
opponents are using guerrilla tactics
By "opponents" you mean the parasitic scum of the earth AKA tobacco companies?
The UK's advertising watchdog says that generic lifestyle campaigns urging people to improve their health by vaping instead of smoking may fall foul of EU law. The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) today upheld an anonymous complaint made about an advert for a e-cigarette shop Vape Station, in the magazine The Journal. …
Going by some of the comments on past el Reg articles discussing vaping, a disturbing amount of the general public are very uneducated regarding its health benefits over tobacco products. I've had people stop me in the street, on more than one occasion and tell me I would be better off healthwise smoking actual cigarettes!
There are people out there that would rather see all vapers and smokers alike banned outright...
These days it's more likely to be the long and overreaching arm of Tobacco Control. You know, actual public health people.
It's becoming increasingly laughable, frankly. Or it would be, if they weren't taxpayer funded ideologues who are standing in the way of massively reducing the harm caused by the single most dangerous consumer habit out there.
Steven R
>The tobacco companies love vaping as they're the source of the nicotine.
These aren't the big tobacco companies though, there's no nicotine extraction cartel. The wholesale cost of 1tr of concentrated nicotine liquid which will make 1000 10ml bottles (each basically 20-40 cigs worth) is about £50.
Pseudo medical products and old fashioned cigarettes is where the profit is which is why big tobacco is spending £100 millions a year lobbying against e-cigs.
"there's no nicotine extraction cartel."
Yet.
Bear in mind that the actual cost of a packet of smokes is about 10p and all the rest is taxes extracted along the chain.
Whilst I don't mind smokers switching to vaping as long as I don't have to breathe the fumes, I have _serious_ issues with brightly coloured vaping displays at child's eye height in my local stores and marketing which seems designed to attract young new recruits (remember, if the tobacco companies got you smoking by age 18, they had you for life).
>Bear in mind that the actual cost of a packet of smokes is about 10p and all the rest is taxes extracted along the chain.
Dunno about that Tax in the UK is 16.5% of the retail price plus £4.16 - 20 Silk Cut @ Tesco are apparently £10.52.
In any case my point was that growing blends of high quality tobacco suitable for smoking is expensive and skilled agriculture before manufacturing cost. Growing and harvesting hardy weeds simply for high nicotine yield requires very little husbandry and tiny crops overall for the same consumer base. Producing 100% pure nicotine is a very simple process compared to much of what is undertaken on a modern farm these days - without legislative assistance there's no business there for big tobacco.
"Dunno about that Tax in the UK is 16.5% of the retail price plus £4.16 - 20 Silk Cut @ Tesco are apparently £10.52."
There are excise, export and import taxes levied at every step of the chain from harvesting through manufacturing, distribution, etc. The tax you speak of is only the last one in a compounding sequence.
About the only other substance which comes close to this level of taxation at every step of the chain is petrol/diesel.
>There are excise, export and import taxes levied at every step of the chain from harvesting through manufacturing, distribution, etc. The tax you speak of is only the last one in a compounding sequence.
The tax I speak of is the UK Tobacco Products Duty levied on cigarettes @ import - it's you that's misunderstanding.
Bear in mind that the actual cost of a packet of smokes is about 10p and all the rest is taxes extracted along the chain.
Nope. This is capitalism, run by a cartel. There has to be SOME profit margin in the retail price!
In Kentucky, state having cheapest in USA, price is about $4.5 (3.50 pounds.). $1 of that is federal tax, $0.60 in state tax. That's $1.6 taxes on $4.5, so there's $2.90 in costs and profit.
By "opponents" you mean the parasitic scum of the earth AKA tobacco companies?
Tobacco companies were neck-deep in TPD lobbying, there's plenty of research and evidence on this - but they're not the problem here. I'd imagine they want vaping to be advertised - given they bought into the market and shaped the TPD to make their products own the market; despite the TPD compliant gear they're pushing being trash compared to the non-compliant gear.
It's the pharma industry that's at fault here - they don't want people to actually give up smoking because it'd hurt their market in flogging inferior product that hardly helps people.
The tobacco companies love vaping as they're the source of the nicotine.
Yeah, they're not generally. The best quality nicotine for ejuice comes from other sources; the pharma industry. Kill me. They love vaping because it's a healthy alternative to smoking and a potentially massive market. Nobody who's vaped for more than 3 weeks would touch ecigs the companies they own put out though because they're trash - which is exactly why the EU had to rig the TPD for them. Hasn't worked though has it EU, oops.
No, they are pharmaceuticals that happen to be derived from tobacco, the lobbyists made quite sure of that. The whole TPD is ridiculous, it was written by Big Pharma and Big Tobacco to try and make vaping as unappealing and legislated as possible.
Pharma can continue making a fortune charging users, governments and insurers for "nicotine therapies", and Tobacco can continue to exist, all helped along by fundamentalist anti-nicotine "health professional" crusaders who believe that any use of nicotine is wrong, especially if you enjoy it.
This unholy trinity have given us laws that will cause more harm and suffering, lead to more addiction. Coincidentally, it means more funding for healthcare, more pharmaceutical tobacco prescriptions, and more people still smoking. There could barely be a law that is so heavily tilted towards rewarding commercial parties and fucking over the citizens.
Even if you are not a vaper or a smoker, you should be furious - collectively we are all on the hook for the resulting costs.
I was under the impression that these days vaping was largely he product of Big Tobacco - and why not? It's very lucrative, highly addictive, and likely to cause them a lot less grief due to relative (compared to cigarettes) lack of restriction on marketing and increased survival of their customers.
If I were BAT I would be hyping vaping like crazy (and they are: "Introducing Vype! Pebble Vaping Rocks!", google tells me). I know they're better that cigs, but I'm very uncomfortable about the way they're marketed.
Even if you are not a vaper or a smoker, you should be furious - collectively we are all on the hook for the resulting costs.
It's not all bad news, of course. Keeping people smoking lowers the number who manage to reach the ever moving retirement age. Less people retiring, less of that lovely pension pot The City™ have invested in more consumer-rogering you have to claw back or find from the social security budget.
Actual smoking is still a net gain. From the top of my head, 2011-12 tobacco taxes gathered £12bn. Tobacco use cost the NHS £5bn - and most of that is not the cost of the compounds used in the interest of patients, more the compound interest on the money used to access the patents...
Why is there so much confusion when Vaping does not contain Tobacco...
It can and might include Nicotine but Vaping definitely is not Tobacco related.....
I stopped smoking thanks to the capacity to be allowed to vape, my lungs are thoroughly happy and the difference I can feel is amazing..
Let's ban cigarettes first, where there is absolutely no doubt about their negative effects.
On the other hand I'm not aware of many long term tests of the effects of vaping (which in most cases involves some nicotine). I doubt that it's worse than smoking tobacco but what about the additives they put in for smell/taste?
As I say I'm not against vaping and I've several friends who are coming off fags thanks to it but what's in the vape liquid seems uncontrolled..... perhaps I just need to do more research.
Indeed AC I suggest that you require some further reading. Vape products have gone quite a lot of testing.
There are sponsored testing like you will find on sites like Wicked, as well as cancer research UK. Granted the results usually look like - Vaping isn't that bad when you compare it to smoking.
http://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk.org/2017/02/06/new-study-comes-the-closest-yet-to-proving-that-e-cigarettes-arent-as-dangerous-as-smoking/
Vaping isn't that bad when you compare it to smoking.
That really is damning by faint praise. A bit like "Not as bad a poke in the eye with a sharp stick". Vaping is a drug delivery system. It is commonly used for nicotine today, but can also be used for other inhaled drugs, both legal and otherwise. Big Tobacco has an issue with vaping as they have a vested interest in the status quo and even if they can have a large slice of the pie, they may not necessarily get it. Entrenched monopolists don't like change.
Vaping is a drug delivery system.
Oh noes! Ban teaspoons before someone mixes their next fix on one!
Just like the language you used there, it all depends on what you load it with. Banning the legitimate use because someone may use it illegitimately simply kills all legitimate use. This is what we've been trying to get Ms Rudd and Ms May to understand about cryptography - you won't stop the scrotes using it, you'll just remove all of the positive benefits.
"They are optional. I don't have anything of that nature in mine."
It's worth bearing in mind that cigarettes used to be able to be obtained in various fruit flavours, etc, and this was used as part of marketing strategies directly targetting children up until the 1950s (if you don't think kids were targetted, look at this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqdTBDkUEEQ )
That's why it was banned in a lot of countries (except for rum and menthol, on the basis that kids don't like those), although you could still buy fruit-flavoured ciggies in Poland until last year.
As I said, I don't mind people using Vaping as a substitute for smoking, but the marketing methods and flavours being promoted are guaranteed to be attractive to children (ie, new recruits).
Nicotine is pretty well understood. The carriers, propylene glycol and glycerin, are as well. You're right about the additives though. Inhaling flavorings is a new thing and not tested by regulatory bodies. Who cares whether it's safe to inhale fake raspberry flavoring when it's going into food, right? If candy or soda gets in your lungs the safety of the flavorings is the least of your worries.
We know of some substances that are definitely safe to ingest and definitely unsafe to inhale over a long peiod, such as diacetyl (used in microwave popcorn, causes popcorn lung, it's a real thing). I don't know that cinnamaldehyde has been proven to be unsafe for inhalation but it's an irritant. Using e-liquid containing it is probably not a great idea. There's just very little data available on inhalation of flavorings, and good luck finding out what's in a retail e-liquid. That plus cost is why I only use the e-liquid my wife makes, as she's sifted through all of the available information and uses only the flavorings least likely to cause problems 20 years down the road. It's still a gamble though, and is the main reason I think that the safety of vaping is dubious except as an alternative to smoking.
> Who cares whether it's safe to inhale fake raspberry flavoring when it's going into food, right?
It has to be tested for occupational exposure even in food use - for vaping MSDSs explicitly include diacetyl and acetyl propionyl...also raspberry flavouring comes from actual raspberries not fake ones.
"Why is there so much confusion when Vaping does not contain Tobacco..."
Because nicotine is a potent neurotoxin and whilst the long-term health effects of smoking are fairly well-known there's not the same body of information on vaping and won't be for another 20-30 years.
So if I understand you correctly then we should just carry on smoking fags, apart from the brave volunteers who will heroically avoid the tar induced cancers and then demonstrate the sad, side effects that would hit the emphysaemic, cancer ridden remaining survivors in your hopefully "double blind" (albeit the chance of being blind or dead would appear to be with fag addicts) test.
Personally I don't like vaping - it is too sweet for me; and I only smoke the odd fag. But your comments I am sure were well meant; and for all I know (waits for 30 years...) accurate.
The overwhelming majority of vapers are ex smokers. People with an addiction to nicotine that kept them smoking, and are vaping as a far safer alternative to lighting up. Many have had health scares. Most have attempted to give up many, many times and failed, and for them vaping is the only thing that has worked, and vastly improved their health and wallet.
Do you really think even one of them gives a shit about whether you think they look sexy?
After 35 years of smoking, the only method that has worked is vaping. Tried Chantix, patches, and gum - vaping is what does it for me. I use a Baby Alien AL85 mod/3ml Baby Beast tank with various flavors at 6mg nicotine and just noted that when I started, I was using 9ml ejuice, now I'm only using 6ml a day.
I'm breathing better, finally stopped hacking in the morning, and is a much cheaper habit I expect to drop in the future. Biggest con has been that I noticed after smoking for 8 years in my truck, it smells pretty nasty from the cig tobacco smoke - I'm three bottles of Fabreez in... might replace interior.
Truck: Bought it new in 2008, have 223k miles thus far, keeping it forever. I'll strip the interior to metal if I have to ;)
Mixing my own: I'm still nailing down the flavors I like - tend to favor fruit over dessert flavors. I plan on going that route in the near future.
Why anyone would want a tobacco flavored vape is beyond me, didn't smoke for the taste, but for the effect. Settled me down in high stress situations (started when I was 18 in the Army). What I've observed with vaping is that it satisfies the hand-to-mouth fidgeting as well as getting that calming nicotine hit - something that the gums, patches, Chantix stop-smoking methods don't address.
Polonium: Nope. Don't want to know. I'm good, thank you.
Good on you 404... I use the same Alien with the Baby Beast. One difference though is that I mix the PG/VH ( 30/70) myself. It is much much cheaper and I only add a little bit of menthol.. I dropped down to 3mg and soon I will drop down to 0 and probably stop the vaping....
Anything that helps stops smoking is great in my mind....and lungs etc...
404, you can make it even cheaper and mix your own ejuice. You can get "bottle shots" these days, 500ml bottles filled with 100ml of flavourings, you squirt in the %age nicotine you want from "nicotine shots", add VG and/or PG, shake well and then leave in the cupboard for a week, shaking it occasionally. This comes out to about £30/L, compared to £500/L for "premium" juices sold in 10ml bottles. Even if you are just using 6ml a day, its the difference between a £3/day habit to a £0.20/day habit.
Google for "bottle shots" or "hack shots" or "one shots"; each manufacturer uses a slightly different name.
"I'm breathing better, finally stopped hacking in the morning, and is a much cheaper habit I expect to drop in the future."
You might be mildly amused at what you find if you manage to slide a radiation counter down your bronchia.
FWIW: When you stop smoking the chemical effects are cleared out in 3-6 months. The polonium takes somewhat longer to disperse and according to smokers in my family, the cravings never really go away even after 50 years.
As someone who quit a 45-year habit through vaping, I'm 99% in their favour.
That last 1%? Nicotine is a very dangerous poison, and there appear to be no controls over the people who mix it into those multi-flavour e-liquids.
I was hit with a batch of e-liquid which had a dangerous proportion of nicotine in it. I was very ill for a day or so (being generally healthy helped. If I'd had a dodgy ticker, I'd be dead.) Afterwards, couldn't even contemplate anything nicotinish (which, I suppose, was a result).
I'd like to see some level of control over e-liquid production. Beyond that, vape away.
"As someone who quit a 45-year habit through vaping, I'm 99% in their favour."
But are you in favour of brightly coloured advertising and counter-mounted displays of the product enticing people to vape?
The local shops have vaping products interspersed with the candy displays at the till. You know exactly who that's aimed at.
Around here this year everybody is a smoker. The forest fires are the worst ever seen in history.
This is a smokey planet and always has been outside of the ice ages. It very much depends on how much smoke you inhale. I smoke a pipe and always have. I use the equivalent of maybe two cigarettes per day. My health risk is the same as a non smoker living in any polluted city, or less.
Nicotine is a Smart Drug