Posted on 01/28/2015 8:41:44 AM PST by Oldpuppymax
According to Dr. Gilbert Ross, Medical and Executive Director, American Council on Science and Health…
Smoking is America’s most important, and preventable, public health problem: It is estimated that almost a half-million of us will succumb prematurely to smoking’s deadly effects each year, with twenty-times that number sickened. Among our 43 million smokers, over half try to quit each year, yet less than one in twenty succeed. The FDA approved products—patches, gums, and drugs—help “boost” that to about one in ten, an abysmal “success” rate of 10 percent. Yet, the official line, from the FDA and the CDC on down, is “stick with the FDA-approved methods; don’t even try anything else!”
Chief among that “anything else” are e-cigarettes, loved by users—because they do help you quit—but almost unanimously hated by officialdom. Dr. Ross has been in the forefront of those criticizing the coordinated and baseless attacks on e-cigarettes for years, and fortunately he is not alone. Other good guys include Bill Godshall, Brad Rodu, Michael Siegel, Carl Phillips, and Clive Bates. However, there are powerful forces against e-cigarettes, including the proverbial strange bedfellows.
Clearly, Big Tobacco has been against e-cigarettes from the get-go, alarmed by decreasing cigarette sales, compared to skyrocketing e-cigarette sales. Some cigarette manufacturers have even ventured into the e-cig business themselves. Big Pharma also lines up against e-cigs, with its gums, patches, and lozenges; not to mention nicotine receptor partial agonist drugs such as Chantix. Ross notes the miserable track record of these pharmaceutical products, and is too polite to ask if people would take any other pharmaceutical with such a poor success rate. Chantix is also known for bizarre side effects, and carries the dreaded black box warning against serious neuropsychiatric events.
As to the strange bedfellows, e-cig opponents include many public health departments...
(Excerpt) Read more at coachisright.com ...
Just quit!!
I’ve always been amazed at the opposition to e-cigarettes. I imagine most of the harmful effects from regular cigarettes are from the smoke. If you can eliminate the smoke, and give the user just nicotine, it seems like a clear benefit in overall health.
The user then only has to consider the effects of nicotine addiction, which by itself must be better than the health risk from inhaling smoke and toxins.
If you can gradually dial in a lower amount of nicotine in your e-cigarette, you have a chance of beating your addiction.
My friends who are smokers have all tried patches, gum, etc. They complain that they miss the “ritual” of lighting and handling a cigarette. An e-cigarette can simulate the “ritual” and give you something to hold, as opposed to patches or gum.
Since opposition to e-cigarettes defies logic and common sense, the only reasonable conclusion is that it’s all about money.
Nunya.
“A study published in Indoor Air from the Fraunhofer Wilhelm-Klauditz-Institut in Germany examined secondhand emissions from several e-cigarettes in a human exposure chamber. Each e-cigarette was puffed 6 times and data were collected for a conventional cigarette, also puffed 6 times.
While the e-cigarette produced lower levels of toxins in the air for nonsmokers to breathe than the conventional cigarette, there were still elevated levels of acetic acid, acetone, isoprene, formaldehyde and acetaldehyde, averaging around 20% of what the conventional cigarette put into the air.
Thus, while not as polluting as a conventional cigarette, the e-cigarettes are putting detectable levels of several significant carcinogens and toxins in the air. “
Even as we speak, a traitorous republican here in Indiana, Brandt Hersheman, has introduced an HR bill to tax the hell out of e-cigarettes. The anti's are between a rock and a hard place. Their central message for all these years revolved around how damaging second-hand smoke was (all lies, mind you). Now they are faced with e-cigs and the message can't be used. Their choices are to lie (the most likely of outcomes) or come up with a new campaign. So far, the campaign message has been "oh look. flavored nicotine that will attract and kill our children". I swear, this has me infuriated.
I struggled for 30 years with cigarettes. I tried the gum, the inhalers, all multiple times. They all lack the most important variable that would make them effective and that is the mechanics. I quit smoking after 30 YEARS of HEAVY addiction thanks to the e-cigarette. I can't begin to explain the feeling of being free of those chains... mostly chains of oppressive law, not the cigarette itself. My life revolved around planning for my next smoke, now that stress and constant nag is gone. So what is my fear now? Anti's who would rather I go back to being an outcast and a smoker who they can control. I have to say, this has me violently angry.
not the smoke, the toxins in the smoke.
e cigaretes just deliver 20% less via water vapor. My own observation is that e cig users “smoke” more. It is like drinking more soda because it is diet soda.
An e-cig is a black rifle with a pistol grip and a 30 round mag.
I suddenly have the urge to buy a can of Folgers and a pack of Lucky Strikes.
It does show one very valid point, however. they should have NEVER used the word cigarette in the description. what they really are is a vaporizer. I guess the word was used to draw attention to the obvious market, that is, cigarette smokers who wanted a safe alternate that was free of all the excuses used by marxists who parroted the smokers are dirty propaganda. Here's an alternative that doesn't affect the anti in any way, shape of form. But alas, they see it as a loophole, lost ground in their battle. Lost control in their overwhelming defeat of the cigarette. THAT is their hangup. they don't hate the cigarette smoke nearly as much as they hate YOU for using it.
They forgot dippin’!
It’s because they aren’t taxed enough.
they should not be outlawed. they should not be used an excuse to annoy others.
When eating in a restaurant I do not want anyone else’s vapor or smoke while eating or conversing.
Gotta love the scare tactic of using percentages without providing the hard data gathered from the tests. Six cigarettes each, yeah that’s a solid sample base.
Seems the real story is the number of usable compounds present in tobaccy. Does Big Chem know about this? How about Revlon? Now I know why women blow on their nails after applying nail polish, the acetone in the smoke keeps the polish fluid longer for that smooth mirror polish look. And all the time I thought it was for quicker drying.
;>)
E-cigs have greatly improved but it does feel a little strange sucking on a ratchet handle. :p
I went to pick up a script yesterday and right by the pick up is a case full of the patches and gun. The Nicorette gum was $74.99! I didn’t look to see how many was in the box but day em that’s expensive.
That’s the hate coming out. I could be right behind you puffing away on one and you wouldn’t even know it unless you turned around looking for it. I don’t know a single person that uses them “to annoy” others. I question your authenticity. You are one of them.
Someone is having a fish dinner and the smell of fish makes another ill— should the person having fish not be allowed fish?
What if someone has a raging headache and the conversation of another is causing their head to pound even more— should you then stay silent?
” It is estimated that almost a half-million of us will succumb prematurely to smoking’s deadly effects each year, “
—
If I die this year,at age 82,it will be considered a smoking related death. Maybe I could have lived to 83 ???
Smoking isn’t good for you,but it certainly isn’t as bad as the “experts” claim.
.
My daughter,a non-smoker,waited tables in the 80s while going to school.
All the waitresses wanted the smoking section because of the bigger tips.
.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.