I’ve been searching for quite a few years for someone louder in the tobacco control and public health sectors, for a hero. Someone to correct easily repeated disinformation and outright lies. Someone with balls. Cliff Douglas notes harm reduction with precision.
In a surprising tweet, Cliff Douglas did just that. How? He released a document titled “It is Time to Act with Integrity and End the Internecine Warfare Over E-Cigarettes” in a tweet (here) on March 4th, 2021. It’s about damn time.
In dealing with e-cigarettes, he explains the tobacco control community is “letting down tens of millions of adult smokers, their families and friends”, along with “healthcare providers, and government decision-makers.”
He calls to “pursue rational, social justice-oriented approaches to tobacco harm reduction” and later states: “This is clearly a social justice issue.”
“opposition to even considering positive scientific findings related to the promise of vaping for cessation and harm reduction is widely reinforced by confirmation bias“…
Crafted with direct language to his colleagues, he’s quick pointing out valid concerns for vaping products not being ‘approved’ by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), but states the issue is “factually separate from whether these products are in fact helping a significant number of adult users quit smoking“. That’s harm reduction.
Also discussed is the rise in cigarette sales due to a massive “negative coverage on e-cigarettes” and bans on “all flavors” in e-cigarettes because of youth use (<– that’s an important link), while ignoring adults wanting to choose safer alternatives.
Not mincing words on the 2019 “Evali” fiasco, he states: “To be clear, EVALI is caused by vitamin E acetate added to illicit THC vaping products“, adding his niece returned to smoking because of the misleading headlines.
“Stop skirting the truth when it feels inconvenient”
Is this statement from Cliff Douglas too late?
I certainly hope not. During the middle of a real health crisis – the covid pandemic, politicians are distracted by pushing for a vape mail ban to restrict access to adult consumers, and because of pubic opinion of a fake ‘epidemic‘, outright flavor bans are still being pushed to ban less smoking by politicians like Senator Mitt Romney and Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi for products children cannot legally obtain.
Blackballing – Blacklisting
With the leadership Cliff Douglas portrays, I hope to see others willing to have the courage to speak out. I say that because fear of being shunned – literally blackballed by their professional peers for explaining data, research, and science, is a thing.
I say again, blacklisting – that’s a thing in the public health sector. I’ll let two examples from professionals – where they will turn, with vile contempt, on themselves…
In 2009, Dr Michael Siegel explained his experience of stepping out of line with the anti-smoking narrative:
“Importantly, only one perspective on this issue was presented to us in the trainings. There was no room for disagreement or challenge. These ideas were presented as scientific facts, not subject to debate. In fact, if we were to challenge the ideas, the implication was that we – ourselves – might be accused of working for Big Tobacco or receiving secret payoffs.”
Highly respected public health warrior, Dr. Marewa Glover, (Centre of Research Excellence, Indigenous Sovereignty & Smoking) – knows all too well how vindictive the community can be. After decades dedicating her life, well respected experience, the damage already done, she was eventually given an apology (here).
She also gave Patrick and I keen insight to fundamentalist anti-tobacco stigmatization – cynical optimists I call them, who use deliberate behavioral methods – to ‘help’ and manipulate smokers with cognitive dissonance, projecting a ‘spoiled identity’, “barbarian whipping school” style – on Smoke Free Radio last year (here).
What about employees of big, bad tobacco companies? Do they get their say? Well, personally, as much scrutiny as they’re always under, (and public health isn’t), I trust them way more than you might think.
Speaking of being under a microscope, Dr. Gilchrist, the head of Scientific and Public Communications for Philip Morris International… Her twitter says she’s an “Advocate for “better”. Science Lady” (who I admire and follow on Twitter):
I can think of countless times when others in the scientific community have been afraid to support us publicly – despite supporting our smoke-free vision and the evidence – because they feared for their reputation, job or funding if they were to do so.
Next, from Nicotine Policy, Neil McKeganey and Christopher Russell:
There is a real danger here of creating an academic environment in which allegation or suspicion has supplanted proof when it comes to scientific misconduct.
Like most of my regular readers, I’ve searched for – and found – a few individuals in the public health and tobacco control sectors willing to stand up, unabashedly state facts, call out the preposterous junk science, and stop the manipulation of information about vaping products.
Then they’ve been ostracized. Who wins? Certainly those valuing their pride overrides the very public’s health they’re paid by and employed to, to “protect”.
Consumers need the truth
If less smoking “at any cost”, is the “end game”, and is their only goal, they’ve done a piss poor job of trying to convince me and millions of smokers and families looking for answer(s) buried in their constant attempts to be the “popular kid” on campus spewing contrived sociopolitical and pseudo “science”. That’s not harm reduction.
My hope is this powerful statement by Mr. Douglas encourages others in all facets of leadership roles in public health, to do the same. I’ve revised my statement: “I’m for whatever works for the informed consumer. Patch, gum, Heat Not Burn, vaping, snus, acupuncture, books, hypnosis, counseling, Hale, Juul, etc. Do I “like” them all? No. It’s not about or me, or what “I” like. What may work as a choice for a consumer is first.” That’s harm reduction.
I implore EVERYONE in public health to consider what Mr. Douglas asks in his tweet below. His paper is linked for your convenience just below his tweet.
To my friends on both sides of the internecine divide over tobacco harm reduction, I'm pleased to share my brief, personal commentary calling for collaboration, honesty and integrity on the part of all stakeholders. Please feel free to share it. Thank you. https://t.co/mg3SvSNW9Y
I’ll repeat myself: If less smoking, “at any cost”, is the “end game” and is their only goal, the words in the tweet below should be used at all times. “No neighbor left behind”. That’s harm reduction.
A focus on significantly reducing the death & disease caused by smoking & other dangerous ways of using tobacco (Stuff like Indian chewing tobacco).
Basically it’s the opposite of “Quit or Die.” Seeking a better way for those struggling to quit.
I’ll paraphrase Skip Murray (I affectionately call her #CrankyOldBroad). None of this should be “us” against “them”. It shouldn’t be about who’s “winning”. It should be about helping one another. Period. That’s harm reduction.
Like my last blog, it’s a matter of public health, and it’s personal.
Let’s get to work, public health.
Added March 10th, 2021:
This is Philippines, not USA...
but gives insight to the obvious influence of “non-profit” “charitable” organizations…
“Suansing noted that in addition to receiving funds from the BloombergInitiative, the FDA also admitted to soliciting and accepting funding from another anti-tobacco and anti-vaping organization, The International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease (The Union).”
You are one person, don’t you have enough to do already? How many hats can you wear in one day? With a trade association, you are many being represented as a collaboration of many with one loud voice.
Are you louder?
Well funded and oiled organizations are already so loud, I’m barely able to hear you over the noise. They have friends at the local, state and national levels. They have political influence across the country. They have allies and long-standing relationships. They aren’t questioned about their motive. They have immediate credibility just by saying their names.
Other non-profit associations (Tobacco-Free Kids, Truth Initiative, American Heart, Lung, Cancer, American Medical Association, etc.) have already and are still designing and passing tobacco 21 laws, regulations, restrictions, taxes, and bans to put you out of business. It’s like cutting cookies. Wash, rinse, repeat. They’re organized.
They’re doing it – and getting away with it – right in front of you. They’ve already defined your product as a “tobacco product”. The rest is easy for them. While they regulate, restrict, tax and ban less smoking, the rest of your time in business – at the moment – is just a polite formality until you are gone.
You are in business, right?
State and national trade associations are designed to be a resource for professionals to keep up with YOUR industry news, legislative and regulatory alerts, trends, public affairs and education regarding YOUR business.
A trade association should be an invaluable resource for business owners to learn, share, and teach key information with other business owners about things they commonly need like insurance and credit card processing.
Also, they can provide information on issues like compliance, OSHA and industry standards, operating procedures, (carding, transporting, material, battery and chemical handling, clean rooms, etc), protocol and general business practices, they also should be involved with you at the local, state and national level communicating with lawmakers, and creating and maintaining a favorable public image for your industry.
They also likely maintain relationships with other trade associations and suppliers relating to your industry.
As a former business co-owner, I was a member of the “Taxicab, Limousine & Paratransit Foundation” (TLPF). Why? Because I was a dispatcher, driver, mechanic, lawn boy, car wash guy, human resources, ceiling tile counter, janitor, night watchman, city ordinance liaison, public relations manager, plumber, and vice-president – and I just didn’t have time to know every single bill front and back coming down the pike.
Simply use “vapinglinks” at checkout for 15% off your entire cart!
Please visit my proud sponsor
Did you know?
Did you know taxicab drivers are exempt from overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FSLA)? I did. At one time, some taxicab businesses were exempt from gas taxes. From seat belt laws to overtime, I understood the groundwork laid decades before I was in that industry, and why. The state and national trade associations were instrumental in keeping it that way.
Think about gumballs
Why would gumball machine owners need a trade group? Here’s an example that started a trade association group – from the 1950’s:
“In 1950, the United States Treasury Department attempted to impose gambling excise taxes on bulk vendors on the grounds that there was no way for consumers to know for sure which gumball or other product the machine would dispense. For a short time, manufacturers installed viewfinders in bulk vending machines to display the next item to be vended.”
“Vendors organized to found the National Bulk Vendors Association (NBVA), which successfully lobbied against the taxes, arguing that the items vended were of approximate or equivalent value. The NBVA has since lobbied on behalf of bulk vendors on a variety of issues; for instance, it joined the Coin Coalition which pushed for elimination of the U.S. one dollar bill in favor of the United States dollar coin.” (Source).
Do your part – or not
Keeping irresponsible laws and taxes out of politicians hands is YOUR job as a business. With taxes comes higher prices passed on to the consumer. If YOUR customers, consumers like me, are willing to pay higher prices, you’ll be fine. If they can find your product or service reasonably priced, you have a customer. Without customers, you are out of business.
Industry trade groups are designed for businesses. What should your customers know? Consumer groups are designed for consumers. They pass on calls to action and information to help YOU as well as them. You, as a business, should be supporting them as well by telling your customers about those consumer groups along with regulations, restrictions, taxes, and bans coming in your state.
You don’t have much time left. If you’re doing what I, as a consumer, expect you to do as a business owner, thank you. I wish you many years of success. If you’re not, I imagine your customers can find out once they discover your shop has closed.
Vaping In The News covers nicotine, smoking, vaping, snus, heat not burn, e-cigarettes, harm reduction, tobacco control, public health, government, regulations, policies & more worldwide.
Some FDA Claims About Teen Vaping Confirmed, Others Evaporate ~ Changing Perceptions ~ Unfair advantage ~ Vaping Taxes Do Not Deter Youth Use of E-Cigarettes ~ FDA’s Fake E-cigarette News ~ Bye, Felicia: Gottlieb Leaves FDA After Bizarre Seizure Warning ~ School district randomly testing for vaping paraphernalia ~ Wrestling with Curiosity and Fear About Nicotine ~ Dimi Rant
Some FDA Claims About Teen Vaping Confirmed, Others Evaporate
Brad Rodu slaps some things around, including support of “Tobacco 21”.
I’ve talked about, and James Jarvis has talked about how Scientific, Public Health and Government sectors (Seeya, Gottlieb) have continuously publicly and purposefully encouraged & promoted more smoking with manipulation, narrative, and snippets.
Of all things… I can’t imagine the forced irony of this tweet from GottLIEB on his last day holding his position. For the record, I think he did it on purpose just to piss us off.
I can’t imagine Dimi talking about politicians, legacies, or tobacco… but he did. Also, there’s a bit of math involved because he’s multi-talented. He explains how to talk with politicians – educate politicians, how to piss off Juul, the South American cartel connection, and is well worth the watch.
Let’s change the conversation about the myths surrounding nicotine and vaping.
The government resists ignores the opportunity to correct myths surrounding nicotine, vaping, and snus. Most things shared in mainstream media is full of multi-layered bias. There are difficultiesexplaining admitting vaping products and nicotine (and snus) are a safer, less harmful alternative to smoking, and the government continues to mislead the public.
Let’s change the conversation.
Myth:
Vaping does not work.
Truth:
Vaping does work.
Current nicotine cessation products show smoking cessation rates below 7% at 1 year.
Dr. Gottlieb knows the 93% failure rate is accurate.
However, what you’re not being told they won’t admit: Without question, e-cigarettes have shown extremely high success rates. A survey conducted by the Moffitt Cancer Center funded by the National Institute of Health (NIH) and National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) showed as far back as 2013: 79% had completely quit smoking cigarettes
An immediate transition
42% quit switched in one day. 75%stopped smokingswitched within a month in (my) global survey of 7,238 participants. While some ‘experts’ believe this is bias because vapers participated, this shows ‘real world’ beneficial bias. I found their experience similar to mine and wanted the world to know. So did they.
Flavors: This United States survey, the largest survey ever performed on e-cigarette use in terms of sample size with 69,233, shows flavors was associated with significantlyhigher odds of adults having quit switched with vaping products and was submitted to the Food and Drug Administration.
The FDA has not published or utilized these findings to my knowledge.
“They want to regulate, restrict, tax and ban less smoking.”
Consider this:
Did you know “it may take 30 or more quit attempts before being successful” They DO.
56 more demonstrating vaping products are less harmful than cigarettes or are effective to switchcan be found here.
Dr. Farsalinos “has been conducting laboratory and clinical research on e-cigarettes as a principal investigator since 2011” has his research found here.
Point To Ponder:
The FDA experimented with Chantix on 12-16-year-olds. “The study failed to meet the main goal”. You read that right. It’s here.
Fun Fact: They are encouraging more smoking.
According to this press release: “Agencies of the U.S. federal government have invested more than $100 million in independent clinical research with SPECTRUM cigarettes”
Dr. Gottlieb, along with the majority of non-profit “health” organizations are excited to support more combustible cigarettes (with “lower nicotine“) entering the market.
There’s More:
This February 2018article from Moffit Cancer Center, where Thomas H. Brandon, Moffit’s Director of Tobacco Research and Intervention Program is in the middle of “a large national study” and states “my perspective that e-cigarettes represent the most important change in the landscape of tobacco use during my 36 years in this field. We need to harness this change to maximize the public health benefit“.
Dr. Brandon acknowledges quitting takes “several serious attempts” and smokers should make use of the seven products approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and adds: “And yes, e-cigarettes, whatever works!” (Article.)
Let’s change the conversation.
It’s time for public health and politicians to
make a decision:
You want less smoking, or you don’t.
You want less harm, or you don’t.
Not the only one wanting to change the conversation with public perception, Dr. David Abrams of New York University agrees with Public Health England’s 2015 report.
According to this article, he knows vaping products are “substantially less harmful than cigarettes“.
Again, changing the conversation is paramount to “reframe societal views of nicotine use” and stressed the need to “get out the latest accurate information about reduced harm”, along with the need for “ethics and integrity in responsibly interpreting the scientific evidence with rigor” is a necessity in this Annual Reviews of Public Health.
Consider this:
YOU are CASAA. The Consumer Advocates for Smoke-Free Alternatives has been changing the conversation since 2009. There are thousands of real-world testimonials here, and it is free to be a member and I encourage you to join here.
Tobacco Harm Reduction 4 Life (THR4Life) is another consumer group. THR4Life wants to change the conversation by supporting and educating consumers.
WHY are government officials withholding information on legal consumer nicotine/tobacco products from the public?
Simply use “vapinglinks” at checkout for 15% off your entire cart!
Please visit my proud sponsor
Myth:
E-liquid is a tobacco product
Truth:
As of August 8th, 2016, e-liquid (with or without nicotine) and vaping products are “deemed” (looked on, or to regard or consider in a specified way) tobacco products for the sole purpose of then regulating, restricting, taxing (like cigarettes) and even banning them.
Milk is not beef. Syrupis not wood. Grapes and hops are not alcohol. Almonds are not milk. Nicotine is not tobacco.
Sources for nicotine patches, gums, inhalers, and e-liquid all come from the same source. While some e-liquids do contain nicotine extracted from the tobacco plant, it can also be synthetic.
Exempt? Nicotine patches, gums, inhalers
It’s the same nicotine. “Nicotine can also be purchased in many other forms including patches, chewing gum, and liquid extract formula.” That’s here.
Vaping products and nicotine replacements like patches contain nicotine, I’m trading one addiction for another. Vaping is just like smoking.
Truth:
No. These products are different and the likelihood of addiction is very low.
While the nicotineitself is the same nicotine, these products deliver nicotine differently and have a much lower risk of addiction than cigarettes.
“To debate a comparison of e-cigarettes to combustible tobacco is gross negligence or voluntary incompetence.”
There are other chemicals in cigarettes, like ammonia, for enhancing nicotine delivery. There is much more to it. “Research is showing that nicotine may not be the only ingredient in tobacco that affects its addictive potential” and “…likely caused by some as-yet-unidentified ingredient in tobacco smoke other than nicotine.”
You can see more about this hidden at the bottom of the page in purple from drugfacts.org here.
There’s More:
I understand your skepticism about nicotine. In fact, despite what you’ve heard since the 1988 Surgeon General’s report, there is no proof nicotine addiction exists.
This, from Hanan Frenk and Reuven Dar, says claiming nicotine addiction “could only be sustained by systematically ignoring all contradictory evidence” and “is remarkably biased and misleading.”.
Still not convinced? I still understand your skepticism.
Consider this:
This is ground-breaking research on Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease. Dr. Paul Newhouse is director of Vanderbilt University’s Center for Cognitive Medicine.
“…and nobody started smoking cigarettes.”
“It seems very safe even in nonsmokers,” he said. “In our studies we find it actually reduces blood pressure chronically. And there were no addiction or withdrawal problems, and nobody started smoking cigarettes. The risk of addiction to nicotine alone is virtually nil.”
The effects of nicotine itself are similar to that other popular drug, caffeine. There is no evidence that nicotine causes any substantial risk for cancer, and the research shows that the risk for cardiovascular disease is minimal. The confusion about nicotine comes from anti-smoking activists talking about nicotine and smoking as if they were the same.
This website also has information about smokeless tobaccoincluding snus.
In Florida, Dr. Lee, faced with a five-year-old (at the time) experiencing “20 seizures a night” with a rare form of epilepsy decided to administer nicotine via a patch. Dr. Lee also “found evidence that a nicotine patch helped stopped seizures in an adult”.
No one has proven themselves right with criteria provided in my “Nicotine Addiction: An Open 30-Day Public Health Challenge“.
Myth:
There are no side effects from vaping products.
Truth:
An important point for someone considering vaping as an alternative, Vaping 360 has some astounding information on their website. One example is ‘The Potential Side Effects from Vaping“.
Also, some have experienced allergic reactions to propylene glycol.
Myth:
If I use vaping products, I will experience no withdrawal symptoms or cravings quitting smoking during my transition.
Truth:
Vaping products reduce withdrawal symptoms associated with cigarette smoking.
In fact, many (mentioned in the survey linked above) experienced little or no withdrawal symptoms during their transition. Nicotine strength is essential.
Let’s change the conversation in the next myth below.
Myth:
If I start vaping, nicotine strength should be reduced as soon as possible.
Truth:
You should not limit your nicotine strength.
During your transition, the strength of nicotine you choose mimics the throat hit you experienced while smoking. It’s your pleasure. If you decide to switch, it is recommended nicotine strength matches to make the transition easier. There are also nicotine calculators to estimate your nicotine strength.
As an example, if you smoke heavily, your nicotine strength should be 12, 16, 18, or 24mg. Strengths do go higher, (36, 54 and even as high as 72mg). If you are a light smoker, it may only be 0, 3, 6 or 9mg nicotine strength you would be satisfied with. Start higher, and over time you can lower your nicotine if you feel you should. Your local vape shop should be able to determine your needs.
Since myths of nicotine have been ingrained into the public and culture so long, finding this study showing higher nicotine strengths was intriguing.
Myth:
Nicotine causes cancer.
Truth:
Nicotine does NOT cause cancer.
There’s More:
World renowned cardiologist Dr. Farsalinos explains in this article: “Nicotine does not cause cancer“, he goes on to say “All medical experts around the world know this to be a true fact. And yet, many continue making the mistake of associating nicotine with cancer.”
Only healthy people can use Nicotine Replacement Therapy (NRT), or nicotine.
Truth:
The effects of NRT and vaping products on the body is not “fully known”, but these products are safer than cigarettes. By using vaping products to switch from smoking, “you reduce your exposure to many chemicals found in tobacco smoke.”
In fact, 85% of the medical professionals in this survey said they are safer than combustible cigarettes.
If you have any concerns, talk to your doctor before doing so. Some find as patients, they are educating their doctors.
Under the direction of your doctor, most people can use NRT. Generally, NRT and vaping products can be safely used by people with diabetes or high blood pressure and does not increase the risk of heart attacks.
No, there is no “epidemic”. With bold being my emphasis, It may surprise you to see this via Clive Bates:
“Applying this proportion to the 2018 data would suggest about 4% of high school students are daily users (this compares to the headline 20.8% use in the past 30-days).”
It is illegal to purchase these products for anyone under 18 21. (Trump amended the law in December of 2019).
That fact is on page 13 of the 499 page document found here.
Did you know?
Since 1992, retailers must “achieve a noncompliance rate of no more than 20%” selling tobacco to minors (80% is acceptable in accordance with the Synar Amendment)
Surely you can answer for yourself if you like flavors (coffee, cake, cookies, candy, Grandma’s pies, etc.). While the myth of flavors being a ‘gateway‘ to smoking for teens (it is not), it is noted flavors like fruit and desserts, pastry and other flavors areextremely important in your transition.
Myth:
E-cigarettes are a “gateway” to smoking.
Truth:
More truthful information across the board = less harm.
“If our primary concern is population-level trends in youth and young adult smoking, which we believe is appropriate, then vaping has not shown to be a serious cause for concern”.
Two other studies, one here, and one from Yale shows “as a result of these bans, more teenagers are using conventional cigarettes than otherwise would have done so“, here.
There’s “anti-freeze” in e-cigarettes, and I’ve heard about “popcorn lung”.
Truth:
Blatantly lying, there is no “anti-freeze” in e-liquid. This statement is simply manipulative and absurd. As of the publishing of this post, the well respected American Academy of Pediatrics is still alluding to ‘anti-freeze’ as an ingredient in their ‘quick facts’ section here.
A twist of words on an ingredient, “facts” by various health groups and professionals. This article from Lee Johnson will ease your mind about this subject:
A valid concern. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health took that quite a bit further in a vape shop, where more than one person would be using these products.
“We evaluated concerns about exposure to vaping-related chemicals in a vape shop. Exposure to flavoring chemicals (diacetyl, 2,3-pentanedione, acetaldehyde), formaldehyde, nicotine, and propylene glycol were all below occupational exposure limits.”
Also see: “Results indicate e-cigarette secondhand exposures are sources of elevated nicotine and propylene glycol exposures. Secondhand exposures to e-cigarettes did not contain consistently elevated concentrations of formaldehyde or acetaldehyde.” That’s here:
Linda Bauld: “despite the lack of data of safety in pregnancy, we can be relatively confident that if the choice is between continued smoking and use of an e-cigarette (‘vaping’) then vaping is the safer option.”
“E-cigarette users with 3 or more years of use were found to have a 96% reduction in reported adverse health events after initiation use, and a resolution of 61.8% of the measured existing health problems that developed while smoking.”
“You can smoke and vape. In fact, I encourage it.”
If you are a smoker choosing to switch to vaping products, do it for your own reasons. If you smoke and vape – just to try it, that’s called “dual use“.
Should vaping products be designated as a “medical device”? Swedish courts found: “the product must have the function of preventing or treating an ailment” and are not medical devices.
Nicotine “addiction” is blamed solely on “nicotine”. Why are teens not using patches and gums to hide their addiction?
At what age is a smoker considered a smoker?
Immature Manipulative Data
While smoking among teens has reached it’s lowest levels in history, The 2018 “Monitoring The Future” survey shows teens are using e-cigarettes at ‘epidemic’ levels at 26.7%, yet fails to showdaily use (habitual).
Daily use was not asked. It did not have data showing:
What users were of legal age
What users did not use nicotine
How many were smoking and switched
Why marijuana is included with “any vaping“
Why is “use” defined as in the past thirty days, not daily
Why?
Why would anyone in the government or public health field purposely mislead the public?
When #data collected fails to generate daily data to analysis and assess information, which bias is utilized best? Is it:
Fun Fact: For the record, they want to eliminate 18, 19, and 20-year-old adults from accessing products by including vapor products with “Tobacco 21.
There’s more
They want to restrict access to cigarettes and e-cigarettes. For adults.
They already are well aware it doesn’t work. In fact, it makes no sense here. Creates more smoking, and didn’t make sense here. It also doesn’t make sense here.
The movement to raise the age to 21 for tobacco is not going to work. According to the Centers for Disease Control, underage drinking is still continuing to be a problem.
Switching and the Pleasure Principle
In the very important video below, fellow consumer David Dorn says in less than five minutes what most tobacco control expertsnever took the time to understand. He talks about switching and the pleasure principle.
It is highly recommended for smokers being pressuredand families of smokers. This should be required for anyone in the professional crowd to listen to.
Ultimately, it is about choice and pleasure. David talks about switching. Pleasure. Choice.
From the Global Forum on Nicotine (GFN2016): The Pleasure Principle – David Dorn
Why?
Why would anyone in the government or public health field purposely and knowingly mislead the public?
WHYare government officials withholding information on legal consumer nicotine/tobacco products from the public?
Let’s CHANGE The Conversation.
Along with e-cigarettes, I must point you to this important link from Dr. Brad Rodu about Mitch Zeller making false statements about smokeless tobacco needing to be part of the conversation as well. Dr. Rodu also talks about snus, and here where Mitch Zeller quietly answers Bengt Wiberg and absolutely admits snus is another alternative in the world, but no one hears that.
If the time, energy and money it took to convince the public otherwise been spent over the last ten+ years e-cigarettes have been available to educate, not manipulate, they may have achieved their goal of less smoking in the United States. I applaud the few who have stepped up despite the pressure of professional peers, and I encourage the others to do the same.
On one hand, when if authorities, legislator and public health officials swallow their pride and see the need, en mass, to listen and to change the conversation completely, they will be very embarrassed.
On the other hand, changing the conversation, for most, isn’t their goal.
Let’s change the conversation about myths surrounding nicotine and vaping.
This blog was derived, in part, from a previous post featuring James Jarvis, and “Dispelling Myths about Nicotine Replacement Therapy”: Myths about Nicotine
James Jarvis, President of the Ohio Vapor Trade Association
VAPING: “Let’s get this out of the way for 2019”.
In a recent post, James Jarvis discussed common myths about vaping, stating “Let’s get this out of the way for 2019.”
Not only is James Jarvis is President of Ohio Vapor Trade Association (OHVTA), he’s also a consumer. I’ve been to Columbus a couple times to see him, and I’ll describe James simply as good people. He cares about smokers having proper information and he cares about the industry.
To the point, a post on his Facebook page got me to thinking… if some vapers genuinely don’t know or are confused about information, how can the public know?
Let’s change that. Now. Let’s get this out of the way: Educators and legislators must learn.
On Public Record.
With the battle preconceived and one-sided (predetermined in some instances) for power and funding, authorities having jurisdiction (AHJ) of their respective township, town, city, and state must be made aware of all sides of this issue in their communities.
If an opportunity arises for three minutes at a podium, this can be read, memorized – as is – or modified, printed to dispel myths about vaping products and nicotine.
Politely – and directly engaging each concern immediately in front of decision-makers, with proper sources for authorities given the task of deciding the fate of (your) regulations, restrictions, taxes, and bans shows a proactive approach to their concerns no matter what the opposition.
I saw his list and was inspired. I have provided his points about vaping (numbered) from his post and link(s) to each point made.
James said: “Let’s get this out of the way for 2019″… ” I agree.
Let’s get this out of the way
1. Popcorn Lung is not caused from vapor products
From Dr Farsalinos, Brad Rodu, Dr. Siegel and more, a collection of evidence to the contrary:
The changes being recommended by FDA include a removal of the warning that consumers should not use an NRT product if they are still smoking, chewing tobacco, using snuff or any other product that contains nicotine—including another NRT.”
4. Tomato, Eggplant, and all nightshade veggies contain nicotine
“Nicotine is an alkaloid found in the nightshade family of plants (Solanaceae), predominantly in tobacco, and in lower quantities in tomato, potato, eggplant (aubergine), and green pepper. Nicotine alkaloids are also found in the leaves of the coca plant.”
Nicotine has no association with cancer. There is no supportable evidence to link nicotine with cancer, and a vast amount of evidence (and irrefutable facts) that there is no such link.
11. While youth use of the product Juul has risen, It is far from epidemic proportions. What is a youth epidemic you ask? Alcohol,Opioids and other drugs.
James closes with his post adding “I hope this helps you understand what Vapor is and is not…. any other questions, please don’t hesitate to ask.”
In addition to the statements James made above, I’ve added more points commonly brought forth and used by jurisdictions when trying to regulate, restrict, tax and ban businesses below.
Simply use “vapinglinks” at checkout for 15% off your entire cart!
Please visit my proud sponsor
Let’s get this out of the way
There’s more.
12. Tobacco 21
A movement in the United States is raising the age of sale of tobacco to 21. While valiant in effort, it both restricts 18-year-old adults from products (e-cigs, snus, etc.) that can help them quit smoking and shows little progress to reduce smoking rates.
The Consumer Advocates for Smoke Free Alternatives Association (CASAA) released this statement about “Tobacco 21” laws:
Here, a study showed “Increasing the minimum legal purchase age (MLPA) to 21 years in NYC did not accelerate reductions in youth tobacco use any more rapidly than declines observed in comparison sites.”
“Beginning in 1997, Washington required states to report underage sales via the Synar Program (here). The latest Synar data shows that 9.6% of retailers were noncompliant in 2013. The FDA also conducts compliance checks of tobacco retailers. In 2016, the FDA reported a noncompliance rate of 11% (here). The FDA should focus on this far more dangerous illegal cigarette sales issue, rather than obsessing over e-cigarettes. “
Being restricted by law (I’m not as a consumer) is not an easy task for shops to contend with. Shops cannot say e-cigarettes could help ‘quit smoking’, or they’re safer than…
“We argue that omitting key health relevant information for current or prospective consumers represents a kind of quarantine of health-relevant information”
Ignored since 2011, Hanan Frenk and Reuven Dar submitted this to the Harm Reduction Journal:
“We show that the nicotine addiction model presented in this chapter, which closely resembles its 22 years old predecessor, could only be sustained by systematically ignoring all contradictory evidence.”
This shows “The effects of nicotine on the brain are similar to those of sugar, salt, exercise, and other harmless substances and events. “There are so many findings that conflict so starkly with the view that nicotine is addictive that it increasingly appears that adhering to the nicotine addiction thesis is only defensible on extra-scientific grounds.”
A new study shows higher nicotine levels are safe – “nicotine on its own, outside of tobacco products, has limited addictive potential, and that higher doses are safe and well tolerated”
From the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health :
“We evaluated concerns about exposure to vaping-related chemicals in a vape shop. Exposure to flavoring chemicals (diacetyl, 2,3-pentanedione, acetaldehyde), formaldehyde, nicotine, and propylene glycol were all below occupational exposure limits.”
It is not anti-freeze. Simply absurd. As of the publishing of this post, the well respected American Academy of Pediatrics is still eluding to ‘anti-freeze’ as an ingredient on their ‘quick facts’ section here.
It’s survey time for U.S. consumers. The largest consumer group in the United States, CASAA, and EcigIntelligence have teamed up once again for you (and all your friends who use e-cigarettes) to take and share the survey. I completed it in approximately 10 minutes.
Data and research are important.
Challenges in the United States are far from over. Your voice counts. As a consumer, your data is both necessary and imperative. Information obtained from surveys can be (and are) used by consumer and trade groups to inform our local, state and national legislators, regulators, media, research, along with public health officials and importantly, other consumers are able to consider making an informed choice to switch to a less harmful alternative.
A word from Alex Clark:
“Once again, CASAA is pleased to share the annual ECig Intelligence consumer survey with our members. As you may remember from previous years, CASAA works cooperatively with ECI to develop survey questions that aid us in our advocacy efforts and help take the pulse of the vaping community.
Your participation in this survey will help inform regulators, advocates, and commentators as we all work to build policies that benefit consumers.”
Vaping Links And More 