Why Vapers are getting a BAD NAME.

[Myk]

What better way to prevent a united front than to divide and conquer. I wouldn't be shocked if some of the posters here at ECF are these people who are baiting the forums so we can continue to fight each other, because the more we pay attention to each other the less we pay attention to the real threat.

Also to manipulate people into going along with what they say.
"They won't believe us but maybe if they thought it was one of their own saying it they'd go along with it."

I'm not saying anyone in this thread is that but it has been proven that has gone on here, at least with small time nobodys from anti-smoking/vaping forums.

 

[zoiDman]

There are rude people everywhere. Even vapers.

...

I have a real problem with your last sentence because the battle to ban e-cigs was being waged before any of us were vaping. Sure the rude vaper gives someone the excuse to point their finger and say "see...see...see what I mean....." but even if 100% of us were totally cool and respectful, then people would still want to take our e-cigs away.

...

It would seem if you Believe the First Two Sentences of your Post that you Shouldn't have Much of a Problem with Any of the Sentences in my Post.

There is No One Unique Factor that goes into Decided all but the Most Simplistic Issues. And e-Cigarette Use and Policy is Far from a Simple Issue.

Disrespectful Vapers isn't Going to Decide the "War" as your Referenced it. But I sure don't see how they are in Any Way Helping our Side.

 

[celticluvr]

Ok, Where I live vaping is actually being strongly encouraged and the local and state government are getting fully behind it. I was at the Dr's office just a week ago. i was not vaping in the office, but my APV fell out of my pocket the Dr noticed and asked about it. He asked me to show him how it worked so i set up mine and the spare setup i carry and he and i (with my kids in the office) casually vaped while other nurses and Dr's came in to see what the ecigs were and to learn about them. Spent a good hr after the appointment with 7 ppl Dr's and nurses going over how they worked the fact that they do work, and educating them on sites like this and CASAA.

I just a couple days ago ran into my children's Dr and he now has his own set up (Vamo V5) and has started the journey to being analog free.
Do I feel that I should be discreet as to where I vape? No not at all. People who still smoke analogs dont have to wash their clothes and brush their teeth before the interact with non smokers. The smell of their clothes/breath is by far more invasive then the smell and harmlessness of my vapor. Also, I will take every chance I can get to help educate another person to a safe and healthy alternative to something that WILL kill them.

With that said, If I am asked to not vape in a particular place I will stop. But that has yet to happen. Most people are more curious then afraid of someone vaping.

That is so freakin' awesome. Way to go!

I love you, man! but no...I don't want any beer. you could share the poppin' corn though!

To the OP:

I try to be respectful. To be honest with you, I had already been trained for so many years NOT to smoke in buildings, it doesn't usually hit me that I *need* nicotine while spending time in one.... but maybe that's just me....

Could be root beer.

 

[Bramble]

[...] but even if 100% of us were totally cool and respectful, then people would still want to take our e-cigs away.

[...]

And indeed, it happened here so quickly that no one even had a chance to be anything but cool and respectful.

But I will tell you the mistake they make in doing so - enforcement and the "nothing to lose" syndrome. If you take away something before anyone is offended by it, people aren't interested in enforcing it.

I think it's very rare for someone to be anti-vaping if they have someone in their lives who smokes. Someone who they watch die a little every day from a PAD smoking habit. I was recently at a [location] that may or may not have had lots of people vaping indoors and a (non-smoking) woman sitting next to me said that she wished her smoking hubby would take up vaping instead.

I conclude that the so-called "ANTZ" are actually people who lack enough empathy or knowledge about smoking to even have a valid opinion about it. Why are these people in charge of it? It's like I keep saying about utah - don't put the mormons in charge of liquor... put the IRISH in charge of it. At least we know something about it!!

 

[Myk]

Well I guess I'm not one of the Hundreds.

Because I have seen Vapers Blowing Clouds onto the back of Peoples Heads of People in Movies. And I have seen People have a Complete Hissy Fit when asked not to use an e-Cigarette inside a Restaurant.

These are the Exception and Not the Rule. But to make it sound like it Never Has or Is Not Happening is Disingenuous.

The Very Small Percentage of the Population tend to Screw it Up for the Vast Majority. e-Cigarettes Is and Will be No Exception.

Where are you that you see other vapers? (I think this has been asked in the topic about movies but I don't remember.)

 

[p.opus]

It would seem if you Believe the First Two Sentences of your Post that you Shouldn't have Much of a Problem with Any of the Sentences in my Post.

There is No One Unique Factor that goes into Decided all but the Most Simplistic Issues. And e-Cigarette Use and Policy is Far from a Simple Issue.

Disrespectful Vapers isn't Going to Decide the "War" as your Referenced it. But I sure don't see how they are in Any Way Helping our Side.

The last sentence of your post was
"The Very Small Percentage of the Population tend to Screw it Up for the Vast Majority. e-Cigarettes Is and Will be No Exception."

This is very different from:
"Disrespectful Vapers isn't Going to Decide the "War" as your Referenced it. But I sure don't see how they are in Any Way Helping our Side."

The first statement seems to indicate that rude vapers are the CAUSE of all the vaping woes. Whereas the second statement say well, rude vapers aren't the CAUSE, but they are not helping.

I would agree with statement two, but not with statement one.

I believe that a common sense approach to vaping indoors and in public needs to be developed. It needs to start off with the distinction that vaping and smoking are totally unrelated activities.

It needs to be appropriate to the venue. For example. Blowing a huge ohm cloud in the movies, I would put in the same category as texting or talking on your cell phone.

It needs to be based on science and research, not emotional or irrationality.

It also needs to be flexible. For example. If someone is walking around and intentionally blowing clouds in peoples grill, that person needs to be removed from the premise immediately, even if vaping is allowed. However the opposite is true. If some patron gets their panties in a wad because they see someone vaping from across the room, that patron needs to be specifically told that it is allowed.

I am not, and will I ever be in favor of the "vape only where smoking is allowed" crowd. Based on that argument, then I am condeming vaping to the same fate as smoking. And if anyone passes a law that says I can't vape in my apartment, then:
a. They can kiss my buttocks
b. Good luck in enforcing it.

 

[zoiDman]

Where are you that you see other vapers? (I think this has been asked in the topic about movies but I don't remember.)

Orange County, California

 

[zoiDman]

...

The first statement seems to indicate that rude vapers are the CAUSE of all the vaping woes. Whereas the second statement say well, rude vapers aren't the CAUSE, but they are not helping.

...

Try Not to Read Too Much into what people Type Sometimes.

Causality is Sometimes Not Based on One Unique Event. But the Sum Total of Many Events. And the Significant Impact of Any Given Event is Not Necessarily the Same as Every Other Event.

 

[Uma]

Why thank you everyone! It was a pleasure... I was procrastinating starting hot cakes for the boys. Glad it was readable.
I took the advice, & edited the terminology and more at the end. Thanks!
I'm open to a good edit if anyone would care to help iron out the wrinkles before it... Gasps... Goes viral. .
Glad it helps fill in the blanks.

 

[p.opus]

Why thank you everyone! It was a pleasure... I was procrastinating starting hot cakes for the boys. Glad it was readable.
I took the advice, & edited the terminology and more at the end. Thanks!
I'm open to a good edit if anyone would care to help iron out the wrinkles before it... Gasps... Goes viral. .
Glad it helps fill in the blanks.

It was really well done, I think all new vapers should read this before they start spouting off about vapers ruining it for other vapers.

However, I don't agree with one thing. I don't thing BT will ever be gone. BT will be able to corner the market once all the players are run out, and they will have control of the e-liquid. They will then come out with a new safer (nothings changed, just who's talking) e-cig that everyone will clap and praise BT for their responsible behavior. Who knows, new safer e-cigs may now be trendy again.

These new e-cigs will be:
1. Proprietary
2. Expensive
3. Disposable
4. Able to be manipulated so that they can be more addictive than normal.

Those who can not afford the safe alternative can continue the cycle that many of us have broken.......

 

[Uma]

It was really well done, I think all new vapers should read this before they start spouting off about vapers ruining it for other vapers.

However, I don't agree with one thing. I don't thing BT will ever be gone. BT will be able to corner the market once all the players are run out, and they will have control of the e-liquid. They will then come out with a new safer (nothings changed, just who's talking) e-cig that everyone will clap and praise BT for their responsible behavior. Who knows, new safer e-cigs may now be trendy again.

These new e-cigs will be:
1. Proprietary
2. Expensive
3. Disposable
4. Able to be manipulated so that they can be more addictive than normal.

Those who can not afford the safe alternative can continue the cycle that many of us have broken.......

Valid point. This has been a turnoff for us Vapers, the thought of BT manipulating it like that. I hope the FDA does make a rule to keep it unadulterated. It's a concern, no doubt about that. That's what the cronies need to be focusing on, keeping the nicotine free from BT abuse, but instead they fight the whole shebang. Ticks me off.

 

[Jay-dub]

Is there a higher proportion of Tea Bag types in the Vaping community or, like everywhere else, they just make the most noise?

 

[p.opus]

Is there a higher proportion of Tea Bag types in the Vaping community or, like everywhere else, they just make the most noise?

Fighting for one's constitutional rights is not considered tea bagish.

My beliefs alone on Gay Marriage, the legalization of a certain drug and my views on most organized religion would keep me out of that group.

However I do find that most of the local governments war on e-cigs to be laughable if it weren't so serious.

I'm really more libertarian. Keep government as small as possible and have it only around for the necessary's. Other wise Live and Let Live.

 

[Myk]

Is there a higher proportion of Tea Bag types in the Vaping community or, like everywhere else, they just make the most noise?

There are plenty of squishy minded liberals who do what they're told. They even get offended when someone points out that it's mainly Democrats pushing for bans and claim it's a bipartisan issue so they can continue voting for the Nazis that want us back smoking cigarettes.

I'm also a libertarian (note the small L because I don't trust that party either).

 

[Uma]

It was really well done, I think all new vapers should read this before they start spouting off about vapers ruining it for other vapers.

However, I don't agree with one thing. I don't thing BT will ever be gone. BT will be able to corner the market once all the players are run out, and they will have control of the e-liquid. They will then come out with a new safer (nothings changed, just who's talking) e-cig that everyone will clap and praise BT for their responsible behavior. Who knows, new safer e-cigs may now be trendy again.

These new e-cigs will be:
1. Proprietary
2. Expensive
3. Disposable
4. Able to be manipulated so that they can be more addictive than normal.

Those who can not afford the safe alternative can continue the cycle that many of us have broken.......

I added it, but perhaps the wording could be clearer.

 

[KenD]

Is there a higher proportion of Tea Bag types in the Vaping community or, like everywhere else, they just make the most noise?

I'm pretty much the opposite of a Tea Bigger, and about as left as you can get (on most issues). And that's European left (and this is a global battle, if anyone's wondering why a European is butting in)

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

 

[p.opus]

I'm pretty much the opposite of a Tea Bigger, and about as left as you can get (on most issues). And that's European left (and this is a global battle, if anyone's wondering why a European is butting in)

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

Yeah, but at least the Swedes got smart with snus. All of Europe was in a furor years ago about snus as a smoking substitute and banned a product that data showed was saving lives (and still is by the way). Can't have that. Can't lose that Big Pharma money, some of the largest of which are European based companies. Snus are saving lives in the way Big Pharma can't dream of doing...And GASP, people are enjoying them...Must be bad. So Snus are only allowed in Norway and Sweden since they would not join the EU without that in place. The rest of Europe? Banned....

So when us folks in US start yelling at our European counterparts and accusing them of over-reacting, just remember they've been on this merry-go-round before. Ground breaking new product (well new outside of Sweden. Swedes have known about Snus since the 18th century), saves smokers lives, easily adopted by the smoker, removes most if not all the offensive by-products of smoking, and is immediately banned. Sound familiar?

Ironically e-cigs are legal in Sweden, but only 0mg nic e-juice is allowed. Thus nicotine e-juice is treated by the swedes as "medicine" and thus banned. I guess they have their own industry (snus) that they need to protect....

Just follow the money.......

 

[jpargana]

Most of it is in the legislature forum here at ECF.
In the 2009 era, the eCigs were becoming popular here in the states. Big Pharma didn't like that one little bit. So the FDA began their illegal seizure of incoming products at customs. A few eCig companies took the FDA to court. Judge Leon told the FDA to knock it off, they are not a big Pharma product, if anything they'd be a tobacco product but they're not that either unless of course you, the FDA deems them as such.
The FDA lawyer gasps and exclaims "your honor! But what about their (BP) investments?" (Paraphrased). So, the FDA lost that battle for their bedfellow, big Pharma. (The FDA loves their testing fees for each product).

Meanwhile, the media is flooded with nonsense stories from the ANTZ about the eCigs. The push was on, to get them banned. Everyone from the MSA/TSET, AG's, big Pharma sluts who push big Pharma drugs & live off grants & smoke taxes got in on the ban wagon. They are unofficially officially called banstabators, btw.

As time goes on, the eCigs become so popular that even Forbes does a Holy End Run article, about the new billion dollar industry.
The next day or so, the attorney generals (AG's) of many states get together, sign a letter, begging the FDA to hurry up and deem them as tobacco products so they can begin super taxing them like smokes. Then they begin their "save the children" campaign, accusing adults of being a flavorless society and declaring that only minors like Flavors.
With that said, the ANTZ push forward with their ban plots, taxing plots, etc.

Meanwhile, eCigs become really really really popular, due to all the ANTZ false advertising. ECigs are in the news night and day. Naturally, smoke sales drop drastically-er. They now drop so far that the next headline reads "smoke sales down, profits way up!". (Para). PANIC!! The senators get on the horn and demand for the eCigs to be included in the 1997 MSA. (Master settlement agreement).

Why did they do that you ask? Because the big tobacco companies (BT) are profiting despite their sales loss, because they now have less legal fees... they now don't have to give the MSA money for every cigarette sold, because the MSA is based on anything equal to or over the grandfathered 1997 sales. For the first time, sales are below 1997!

Oh, boy. The polls all show that everyone is fine and dandy over vaping, except of course the MSA, TSET, BP, and AG's. So, now the cronies demonize SHS and THS again, to re- raise the brainwashed fear in the masses, so the cronies can more easily convince the brainwashed masses that vapor, SHV, and THV are just as bad, dangerous, whatever as the SHS. The funny part about that, is that records show that SHS was tossed out of court by judge Osteen in 1998.(?) due to cherry picked nonsense data. Yet the media still enjoys running ANTZ versions of the outcome, loves watching people get fired from their jobs, catch pneumonia in the rain, go homeless, etc, because the ANTZ love controlling behaviors of the brainwashed masses.

Including vapor in with smoking is the icing on the cake for them.
No vaping wherever smoking is not allowed. Work, public areas, parks, sports, cars, and private homes.

But what about the MSA funds, you may ask. Well, after BT and the eCigs go belly up, BP swoops in and gets the nicotine all to themselves. They like to patent their pills, and have plans for beneficial nicotine. Smart pills, Alzheimer's Meds, Parkinson's Meds, ADHD Meds, .., etc... Smokers & or Vapers who were able to control their neurological disorders before, will now have to rely on BP. Yippee eh.
Another thought, is that BT & BP will continue playing their roller coaster game consisting of on the wagon with BP smoking cessation products, off the wagon & back on smokes, on/off, on/off... It's been quite a happy game for them to date.
There are other thoughts too, but these seem to be the most often spoken.

MSA = Master Settlement Agreement
TSET = Tobacco Settlement Endowment Trust
BP = Big Pharma
AG = Attorney General
SHS = Second hand Smoke
THS = Third hand smoke
SHV = Second hand Vapor
THV = Third Hand Vapor.

MSA beget TSET
TSET beget ALA, TFK, ACS, & all the "non-profit" smoking cessation clubs turned lobbyists.
BP has an interesting lineage on their own, all the way down to the Robert wood Johnson foundation.
CDC also has an interesting lineage with board persons on BP firms, according to some. (I would have to research deeper to see. Update: Dr. David Satcher. Plus there is more about CDC at dr. Michael Seigel blog here http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2013/08/why-is-cdc-taking-research-funding-from.html )
RWJf has lineage into Obamacare, etc...
FDA has lineage as well, even Monsanto lineage, .. Will need to gather the specific data, but it's out there.
It's a small world, after all. <insert music here>

You hit the nail right on the head, Uma!! Several times !!

 

[jpargana]

Kind of makes you sick to your stomach when you realize just how we are being played....

HUGE anti tobacco programs down here in Florida funded by Tobacco Free Florida. with the poor 20 something talking out of her stoma and all the other horrifying examples of what smoking does.

I used to sit and give a big fist bump in the air saying...Hell Yeah, glad I don't smoke no more. Then I realized these same people want to take away my e-cigs, even though they won't make me talk through a voice box, even though they won't cause me to lose my limbs.

I thought that all of these anti tobacco organizations like tobacco free kids and the American Lung Association would welcome me with open arms.

I thought they would embrace this wonderful new technology that was finally breaking people free from their tobacco habit in significant numbers.

I mean Tobacco Free Kids and the American Lung Association is about saving lives.....right....right????

"Congratulations on finally giving up tobacco......It doesn't matter how you got here, we're glad you're here......What???? You use an e-cig???....You're still a smoker.....get that thing away from me....don't spew that noxious cloud near me......."

Now you kind of understand the chip on my shoulder. I am one less statistic. I am one less tobacco related death. I no longer inhale carcinogens. I am no longer putting my kids at risk (supposedly)...I've done everything you want me to, except use the "approved" product to get there. I'm even dropping to zero nic like a patch users (currently at 4mg and half of what I have is zero nic) and yet I am still treated as a pariah.

My thoughts exacly...

 

[KenD]

Yeah, but at least the Swedes got smart with snus. All of Europe was in a furor years ago about snus as a smoking substitute and banned a product that data showed was saving lives (and still is by the way). Can't have that. Can't lose that Big Pharma money, some of the largest of which are European based companies. Snus are saving lives in the way Big Pharma can't dream of doing...And GASP, people are enjoying them...Must be bad. So Snus are only allowed in Norway and Sweden since they would not join the EU without that in place. The rest of Europe? Banned....

So when us folks in US start yelling at our European counterparts and accusing them of over-reacting, just remember they've been on this merry-go-round before. Ground breaking new product (well new outside of Sweden. Swedes have known about Snus since the 18th century), saves smokers lives, easily adopted by the smoker, removes most if not all the offensive by-products of smoking, and is immediately banned. Sound familiar?

Ironically e-cigs are legal in Sweden, but only 0mg nic e-juice is allowed. Thus nicotine e-juice is treated by the swedes as "medicine" and thus banned. I guess they have their own industry (snus) that they need to protect....

Just follow the money.......

True about snus (which I think is horrid, though it plays a big part in keeping the percentage of smokers in Sweden relatively low), but Sweden didn't fight hard due to the health benefits. It was all about money (the official motive was that there is such a huge number of users in Sweden). It's a big business in the country. Norway's not in the EU so that's why snus is allowed there. The number of people who used snus in Finland (where I'm from originally) was high in the Swedish-speaking coastal regions, but Finland gave in to the EU almost immediately because there was the perception that it wasn't possible to decline (which strictly speaking wasn't true). Many still use snus in Finland.

As for Sweden and nic liquid, the medicinal products agency raided and seized nic liquid from a shop in the fall, and the customs agency seized shipments recently. In both cases the courts decided (really, really) fast that the seizements were unlawful. Yet the medicinal products agency still maintains that nic liquid is not allowed, and thus we have a government agency that is basically going against the law.

Concerning perceptions of vaping, the media has been strongly slanted towards condemning it (though we are starting to get the occasional positive news story) and almost all political parties want to ban it, but I almost every bar I've gone to allows vaping and I've yet to meet anyone in real-life who's openly opposed to me vaping. Most people don't care, some are intrigued. It's not the public who are keen on banning vaping, it's the pharmaceutical industry and their minions. The best way to get people to care enough to protest the possible banning of vaporizers is to let people see and talk to an actual vaper.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk