WHO statement on E-cigs.

[Painter_]

http://apps.who.int/gb/fctc/PDF/cop6/FCTC_COP6_10-en.pdf

http://www.ecigarette-research.com/web/index.php/2013-04-07-09-50-07/2014/176-who

By Dr Farsalinos
The World Health Organization (WHO) released today their official position about electronic cigarettes. They maintain an overcautious approach and present one-sided evidence in many parts of the statement. However, they indirectly acknowledge that e-cigarettes may have the potential to reduce the burden of smoking and related disease. This is a major (but not extensive enough) revision from previous statements and proposals which basically called for a ban on electronic cigarettes. A major drawback of the report is their proposal to ban flavors until evidence shows they do not attract youngsters. Additionally, they believe that the best regulatory framework would, most likely, be a two-pronged strategy: regulating electronic cigarettes as tobacco and medicinal products.

<...>

 

[tommy2bad]

The WHO have released their position on Ecigs. Not a good read, not as bad as it could have been. Struck me as the WHO being around 18 months behind the rest of the tobacco control industry. I'm not counting Glantz and the rest of the ANTZ, even this document is ahead of them.
Main points are they want a ban on advertising, indoor use and controlls on quality.
My main gripe is that they missed the point of it completely. Ecigs if handled right are a tool in smoking reduction. However they are not perfect yet. A better position for the who would be how do we marshal ecigs as a means of reducing smoking prevelence. This doc seem to be saying how do we limit ecigs untill we have smoking eliminated so we can then eliminate ecigs.
ow.ly/AIL2X

 

[Shootist]

When are they going to realize, acknowledge, it isn't tobacco and it isn't being burned.

Don't need to read it as all these type of articles, documents, are the same. No real knowledge of what a personal vaporizer really is.

 

[h0tsh0t]

Really bad that they continue to state that the use of fruit/ candy flavours is just targeted at young people - don't older people (I'm 60 years old) have a right to nice flavours? Especially if there's any mileage in using e-cigs as a step towards ceasing smoking, forcing tobacco-only flavours just keeps a strong link to actual cigarettes rather than encouraging a move away!

 

[wv2win]

Real WHO agenda: Ex-smokers need to be punished for their past transgressions, up to and including an earlier death if necessary. An easier way to stop smoking cannot be tolerated. Plus, bureaucrats who owe their jobs to the Big Tobacco Industry are never allowed to admit they have errored, especially if it could lead to them eventually not being needed any longer.

 

[AegisPrime]

Really bad that they continue to state that the use of fruit/ candy flavours is just targeted at young people - don't older people (I'm 60 years old) have a right to nice flavours? Especially if there's any mileage in using e-cigs as a step towards ceasing smoking, forcing tobacco-only flavours just keeps a strong link to actual cigarettes rather than encouraging a move away!

That's because none of them understand or respect that there's vapers that vape because they *enjoy* vaping - even when organizations such as the WHO start to soften their stance on e-cigs a little there's this 'it should be an aid to quitting altogether' mentality. I'm sure if you told one of these people you didn't want to vape only tobacco flavours they'd tell you to 'quit vaping then'. Really saddened (but unsurprised) to see this coming out of WHO - 'World Health' indeed...

 

[Anybody]

So if you ban flavors, where will the evidence come from that will show children are or are not attracted by said flavors? The notion of banning flavors is rather silly anyway, as they are widely available for food purposes. The same idiots that dreamed up plain packaging and coloring cigarette papers poop brown to make them unattractive must have come up with this.

 

[ronchinoy]

You beat me to it.
The Ban of e-cig in India is based on this report.

I think the real issue is something else. Its like why do you get to have your brain on a stimulant. And I cant. Im too chicken to risk it. So you cant do it either.

My prediction on this.
1. It will get banned. For sure world wide. Nothing we do can stop this. Ill be back in a few years to say I told you so.
2. They cant put this genie back in the bottle. No matter what they do. About the only thing they will be able to control and get really strict with is Nicotine. Nicotine will get classed as {OTHER STUFF}. i.e. same laws.
3. Big Tobacco and Pharma will enter the playing field and we will be told. The over priced junk they sell us is now safe.

Philip Morris has already spent a few billion dollars on this. Do you really think they will let WHO or a few Govts get in their way ?.

This is all tactics to slow down the growth till they figure out how to get their hooks into making money off it.
Anything from China will get scanned by customs. Bootlegging and underground clubs will flourish.

There are already web sites that let you design and say what you wan on the CN22 form. Im getting some Electronic Toys from China for 22$.
More like 400$ worth of tanks and mods lol.
What I love about my country is the corruption. If you have money you can do anything and get away with it.

 

[DrMA]

Every time I read statements such as this from WHO or the AHA the other day, I see it as indirect evidence that vaporizers are indeed harmless. With all their resources and money, all they can come up with is fear mongering about children and the blatantly false "particles" fantasy - this means they could not come up with anything that's actually dangerous to the individual or public health.

 

[DrMA]

An interesting article from BBC about the WHO position statement:
BBC News - 'Ban E-cigarette use indoors,' says WHO

There are already almost 1000 comments

 

[Oliver]

The real WHO agenda is destroying the tobacco industry, in whatever form it exists. They're not concerned with public health directly, but are absolutely fixated on the notion that "the tobacco industry's interests are incompatible with the interests of public health".

In other words, they wish to "destroy" the tobacco industry, and the fact that TI has entered the ecig market means they have been reflexively opposed to the products from the get-go.

That said, I also note their shift in position from absolute denunciation to begrudging acceptance, but the evidence-twisting they're currently engaged in shows them up as being ideologically motivated.

I suspect the letter from 50 researchers (aka, the "Clive Bates Letter" cf Glantz) has had a big moderating effect.

 

[ClippinWings]

I got curious and clicked "Report this comment" on a particularly ignorant anti-vaping post...

Imagine my surprise when i was greeted with this:

Complain about a post
This form is only for serious complaints about specific content that breaks the House Rules.

The message you complain about will be sent to a moderator, who will decide whether it breaks the House Rules. You will be informed of their decision by email.

So, I looked into it and... a case could be made that most of the comments supporting the WHO's views, violate BBC's "House Rules" and can be reported:

Describe or encourage activities which could endanger the safety or well-being of others

Because enough data now exists that if someone opposes vaping, they are supporting (or encouraging) smoking.

It likely won't work... but it may be interesting to test the BBCs boundaries here.

 

[ClippinWings]

Could we maybe start using "The Children" as our rallying cry too?

"If eCigarettes are heavily regulated our banned, children may be exposed to more second hand smoke from smokers who are unable to quit"

 

[DrMA]

Could we maybe start using "The Children" as our rallying cry too?

"If eCigarettes are heavily regulated our banned, children may be exposed to more second hand smoke from smokers who are unable to quit"

Better:
"If eCigarettes are heavily regulated or banned, children will have no alternative to smoking"

 

[dragonpuff]

Could we maybe start using "The Children" as our rallying cry too?

"If eCigarettes are heavily regulated our banned, children may be exposed to more second hand smoke from smokers who are unable to quit"

We can indeed! Children are most likely to start smoking when they have parents who smoke. E-cigs have been proven to reduce smoking rates. Since e-cigs will reduce the number of parents who smoke, they will reduce the number of children who start smoking as well!

 

[DrMA]

The real WHO agenda is destroying the tobacco industry, in whatever form it exists. They're not concerned with public health directly, but are absolutely fixated on the notion that "the tobacco industry's interests are incompatible with the interests of public health".

In other words, they wish to "destroy" the tobacco industry, and the fact that TI has entered the ecig market means they have been reflexively opposed to the products from the get-go.

That said, I also note their shift in position from absolute denunciation to begrudging acceptance, but the evidence-twisting they're currently engaged in shows them up as being ideologically motivated.

I suspect the letter from 50 researchers (aka, the "Clive Bates Letter" cf Glantz) has had a big moderating effect.

I cannot bring myself to believe that governments all over the "civilized" world are acquiescing to the TCI's deliberate and systematic efforts to deny 1.22 billion smokers (latest WHO stats) their biggest opportunity ever to avoid a slow, painful, and early death. I have to believe that militant ANTZ form a vocal and perverse minority, which somehow managed to become extremely well-funded, connected, and influential.

I hereby propose to expose all ANTZ as a global terrorist network intent on causing unspeakable suffering and death to all 1.22 billion smokers world-wide.

 

[Moonbogg]

http://apps.who.int/gb/fctc/PDF/cop6/FCTC_COP6_10-en.pdf

WHO revises its previous proposal (and plans) to ban electronic cigarettes

By Dr Farsalinos
The World Health Organization (WHO) released today their official position about electronic cigarettes. They maintain an overcautious approach and present one-sided evidence in many parts of the statement. However, they indirectly acknowledge that e-cigarettes may have the potential to reduce the burden of smoking and related disease. This is a major (but not extensive enough) revision from previous statements and proposals which basically called for a ban on electronic cigarettes. A major drawback of the report is their proposal to ban flavors until evidence shows they do not attract youngsters. Additionally, they believe that the best regulatory framework would, most likely, be a two-pronged strategy: regulating electronic cigarettes as tobacco and medicinal products.
<...>

Well that makes perfect sense actually. This way BT and BP can ride off into the sunset, hand in hand with all the profits and all the control, just how they like it. Genius. Who comes up with this stuff?

 

[Painter_]

Disgraceful propaganda by WHO staff against e-cigarettes in social media

By Dr Farsalinos

In an unprecedented, for a prestigious organization, attempt to create fear and misinform the public and regulators, the WHO engaged in a disgraceful propaganda against e-cigarettes by assigning people (obviously staff members) to upload a series of tweets just after the statement about e-cigarettes was released. The messages were a collection of fear-mongering, scientifically unbased, confusing and misleading claims about the risks posed by e-cigarettes. Of note, they avoid to mention that all the risks mentioned are higher by orders of magnitude when someone smokes, therefore, in reality, it will be beneficial for a smoker to switch to e-cigarette use. ...

Click the link to read the rest. Disgraceful propaganda by WHO staff against e-cigarettes in social media

 

[dragonpuff]

Disgraceful propaganda by WHO staff against e-cigarettes in social media

By Dr Farsalinos

In an unprecedented, for a prestigious organization, attempt to create fear and misinform the public and regulators, the WHO engaged in a disgraceful propaganda against e-cigarettes by assigning people (obviously staff members) to upload a series of tweets just after the statement about e-cigarettes was released. The messages were a collection of fear-mongering, scientifically unbased, confusing and misleading claims about the risks posed by e-cigarettes. Of note, they avoid to mention that all the risks mentioned are higher by orders of magnitude when someone smokes, therefore, in reality, it will be beneficial for a smoker to switch to e-cigarette use. ...

Click the link to read the rest. Disgraceful propaganda by WHO staff against e-cigarettes in social media

Disturbing it's nice to see that they've added an all-out brainwashing campaign to their arsenal...

Though on the plus side, it does go to show that they don't have much of a leg to stand on. Hence their need to resort to dirty tricks to get people on their side.

 

[Painter_]

This has been stated many times in many threads, we are the minority that read everything put out about vaping. The average person knows only a little bit and the anti movement is the most vocal. The sad thing is is the people that set the laws base their opinions from the same 30 second sound bites as the average person. All the average person hears is vaping is bad for you. This really makes me sad for the human race.