDA is running an anti-e-cig campaign because they stand to lose an unbelieveable amount of money from cigarette taxes! Who in their right mind would say that nicotine "vapor" is a more dangerous for you than the tar and carcinogens in cigarettes!
If it wasn't for e-cigs I would still be filling the pockets of the Federal Government with my tobacco cigarette purchases, as well as being short of breath, stinky and banned from restaurants and some bars!
I may get hit by a bus tomorrow but if I don't, at least I will be saving a ton of money taking a long satisfying drag from my e-cig!

 

[phillyd]

yup you are so right

 

[JustFolly]

While I certainly agree with the spirit of your post and a lot of the ideas... I would like to point out that technically, a lack of cancer/whatever cases isn't yet compelling evidence that e-cigs are harmless. They've been out for something like 5 years, and that's typically not long enough to develop cancer even with analogs.

Now, I do think that there is other evidence that e-cigs are harmless, but I'm just saying.

 

[hecknaw]

I had spent a lot of time researching electronic cigarettes before I decided to purchase one.
In all of my countless hours of reading about the possible health risks of the e-cig, I was never able to find one documented case of ANY reported cases.
The more I thought about it, it became clear to me that the FDA is running an anti-e-cig campaign because they stand to lose an unbelieveable amount of money from cigarette taxes! Who in their right mind would say that nicotine "vapor" is a more dangerous for you than the tar and carcinogens in cigarettes!
If it wasn't for e-cigs I would still be filling the pockets of the Federal Government with my tobacco cigarette purchases, as well as being short of breath, stinky and banned from restaurants and some bars!
I may get hit by a bus tomorrow but if I don't, at least I will be saving a ton of money taking a long satisfying drag from my e-cig!

Yep! dat dar is whats I'ma say'n! jut can't types dat many words!!

 

[VapingRulz]

The more I thought about it, it became clear to me that the FDA is running an anti-e-cig campaign because they stand to lose an unbelieveable amount of money from cigarette taxes! Who in their right mind would say that nicotine "vapor" is a more dangerous for you than the tar and carcinogens in cigarettes!

In fairness, I don't think that they are making the claim that e-cigs are more dangerous than analogs. What we hear from irrational anti-smoking groups is that [in the absence of firm proof] they think it is AS DANGEROUS as burning tobacco. It's nonsense, of course. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to realize that e-cigs have to be safer than traditional ones because you're not burning anything and inhaling it.

They have an agenda and that's nothing new. I strongly suspect that at least half of the so-called proof of the dangers of secondhand smoke are either greatly exaggerated or are outright lies. An entire generation of Baby Boomers grew up in households with smokers and we were far healthier than today's kids. I knew only ONE kid growing up who had asthma. Nowadays, the schools are full of asthmatic kids. Something doesn't add up. Rant over.

I really think that research needs to be done on the long-term effects of vaping. In the meantime, however, vapers should be left in peace. Vaping should be considered to be an effective form of damage control.

 

[NoLeak]

There's a strong puritanical bent in this country. A lot of people hate to see anyone having a good time, especially when a drug is involved. These puritanical types hate alcohol, cigarettes, sex, etc. Vaping fits right in there for them.

These are the same people who have pushed the DUI laws to include lower and lower blood alcohol levels over the years. They are no longer trying to stop DUI. Their goal is to put end end to drinking itself. MADD in particular has been taken over by neo-prohibitionists. The woman who started it after her daughter's death at the hands of a drunk driver no longer supports them because she feels they are extremists. These are the kinds of people e-cigs are up against.

I am no supporter of drunk driving by any means but when a 110 pound woman has a single glass of wine at happy hour and then tests over the legal limit over an hour later, something is wrong.

 

[LuckySevens4U]

What a concept.....

 

[Kurt]

I had spent a lot of time researching electronic cigarettes before I decided to purchase one.
In all of my countless hours of reading about the possible health risks of the e-cig, I was never able to find one documented case of ANY reported cases.
The more I thought about it, it became clear to me that the FDA is running an anti-e-cig campaign because they stand to lose an unbelieveable amount of money from cigarette taxes! Who in their right mind would say that nicotine "vapor" is a more dangerous for you than the tar and carcinogens in cigarettes!
If it wasn't for e-cigs I would still be filling the pockets of the Federal Government with my tobacco cigarette purchases, as well as being short of breath, stinky and banned from restaurants and some bars!
I may get hit by a bus tomorrow but if I don't, at least I will be saving a ton of money taking a long satisfying drag from my e-cig!

Very observant, chzhed5! Your thoughts are mirrored by the majority here, I would say. IMHO, the prohibitionists are simply the useful idiots used by big money interests to spread their propaganda. You should read the FDA vs Smoking Everywhere thread in e-cig news forum:

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...erywhere-v-fda-daily-docket-sheet-update.html

This very issue is constantly being discussed. Big pharm stands to lose $ since their cessation products do not work, or drugs that mess up the nervous system and mental health. Big tobacco is a really strong lobby in congress. It does seem from the history of PVs that while vaping should not be labeled as "safe", it is orders of magnitude safer than cigarettes, given the several studies done on juices and vapor.

However, none of these things matter really. The FDA has not been bout our health in a very long time. It is about protecting corporate profits. As always, follow the money. Stock up while you can if you want to continue vaping.

 

[NoLeak]

However, none of these things matter really. The FDA has not been bout our health in a very long time. It is about protecting corporate profits. As always, follow the money. Stock up while you can if you want to continue vaping.

What he said. The fate of vaping is simple. If the government and/or large corporations can find a way to extract profit then it will be legal. If not, then it will be illegal.

If it does remain legal the feds will demand their cut. It will be taxed to hell and back exactly like analogs. There's no question about that.

It should be no surprise to anyone. It's how everything works in this country. We have the very best government money can buy!

 

[Pumpkin729]

What will we do if the FDA does ban the e-cigs?

 

[Illuminate]

What will we do if the FDA does ban the e-cigs?

Mods and Homebrew Nic Juice.

 

[nightwalker83]

Come on..... we all know it's nothing to do with the health of people or how the e-cig works.... it's all about the $$$$$ to them.

 

[Strawberry72]

An entire generation of Baby Boomers grew up in households with smokers and we were far healthier than today's kids. I knew only ONE kid growing up who had asthma. Nowadays, the schools are full of asthmatic kids.

I grew up around a LOT of second hand smoke, and although I didn't develop anything like asthma, it did cause me to become addicted to cigarettes as a child before I even actually took a drag. I remember when I was a little girl, when I stayed with my grandmother (a non smoker) after a couple of days I would start going through withdraw symptoms. (I didn't realize back then that that's what it was) When I finally did start smoking I didn't go through the things most people do. I didn't cough at all or get sick. It was if I had been smoking for years. I figure it's most likely because in a way I HAD been smoking for years, second hand smoking.

 

[Raven1]

There's a strong puritanical bent in this country. A lot of people hate to see anyone having a good time, especially when a drug is involved. These puritanical types hate alcohol, cigarettes, sex, etc. Vaping fits right in there for them.

These are the same people who have pushed the DUI laws to include lower and lower blood alcohol levels over the years. They are no longer trying to stop DUI. Their goal is to put end end to drinking itself. MADD in particular has been taken over by neo-prohibitionists. The woman who started it after her daughter's death at the hands of a drunk driver no longer supports them because she feels they are extremists. These are the kinds of people e-cigs are up against.

I am no supporter of drunk driving by any means but when a 110 pound woman has a single glass of wine at happy hour and then tests over the legal limit over an hour later, something is wrong.

The country was founded by Puritans and there has always been a very strong "moral" contingent here. I do not condone drunk driving either and I am one of those 110 lb. women of whom you speak. That charge will always be on my record, though I wasn't drunk when I was stopped. Meanwhile, these puritanical attitudes have caused prohibition in the 1920s and subsequently the highest drug, crime and teen pregnancy rates in the first world.

 

[Raven1]

What will we do if the FDA does ban the e-cigs?

They're banned in Australia, but people there still seem to be managing to get them.

 

[Kate51]

If this is such a "puritan" society, why are cigarettes still available for sale, diet pills, weird mind-bending 'food' supplements, and questionable prescription drugs and "NRT's", etc.....it's not about 'puritan' it is about money.

 

[Brewster 59]

First of all I have to admit that I thought the second hand smoke thing was greatly exaggerated. I no longer think that as since I started vaping my wifes asthma is much better. The dui laws are all about money as an avg dui costs about 13,000 here and .08 isnt even a buzz .10 should of been good enough.

The FDA is all about money look at the facts, chantix FDA approved even with the all the negative effects. Cigs are ok? its ok to add carpet adhesive to cigs to make them FSC? The list goes on and on with this joke of an organization.
Give them money and you can sell your product if no money the product is potentially harmful.

 

[Raven1]

If this is such a "puritan" society, why are cigarettes still available for sale, diet pills, weird mind-bending 'food' supplements, and questionable prescription drugs and "NRT's", etc.....it's not about 'puritan' it is about money.

Well, the puritans have tried to do away with lots of stuff - some of it succeeds, some doesn't. Money and lobbying has much to do with it, agreed. MADD has a huge lobby, the anti-smoking contingent has a huge lobby, big tobacco and big pharma have huge lobbies. E-cigs unfortunately don't have a big lobbying group, though we could certainly use one. Which, not to sound like a broken record, but I've suggested getting the AMA involved in support for this cause, as many doctors have expressed interest.

 

[Kate51]

AMA also supports the "new" health care bills. Go figure.

 

[Catdaddy]

If e cigs can't be proven to cause increased health care costs then the "sin tax" can hardly be applied. In one aspect "First World Country" doesn't really apply, "Evil Communism from Satan" National Health Care could be considered a requirement (like the rest of the civilized world has). We don't seem to mind spending billions and billions on wars and the "war on drugs", while providing health care for the poor is inconceivable. That's a hell of a way to prioritize!