They only have two videos up so far, but they have a couple more marked as "coming soon":
National Journal Online - Could The FDA Burn Tobacco?
National Journal Online - Could The FDA Burn Tobacco?
Video Reports On Tobacco Legislation
- Thread starter IntoxiNation
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Those are truly an excellent overview of what we face. Note that e-cigs are addressed in the last segment on Public Heatlh.
Everyone should watch all four videos. They are very well done and offer a great representation of the entire picture from a tobacco perspective (of course not the pharmaceutical perspective).
I watched the public heath one I do not have time to watch the others right now but will later tonight in like 13 hours because I have to work all day and night doing sound yeee haw I brought my charger on long days like this.. Can someone summerize all the videos?
I did hear that in that video too thats crazy if it is really true... Just makes me want to vape even more despite the government or the Children want whaaa if the children are going to smoke they will no matter the ads no matter anything...Get over it...
These were very informative. I will note something that I've posted elsewhere a few times. In the short clip of Margaret Hamburg she said, (and I am nearly quoting) 'It's time to reduce smoking and reduce harm.' If we have someone at the head of the FDA who understands harm reduction (as opposed to abstinence) and can implement it, we will find a paradigm shift that is supportive of e-cigs, snus, etc. I know that Hamburg understands harm reduction. I don't know to what extent the Tobacco bill might constrain her efforts by simply making the harm reduction approaches illegal.
It wouldn't surprise me. I can see BT execs on the golf course laughing and knee slapping about how they could put anything in cigarettes and people would still smoke 'em. There is probably pig vomit in cigs too.
I'm sure it's been said many times but if it were really about the kids, they would do what Canada does with beer and The Beer Store. They would make tobacco products ONLY AVAILABLE AT TOBACCO OUTLETS and there would be cameras and security to high heavens and it would require at least two forms of identification with proof of age. At this point, I think anyone would be fine with that.
I watched all 4 videos. While they are very informative on everything going on, it just makes me feel so angry and helpless against their billion$ in lobbying power.
Do we have a snowballs chance in he** of our devices surviving?
...Yes, he said urine.
Do we have a snowballs chance in he** of our devices surviving?
...Yes, he said urine.
This is true. If it were really about the kids, my 5 year old wouldn't be able to walk from the juice box isle through the liquor section to get to a huge sealed case with cigarettes in it!
Personally, I would have no problem as a consumer going to a tobacco shop to get my smokes or my ecig needs. However, as a small business owner I do take issue with this idea that such intensive restrictions are placed on businesses to ensure that the parents who aren't doing their jobs are getting someone else to take the responsibility.
As a parent, I fully expect if my child is caught with a fake ID attempting to purchase anything that isn't legal to their age group, it would be my responsibility and not that of the person who checked the ID. But then again, my children are being raised in an environment that is open to the goods and the bads of the world so they understand responsibility and understand what being a rational adult with choices is all about.
This all goes back to the old addage: "It takes a village to raise a child". No. It takes a village to ensure that parents are participating in raising their own children to understand right from wrong. In some instances, like drugs and alcohol, we treat children like they are stupid and can't make rational decisions. But when they do something really stupid that actually harms another, we charge them as adults. It's a double standard.
Lacey-
U.S. public health generally treats everyone as if they were stupid and can't make rational decisions, adults included. This assumption of stupidity lies behind abstinence approaches, which are less "complex" than harm reduction. Harm reduction requires judgement, personal decisions and the personal weighing of risk against value received. This tension in American public health between abstinence and harm reduction is the only reason we even need to have these discussions. Otherwise the harm reduction value of e-cigs, snus and dissolvables would be a no brainer and we would be seeing media campaigns from the Feds and CTFK offering these options as significant improvements over smoking tobacco. Our fight is fundamentally against abstinence approaches in public health.
U.S. public health generally treats everyone as if they were stupid and can't make rational decisions, adults included. This assumption of stupidity lies behind abstinence approaches, which are less "complex" than harm reduction. Harm reduction requires judgement, personal decisions and the personal weighing of risk against value received. This tension in American public health between abstinence and harm reduction is the only reason we even need to have these discussions. Otherwise the harm reduction value of e-cigs, snus and dissolvables would be a no brainer and we would be seeing media campaigns from the Feds and CTFK offering these options as significant improvements over smoking tobacco. Our fight is fundamentally against abstinence approaches in public health.
It is a no-brainer, Wally. Unfortunately, the rational brain has been beaten into submission by the emotional brains that hate tobacco and want it gone from planet Earth. At the moment, those prevail.
I favor Dr. Laugesen's approach: Tax the tobacco or nicotine product on the basis of identified health consequences. Cigarettes get the highest tax; chew tobacco gets a high tax; little cigars get a high tax; regular cigars, lower; pipe tobacco, lower; snus and dissolvables, lowest of all. E-cigs would fall into the same "harm" tax category as snus and dissolvables -- almost no harm at all.
But that's far too rational in today's hysteria over tobacco and "the children."
I favor Dr. Laugesen's approach: Tax the tobacco or nicotine product on the basis of identified health consequences. Cigarettes get the highest tax; chew tobacco gets a high tax; little cigars get a high tax; regular cigars, lower; pipe tobacco, lower; snus and dissolvables, lowest of all. E-cigs would fall into the same "harm" tax category as snus and dissolvables -- almost no harm at all.
But that's far too rational in today's hysteria over tobacco and "the children."
as far as I am concern there are one to many people trying to peg the nail. Getting rid of cigarettes is not the answer...look what that did with marijuana and alcahol. Trying use the high taxes on child health care is a complete slap in the face.
What they should do with the taxes is help pay for the 96 billion dollars waisted every year just for health care towards tobacco related health problems.
Instead of the FDA waisting there time banning nicotine products that work, they should be working on ways to improve the them. What should be done is every store including online should submit names and phone numbers to the FDA of whom they are selling to. Then the FDA should contacted the buyers to make sure they are of the proper age and were or current tobacco smokers....or something along those lines.
They would have to fax or mail a copy of there state ID.
Banning any products only creates a potietial black market. Every illegal and legal drugs that were either banned or place under doctors care are currently being sold on the black market and in huge numbers. Billions made every year just on ilegal drugs...The BIg pharm. companies have nothing on this black market. oh did i mention the dead body count.
The more we keep tagging more laws that control people will only end up in disaster. 1000's of years of history have proven this. People dont like being controled. Its one thing to harm another....and its another to make a criminal out of someone who's done no harm to another.
sorry for the babble
What they should do with the taxes is help pay for the 96 billion dollars waisted every year just for health care towards tobacco related health problems.
Instead of the FDA waisting there time banning nicotine products that work, they should be working on ways to improve the them. What should be done is every store including online should submit names and phone numbers to the FDA of whom they are selling to. Then the FDA should contacted the buyers to make sure they are of the proper age and were or current tobacco smokers....or something along those lines.
They would have to fax or mail a copy of there state ID.
Banning any products only creates a potietial black market. Every illegal and legal drugs that were either banned or place under doctors care are currently being sold on the black market and in huge numbers. Billions made every year just on ilegal drugs...The BIg pharm. companies have nothing on this black market. oh did i mention the dead body count.
The more we keep tagging more laws that control people will only end up in disaster. 1000's of years of history have proven this. People dont like being controled. Its one thing to harm another....and its another to make a criminal out of someone who's done no harm to another.
sorry for the babble
When that lady got to the 5 second ecig segment at the end of the third clip, you could hardly understand her mumbling sentence fragments. Nowhere in her incoherent ramblings did she come close to answering the question and everyone in the room is now dumber because of it. I award her no points, and may god have mercy on her soul.
While I agree that efforts should be made to thwart underage sales, I have an issue with this statement. As a consumer, I would expect that anyone I do business with never gave my info out to ANYONE, including the government. And as a business owner, if this was required of me, I would fight this one to it's death.
It's a ridiculous statement and a blatant violation of privacy laws. It's not well-thought through, Lacey. Good for you on your stance.
We have sufficient laws in every state to deal with tobacco sales to underage users. Enforce them.
We have sufficient laws in every state to deal with tobacco sales to underage users. Enforce them.
IM only talking about online purchasing.....How else can you prove it...anyone can pick up a credit card and make a purchase. or use there own debit card. pay pal doesn't care how old you are. If you go to a store to purchase cigs....they ask for your ID. WE need something that is along those lines. I understand privacy but at this point teens can still get the e-cig if they wanted to. Even if they use there own bank card. The government will want proof that you haven't violated any laws and have been checking for age. so how can you prove it? thats all Im saying.
listen carefully to how they are attacking the tobacco companies...kids...teens. Thats how its going to pass.....so our children wont use it. As long as that mentality is in place we will never get these ecigs aproved unless strict guidelines are in place...and believe me I thought about this since I started....no one in here wants to follow the rules only crap on them.....the law states you must how proof of age when purchasing cigarettes or nicotine products if that violated the privacy then well tell that to congress. Im not saying give out your social, or your favorite desert, just age....if you have a better way to prove your age online then by all means share it with the class.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
