Why is there even talk of banning E-Cigs???
- Thread starter olie
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
There is a certain type of personality that feels a great need to control the lives of others... They think they know what's best for you and feel a great need to be right even when proven wrong. Unfortunately, that same personality type often has other traits such as charisma which can lead to them ending up in positions of power... which they often abuse.
It is an age old story and somehow, it plays itself out over and over and over again.
It is an age old story and somehow, it plays itself out over and over and over again.
Damn it! Now I have to watch Slumdog Millionaire....Ugh....Was gonna have a quite night with my PS3....
(grabs a beer and snacks and tosses in movie)
I love vaping, but I believe there are non-financial reasons for bans. We're part of a huge informal test group determining if constant exposure to PG/VG/flavors/nicotine sources/off-gassing carto fluff/clearomizers/atties/plated passthroughs are safe.
I don't want to seem trollish by noting this so let me say that I have huge issues with the FDA for immediate reasons very few people here share. I have a chronic illness that could potentially be eased by benign parasite therapy (helminths) available outside the US, but it isn't available here because of the FDA and I would need to leave the country every 1.5-2 years to continue this type of therapy outside US approval. I cannot use birth control pills because they irritate my autoimmune condition, nor any of the FDA approved IUDs for birth control because one is hormonal, and the non-hormonal option is on too large a frame for my uterus... which is not a problem for women in the rest of the industrialized world because there are many other safe options. TMI, perhaps, but I want you to know I'm not a silly shill.
I firmly believe that true scientific data on the ages-old human desire to satisfy oral fixation and nicotine craving twenty years from now will validate and also forbid things we do now, perhaps carto fluff will prove to be bad, perhaps my beloved teaberry flavoring will be dangerous, but I think the explosion of smokers looking for a way to go non-combustible generates enough uncertainty for some genuinely concerned parties to balk.
Also, there's the issue of nicotine -- my bio classes taught me it downregulates the proper apoptosis activity of proto-oncogenes, the functions in our cells that prevent abnormal dividing activity. Human history proves that our brains love nicotine, but even absent all the filth of analogs, we may not be better off consuming it.
I don't want to seem trollish by noting this so let me say that I have huge issues with the FDA for immediate reasons very few people here share. I have a chronic illness that could potentially be eased by benign parasite therapy (helminths) available outside the US, but it isn't available here because of the FDA and I would need to leave the country every 1.5-2 years to continue this type of therapy outside US approval. I cannot use birth control pills because they irritate my autoimmune condition, nor any of the FDA approved IUDs for birth control because one is hormonal, and the non-hormonal option is on too large a frame for my uterus... which is not a problem for women in the rest of the industrialized world because there are many other safe options. TMI, perhaps, but I want you to know I'm not a silly shill.
I firmly believe that true scientific data on the ages-old human desire to satisfy oral fixation and nicotine craving twenty years from now will validate and also forbid things we do now, perhaps carto fluff will prove to be bad, perhaps my beloved teaberry flavoring will be dangerous, but I think the explosion of smokers looking for a way to go non-combustible generates enough uncertainty for some genuinely concerned parties to balk.
Also, there's the issue of nicotine -- my bio classes taught me it downregulates the proper apoptosis activity of proto-oncogenes, the functions in our cells that prevent abnormal dividing activity. Human history proves that our brains love nicotine, but even absent all the filth of analogs, we may not be better off consuming it.
Last edited:
Unfortunately, that's what our government does these days.
If something is proved popular, and our government doesn't get their "take" from the profits, well, ban it, regulate it or tax the bejesus out of it "for our own good".
Taxes on a pack of regular "real" cigarettes is somewhere in the order of $3.50 per pack under the guise of providing healthcare for those sickenend by cigarettes. That's a lotta coin for the government. E-cigs are similar (to those uninformed) to regular cigs, but not taxed as heavily ?? Well, our elected officials have to do something about THAT !! If they can't tax them, then get rid of them !
If something is proved popular, and our government doesn't get their "take" from the profits, well, ban it, regulate it or tax the bejesus out of it "for our own good".
Taxes on a pack of regular "real" cigarettes is somewhere in the order of $3.50 per pack under the guise of providing healthcare for those sickenend by cigarettes. That's a lotta coin for the government. E-cigs are similar (to those uninformed) to regular cigs, but not taxed as heavily ?? Well, our elected officials have to do something about THAT !! If they can't tax them, then get rid of them !
just because it's not tobacco smoke, doesn't mean other people at that store, bar, restaurant, mall, wherever, want other people blowing vape clouds all over the place. it's a slippery slope because there are many other devices that vaporize other substances, which to the untrained eye, look very similar to some of the devices we use.
i managed to continue smoking cigarettes for 10 years after they were banned in bars and restaurants where i live, and i imagine i'll continue to live an enjoyable life if e-cigs are also not welcome in these places. it's one of those things that to me is not worth getting bent out of state about. fwiw, i have not done any vaping in the open inside public places except bathrooms, or in my office at work
i managed to continue smoking cigarettes for 10 years after they were banned in bars and restaurants where i live, and i imagine i'll continue to live an enjoyable life if e-cigs are also not welcome in these places. it's one of those things that to me is not worth getting bent out of state about. fwiw, i have not done any vaping in the open inside public places except bathrooms, or in my office at work
Ah yes, lets not offend anyone now.
I find it humorous that the same people who gasp in horror at the sight of a vape plume, or cigarette smoke for that matter, have no problem blissfully sitting in traffic inhaling exhaust fumes from hundreds of vehicles while irradiating their brain talking on a cell.
The busy body "do gooders" never no when to stop. First we had no smoking sections in restaurants. Then the entire restaurant, then bars, then parks, then ones own house for Gods sake. What will it be next? Soft drink to large? Oh wait
I find it humorous that the same people who gasp in horror at the sight of a vape plume, or cigarette smoke for that matter, have no problem blissfully sitting in traffic inhaling exhaust fumes from hundreds of vehicles while irradiating their brain talking on a cell.
The busy body "do gooders" never no when to stop. First we had no smoking sections in restaurants. Then the entire restaurant, then bars, then parks, then ones own house for Gods sake. What will it be next? Soft drink to large? Oh wait
it doesn't really help the cause when we bug out about not being able to vape for an hour inside a restaurant. just makes us sound like helpless addicts that are unable to function without nicotine. if we want to make connections to inhaling vehicular exhaust, then we should also bring up how unfair it is that we aren't allowed to carry unloaded guns on our hips wherever we see fit.
to clarify my position, i'm fully supportive of allowing e-cig use where smoking is banned, but in the long run, i think we'd be better off using our energy to make sure the FDA doesn't outlaw e-cigs entirely instead of on the county level, where the reach of the ban is much smaller, and only effects a very small % of e-cig users in the US.
to clarify my position, i'm fully supportive of allowing e-cig use where smoking is banned, but in the long run, i think we'd be better off using our energy to make sure the FDA doesn't outlaw e-cigs entirely instead of on the county level, where the reach of the ban is much smaller, and only effects a very small % of e-cig users in the US.
Last edited:
To be fair, nobody knows the long term effect on health.
Im not just talking about the lungs or heart either. what we take into our bodies should always be scrutinized to the fullest extent. At least there should be a warning that goes along with every Ecig product that what ever happens 10 years down the road nobodys fault but their own.
Im not just talking about the lungs or heart either. what we take into our bodies should always be scrutinized to the fullest extent. At least there should be a warning that goes along with every Ecig product that what ever happens 10 years down the road nobodys fault but their own.
The Federal Tax on a pack I believe is $1.01 .. and a large portion of that is used to fund childrens health care / insurance .. that money is a tiny portion of the Fed's income ..
If government was simply out for a money grab, using that logic, then certainly letting the market rule would be in their best interest .. the proliferation during the height of analog use and then subsequent discovery of the health issues that were created has had a lasting effect on how similar replacement technology is treated now ..
- Status
Similar threads
