World News did more harm than good for E-Cigs

[DaMulta]

Last nights report last night to me was a very bad thing. True it did show a woman that cut back smoking, but she was not 100% off like a lot of people that vape are. For that reason they didn't show all the good side effects.

Wow my breath is back, wow my taste is back, wow my smell is back, wow cig smoke really bothers me now......

I think Big Tob has the FDA in it's pocket along with the Feds, and all the State Goverments. One reason TAXES, and that is because if every one switched over the budget that smoking pays for would fall out of the floor.

Now last night they said the dreaded word on World News CANCER. Now I think it was DG that they found, but what they didn't say is that crap is in a LOT OF FOODS, Tooth Paste, Mouth wash. DG is in PG for human comspumtion at .02%. I don't know how much is in e-liquid. That may be for concern.


I now see FDA is going to put on a ban on E-Cigs for sure now. I don't have any dought about it now.

If you think that they won't think of Weed, and it's still considered a Felony in the US. Hell in my city they locked a guy away for 90 years for growing 3 plants......



What needs to happen, and I don't think is going to happen. Is a 60mins report on E-Cigs, and also maybe a Nova report done on them.



They also keep skipping the fact on how Cigs are made.

YouTube - Modern Marvels : Tobacco

MAYBE THEY SHOULD SHOW THIS CRAP ON WORLD NEWS

Remember what smokers pay for, and remember the Feds, States, and Hospitals don't want to lose their TAX MONEY!

 

[Jim Davis]

The FDA will get its way in the end. They'll lie cheat & steal to get it. We've all seen proof of this in the past couple of months.

 

[Elokin6]

Maybe it would be helpful for people who have had good experiences to contact the news agencies who made the biased reports? I've done this in the past with other issues and follow up stories have been done a few times to clarify or show the other side of the issue. I'm a newbie who is waiting to receive her 510 (please USPS, get it here tomorrow) or else I would contact them myself.
A close friend of mine turned me on to the e-cigs because of her positive experiences. She has cut way back on her analog smoking, gotten her sense of smell and taste back, and said that she's able to hike a lot more without getting winded. I would think that there are a ton of people with similar experiences.

 

[wjmcspirit]

Maybe it would be helpful for people who have had good experiences to contact the news agencies who made the biased reports?

Pretty much all news is ran by a higher power who limits what gets broadcast in the end. We see what THEY want us to see.

 

[Kate51]

Damulta, excellent example of possible Congressional advisory councils!!
See, what makes me so mad about all this, is that the FDA knows better than any of us what is happening here. It's so disgusting. Still think an FDA by any other name would smell as sweet?

 

[Circuit]

Pretty much all news is ran by a higher power who limits what gets broadcast in the end. We see what THEY want us to see.

I worked in television for 10 years, and this is not the case. While I will agree that bias is fairly obvious, it's more due to the sheer laziness than anything else. Who do you think feeds these people information? Companies with billions to lose, not happy, satisfied non-smokers. We need to change that.

Call your local news, tell them you're gathering with a group of e-smokers, and would like them to see what it's all about. If you make enough phone calls, it'll happen. Trust me, your voice IS heard in television. If you don't watch, they don't make money - and if e-cig users stand up and make their voice heard, it will be.

That said, television only makes money from one source. Advertising. And who's buying the ads? Not you or me - it's the companies trying to squash the tech that will deny them revenue. It won't be easy, but the power STILL lies with the people. It's the apathy that's the problem. An old saying "whether you think you can or you can't, you're right".

Stand up and be heard, and don't take no for an answer.

 

[DC2]

I worked in television for 10 years, and this is not the case. While I will agree that bias is fairly obvious, it's more due to the sheer laziness than anything else. Who do you think feeds these people information? Companies with billions to lose, not happy, satisfied non-smokers. We need to change that.

Call your local news, tell them you're gathering with a group of e-smokers, and would like them to see what it's all about. If you make enough phone calls, it'll happen. Trust me, your voice IS heard in television. If you don't watch, they don't make money - and if e-cig users stand up and make their voice heard, it will be.

That said, television only makes money from one source. Advertising. And who's buying the ads? Not you or me - it's the companies trying to squash the tech that will deny them revenue. It won't be easy, but the power STILL lies with the people. It's the apathy that's the problem. An old saying "whether you think you can or you can't, you're right".

Stand up and be heard, and don't take no for an answer.

This is the winning answer.

What we need is some sort of attention grabbing move.
Perhaps some sort of vape-in, or getting some celebrities to come out for the product.

We need something that will have a WOW factor that the various entertainment/news organizations will want to put on their broadcasts, or better yet something they can not ignore even if they try.

But at the same time we can't be douchebags about it either.

This is a tricky situation, and we need to manipulate rather than being manipulated.
And don't ask me how, because I'm not an idea man, just a person who sees what is needed.

An example of my ideas: Go out with a group and picket in front of a news station with signs that say "Why is the FDA trying to kill me?"

Yeah, now you can see why I don't come up with the ideas.

 

[TropicalBob]

Pretty much all news is ran by a higher power who limits what gets broadcast in the end. We see what THEY want us to see.

That is the most ignorant statement I have ever read posted on this forum. Ignorance means absence of knowledge. That statement is ignorant and incorrect.

 

[C6Silver]

There needs to be a study and better transparency around the juice. The smoking device itself is a red herring since, unlike the analog, it cannot do anything. The juice is the issue here, not the cig/cigar/pipe which on its own allows you to breathe air like through a straw.

Some manufacturers list the ingredients in their juice and some don't. I always understood the essence of the juice to be PG/VG, distilled water, flavor, and nicotine (if desired). Of course none of these news stories ever seem to report on the no nicotine versions. Anyway, where in the list I mentioned above are these cancer causing agents coming from? I don't get it. PG is classified by the FDA as generally safe, so is it from the flavoring? It is hard to say if this an issue with some manufacturing processes or with all juice and whether the offending ingredient would be easily replace with something safe.

I don't think this should be rocket science given the few ingredients that are in these things. We need better analysis and less hyperbole.

 

[Rebecca]

My personal experience today was actually quite the opposite. I've gotten looks from strangers while vaping, but until today no one ever said anything. Today, because of the FDA news, I got lots of questions from people who seemed genuinely enthusiastic about the product and wanted to know how I liked it, where I got it, how much it cost. Hell, one guy rolled down his window at a red light and asked me if it was working for me. Since we were waiting in traffic at the Rankin bridge we got to have quite the conversation.

Plus, I work for a major "big box" store and heard the people in the office and front end fielded calls all day from people asking if we carried electronic cigarettes.

Yeah - some people heard "unsafe", but it seemed to me like a hell of a lot of smokers who didn't know what an electronic cigarette was before are suddenly interested in trying one. Like I said to a friend today - it's not like my marlboros were made of sugar and spice and everything nice.

 

[OutWest]

Anyway, where in the list I mentioned above are these cancer causing agents coming from?

It's from the nicotine. To be more specific - when you extract nicotine from tobacco you also pull with it a small amount of carcinogenic nitrosamines. What the media failed to mention is that those same carcinogens are present in the nicotine gum and the nicotine patch, because they too use nicotine extracted from tobacco. The other option is synthetic nicotine.

 

[eric]

That is the most ignorant statement I have ever read posted on this forum. Ignorance means absence of knowledge. That statement is ignorant and incorrect.

Well, it's true insofar as Fox and CNN. Other than that, you're right on, Bob.

 

[smokinsimon]

Sorry if I'm off topic a bit, but I think it fits.
So if the carcinogens are from the tobacco extract nicotine, the only way to eliminate it, is to use synthetic nicotine right? And only way to get a hold of synthetic nicotine is to buy from big phrama right? So wouldn't it be a HUGE money maker for big pharma to sell "clean" nicotine for use in liquid? Or is there even such a thing as "clean" and synthetic nic?
If that were to happen wouldn't that be a big merge of big pharm, big tobacco, and government. I think I just confused myself again...

 

[CArtVapr]

Well, not sure if this belongs here, but I saw my first commercial on E-smoking tonight. Sorry about the sound, it's very low. So among all this negativity, there is this one positive TV ad.YouTube - Electric Cig Commercial

 

[OutWest]

@smokinsimon - there is synthetic. Apparently the nicotine lozenges use it because independent testing of those showed no traces of nitrosamines found. Also, Johnson Creek has reportedly switched to synthetic for their eliquid production.

 

[Krakkan]

Maybe it would be helpful for people who have had good experiences to contact the news agencies who made the biased reports? I've done this in the past with other issues and follow up stories have been done a few times to clarify or show the other side of the issue. I'm a newbie who is waiting to receive her 510 (please USPS, get it here tomorrow) or else I would contact them myself.
A close friend of mine turned me on to the e-cigs because of her positive experiences. She has cut way back on her analog smoking, gotten her sense of smell and taste back, and said that she's able to hike a lot more without getting winded. I would think that there are a ton of people with similar experiences.

this is exactly what is needed we should pick a few major stories and send all of our community to attack those falsities and force a retraction or a follow-up story.

 

[smokinsimon]

@smokinsimon - there is synthetic. Apparently the nicotine lozenges use it because independent testing of those showed no traces of nitrosamines found. Also, Johnson Creek has reportedly switched to synthetic for their eliquid production.

Ok, so yeah, in theory since all they found with Njoy was trace amounts of nitrosamines all Njoy has to really do (easier said than done) is start using synthetic and well game over.

 

[TomCat1116]

I don't know about you guys, but the fact that e-cig companies all over blatently marketed these items as being carcinogen free and then the FDA reveals that this just isn't true means two things. The folks manufacturing the e-cigs were making claims off the cuff and not actually doing the homework, which puts you, my wife, and everyone else who's been exposed to these e-cigarettes at risk.

We'll be lucky if it turns out that what was found is this arbitrary '1% of the risk of cigarettes' scenario and not something worse. Yes - even the small business home chemists who make e-juice and sell it on a small scale - you're guilty too. Flame away... but while doing so, think about what it was exactly that big tobacco did that got everyone up in arms. Hypocrisy detection is at full alert.

Not everyone who purchased and used these things were smoking analogues the day before they started using them. Many had quit smoking for any length of time and were just tired of dealing with the cravings... and since claims were made that these were safe, tried them. If in the end it turns out that the health risks to using e-cigarettes are marginal at worst, it is by pure luck because nobody - absolutely nobody - was watching the consumer's backs on this one until the FDA stepped in. They're not doing this to hurt anyone - they're doing the job that they are there to do - period. There are too many money grubbing scam artists out there that if the FDA didn't step in we'd never see a mass-produced certifiably safe electronic cigarette produced. The careless/sloppy import or garage based sellers would have too unfair of a price advantage to attract anyone to actually do this the right way. Just because some outdated FDA approvals say that DEG is used in very trace amounts that are able to be ingested safely doesn't mean that vapors from said DEG are deemed to be safe - especially when atomized. Some other documents that say that DEG is used in air cleaning products doesn't mean that it is safe to breath it in in high concentrations. Got an air ionizer at home? Think it's safe to stick your nose up to it and breath in that air deeply over and over again? Like the idea of damaged lungs? That's a great way to do it. People - do not confuse statements made with assertion as truth. Learn how to qualify the truth. The cost of cancer on our government is something like 100 billion a year. Think that they REALLY care so much about the tax on cigarettes that they're interested in killing us all and in the end paying more to do so anyway? Doubt it!

 

[TomCat1116]

By the way - when 'big tobacco' lied to us we all got mad at them and not the FDA

 

[TomCat1116]

It's from the nicotine. To be more specific - when you extract nicotine from tobacco you also pull with it a small amount of carcinogenic nitrosamines. What the media failed to mention is that those same carcinogens are present in the nicotine gum and the nicotine patch, because they too use nicotine extracted from tobacco. The other option is synthetic nicotine.

What about the 'no nicotine' variants that also had some nitrosamines found? I believe that most did not but there were some that surprisingly did. This is because there is no uniform testing of these products therefore inevitable quality control issues.