Should E-cigs be banned?
Replies
-
When it comes to e-cigs it's more about the tobacco industry wanting their cake and eating it too. They don't want to be labeled as a medical device, but market them as a method to quit smoking. The don't want to be called cigarettes because they means you are smoking, so they call it vaping. Both are methods to get around tobacco regulations and taxation. Thus, US jurisdictions are in a bind to address them because the FDA hasn't done so.
There has been a lot of efforts around the social norm change (smoking is not as common as it used to be), so seeing someone "vaping" would change the norm. Kids don't know the difference between an e-cig and a regular one so what message does that send when they observe it? Too, what adult thinks candy apple is a good flavor for anything other than candy? Not many..... These products are marketed to children.
If they are an effective method to quit smoking - put the peer reviewed research out there, register them pharmaceutical products and go on your merry way. Truth is, most folks aren't quitting - they are switching - and simply using the e-cigs where traditional cigarettes are not allowed, while still smoking when they can. Along with the dual use, you have lots of young people who pick up the product because they are told that it is safer. Despite what the labels say, the FDA found several of them marked as being nicotine free - actually had nicotine in them. Nicotine is what is addictive and not the random assortment of other things found in traditional cigarettes.
More research is needed, but I won't be a guinea pig.
I was wondering when someone would come out and say this.
1. Its about taxation. They need to be taxed.
2. ITS ABOUT THE CHILDREN
Typical liberal progressive bull****. OH and no one asked you to be a guinea pig, no one is asking to use them, so your point is mute.
comes into thread with no real knowledge on the topic, then tells people to stop talking. Classic!0 -
When it comes to e-cigs it's more about the tobacco industry wanting their cake and eating it too. They don't want to be labeled as a medical device, but market them as a method to quit smoking. The don't want to be called cigarettes because they means you are smoking, so they call it vaping. Both are methods to get around tobacco regulations and taxation. Thus, US jurisdictions are in a bind to address them because the FDA hasn't done so.
There has been a lot of efforts around the social norm change (smoking is not as common as it used to be), so seeing someone "vaping" would change the norm. Kids don't know the difference between an e-cig and a regular one so what message does that send when they observe it? Too, what adult thinks candy apple is a good flavor for anything other than candy? Not many..... These products are marketed to children.
If they are an effective method to quit smoking - put the peer reviewed research out there, register them pharmaceutical products and go on your merry way. Truth is, most folks aren't quitting - they are switching - and simply using the e-cigs where traditional cigarettes are not allowed, while still smoking when they can. Along with the dual use, you have lots of young people who pick up the product because they are told that it is safer. Despite what the labels say, the FDA found several of them marked as being nicotine free - actually had nicotine in them. Nicotine is what is addictive and not the random assortment of other things found in traditional cigarettes.
More research is needed, but I won't be a guinea pig.
I was wondering when someone would come out and say this.
1. Its about taxation. They need to be taxed.
2. ITS ABOUT THE CHILDREN
Typical liberal progressive bull****. OH and no one asked you to be a guinea pig, no one is asking to use them, so your point is mute.
comes into thread with no real knowledge on the topic, then tells people to stop talking. Classic!
Missed the point of those picts didn't ya
Hint google: moot :laugh:0 -
It's all about the money. Once big tobacco has the lock on it, it'll be completely legal again.
I smoke one in my office daily, no one even knows unless they see me do it. So as far as smell, if there is one, it must be good. And I haven't had a cigarette in a month. So I guess banning them means I have to die earlier. Sweet.0 -
This thread is ugly.0
-
Probably banned it because somebody's not making enough money off of tobacco.0
-
I am against most bans even smoking and I really dislike the smell of cigarettes. I am also tired of people saying they call it vapor. They don't just call it vapor it is in fact vapor. Srsly people get over yourself just because of your prejudice doesn't mean you can willy nilly change the definition of things.0
-
I am against most bans even smoking and I really dislike the smell of cigarettes. I am also tired of people saying they call it vapor. They don't just call it vapor it is in fact vapor. Srsly people get over yourself just because of your prejudice doesn't mean you can willy nilly change the definition of things.
This isn't about e-cigs, is it?0 -
When it comes to e-cigs it's more about the tobacco industry wanting their cake and eating it too. They don't want to be labeled as a medical device, but market them as a method to quit smoking. The don't want to be called cigarettes because they means you are smoking, so they call it vaping. Both are methods to get around tobacco regulations and taxation. Thus, US jurisdictions are in a bind to address them because the FDA hasn't done so.
There has been a lot of efforts around the social norm change (smoking is not as common as it used to be), so seeing someone "vaping" would change the norm. Kids don't know the difference between an e-cig and a regular one so what message does that send when they observe it? Too, what adult thinks candy apple is a good flavor for anything other than candy? Not many..... These products are marketed to children.
If they are an effective method to quit smoking - put the peer reviewed research out there, register them pharmaceutical products and go on your merry way. Truth is, most folks aren't quitting - they are switching - and simply using the e-cigs where traditional cigarettes are not allowed, while still smoking when they can. Along with the dual use, you have lots of young people who pick up the product because they are told that it is safer. Despite what the labels say, the FDA found several of them marked as being nicotine free - actually had nicotine in them. Nicotine is what is addictive and not the random assortment of other things found in traditional cigarettes.
More research is needed, but I won't be a guinea pig.
I was wondering when someone would come out and say this.
1. Its about taxation. They need to be taxed.
2. ITS ABOUT THE CHILDREN
Typical liberal progressive bull****. OH and no one asked you to be a guinea pig, no one is asking to use them, so your point is mute.
Dont tell me to shoosh. My opinion is as valid as anyone elses. If you dont like it dont read it.
0 -
When it comes to e-cigs it's more about the tobacco industry wanting their cake and eating it too. They don't want to be labeled as a medical device, but market them as a method to quit smoking. The don't want to be called cigarettes because they means you are smoking, so they call it vaping. Both are methods to get around tobacco regulations and taxation. Thus, US jurisdictions are in a bind to address them because the FDA hasn't done so.
There has been a lot of efforts around the social norm change (smoking is not as common as it used to be), so seeing someone "vaping" would change the norm. Kids don't know the difference between an e-cig and a regular one so what message does that send when they observe it? Too, what adult thinks candy apple is a good flavor for anything other than candy? Not many..... These products are marketed to children.
If they are an effective method to quit smoking - put the peer reviewed research out there, register them pharmaceutical products and go on your merry way. Truth is, most folks aren't quitting - they are switching - and simply using the e-cigs where traditional cigarettes are not allowed, while still smoking when they can. Along with the dual use, you have lots of young people who pick up the product because they are told that it is safer. Despite what the labels say, the FDA found several of them marked as being nicotine free - actually had nicotine in them. Nicotine is what is addictive and not the random assortment of other things found in traditional cigarettes.
More research is needed, but I won't be a guinea pig.
I was wondering when someone would come out and say this.
1. Its about taxation. They need to be taxed.
2. ITS ABOUT THE CHILDREN
Typical liberal progressive bull****. OH and no one asked you to be a guinea pig, no one is asking to use them, so your point is mute.
comes into thread with no real knowledge on the topic, then tells people to stop talking. Classic!
Missed the point of those picts didn't ya
Hint google: moot :laugh:
0 -
When it comes to e-cigs it's more about the tobacco industry wanting their cake and eating it too. They don't want to be labeled as a medical device, but market them as a method to quit smoking. The don't want to be called cigarettes because they means you are smoking, so they call it vaping. Both are methods to get around tobacco regulations and taxation. Thus, US jurisdictions are in a bind to address them because the FDA hasn't done so.
There has been a lot of efforts around the social norm change (smoking is not as common as it used to be), so seeing someone "vaping" would change the norm. Kids don't know the difference between an e-cig and a regular one so what message does that send when they observe it? Too, what adult thinks candy apple is a good flavor for anything other than candy? Not many..... These products are marketed to children.
If they are an effective method to quit smoking - put the peer reviewed research out there, register them pharmaceutical products and go on your merry way. Truth is, most folks aren't quitting - they are switching - and simply using the e-cigs where traditional cigarettes are not allowed, while still smoking when they can. Along with the dual use, you have lots of young people who pick up the product because they are told that it is safer. Despite what the labels say, the FDA found several of them marked as being nicotine free - actually had nicotine in them. Nicotine is what is addictive and not the random assortment of other things found in traditional cigarettes.
More research is needed, but I won't be a guinea pig.
I was wondering when someone would come out and say this.
1. Its about taxation. They need to be taxed.
2. ITS ABOUT THE CHILDREN
Typical liberal progressive bull****. OH and no one asked you to be a guinea pig, no one is asking to use them, so your point is mute.
comes into thread with no real knowledge on the topic, then tells people to stop talking. Classic!
Missed the point of those picts didn't ya
Hint google: moot :laugh:
That's like a cow's opinion right?0 -
When it comes to e-cigs it's more about the tobacco industry wanting their cake and eating it too. They don't want to be labeled as a medical device, but market them as a method to quit smoking. The don't want to be called cigarettes because they means you are smoking, so they call it vaping. Both are methods to get around tobacco regulations and taxation. Thus, US jurisdictions are in a bind to address them because the FDA hasn't done so.
There has been a lot of efforts around the social norm change (smoking is not as common as it used to be), so seeing someone "vaping" would change the norm. Kids don't know the difference between an e-cig and a regular one so what message does that send when they observe it? Too, what adult thinks candy apple is a good flavor for anything other than candy? Not many..... These products are marketed to children.
If they are an effective method to quit smoking - put the peer reviewed research out there, register them pharmaceutical products and go on your merry way. Truth is, most folks aren't quitting - they are switching - and simply using the e-cigs where traditional cigarettes are not allowed, while still smoking when they can. Along with the dual use, you have lots of young people who pick up the product because they are told that it is safer. Despite what the labels say, the FDA found several of them marked as being nicotine free - actually had nicotine in them. Nicotine is what is addictive and not the random assortment of other things found in traditional cigarettes.
More research is needed, but I won't be a guinea pig.
I was wondering when someone would come out and say this.
1. Its about taxation. They need to be taxed.
2. ITS ABOUT THE CHILDREN
Typical liberal progressive bull****. OH and no one asked you to be a guinea pig, no one is asking to use them, so your point is mute.
comes into thread with no real knowledge on the topic, then tells people to stop talking. Classic!
Missed the point of those picts didn't ya
Hint google: moot :laugh:
0 -
I think it's banned in public places because I don't want people blowing smoke of any kind (even if you call it "vapor" to make it sound better) in my face. I think e-cigs are great if they help people quit cigarettes, but that doesn't mean I should have to inhale it.
Then they should ban perfume... Why should I have to inhale it0 -
0 -
if just a mild smell coming off of it and its not carcinogenic then i dont see a problem with it. its probably less offensive than a lot of perfume older ladies wear.
do older ladies choose pungent perfumes because their sense of smell is decreasing?
Hey. I'm old. I don't like perfume either.
I don't think it's an age thing. Some young people wear too much, too.
OP, does the eCig cast off an aroma? If it does, then I'd be all for banning them in buildings. Some smells trigger migraines for me. Smokers can smoke their eCigs outside.
Agree with the odor triggering migraines or even asthma in some people. Curious though are they banning them just in public places or in your own home as well?0 -
Its been fun to watch this unfold. I am sure there are people on this thread that dont smoke or quit and think everyone should stop smoking in all forms, because its "good for them", but have no problem getting behind the wheel of a 3000 pound vehicle after having a "few drinks" and driving only "half drunk" or buzzed. OR the ones that are overweight who say its safer not to smoke while their body gets weaker and weaker because they "cant lose weight". The hyprocracy of it all never ceases to amaze me. I would stir up a huge pile of it by starting up a new thread "All drinking in any form should be stopped in public and only allowed in your homes" and all overweight people should only eat 2000 calories a day and work out 5 days a week unitl they are at their ideal body weight. How would all of you that are overweight or are drinkers like those rules? You wouldnt. SO leave the people that smoke or use ecigs alone.
Yes!!! Love it!0 -
Sorry, but my fat doesn't blow off of me and into someone's face.Its been fun to watch this unfold. I am sure there are people on this thread that dont smoke or quit and think everyone should stop smoking in all forms, because its "good for them", but have no problem getting behind the wheel of a 3000 pound vehicle after having a "few drinks" and driving only "half drunk" or buzzed. OR the ones that are overweight who say its safer not to smoke while their body gets weaker and weaker because they "cant lose weight". The hyprocracy of it all never ceases to amaze me. I would stir up a huge pile of it by starting up a new thread "All drinking in any form should be stopped in public and only allowed in your homes" and all overweight people should only eat 2000 calories a day and work out 5 days a week unitl they are at their ideal body weight. How would all of you that are overweight or are drinkers like those rules? You wouldnt. SO leave the people that smoke or use ecigs alone.
Therein lies the issue a lot of people have with smoking.0 -
Of all the gin joints in all the towns in all the world, why you gotta smoke next to me? I don't care what that thing is made of if it stinks and it's not saving your life, get it the heck away from me. *gripsheadinfearofmigraine*
Cute picture, however the vapor stays visible for probably about .5 to 1.5 seconds. You can also only smell it for maybe that much time as it dissipates extremely fast.
It doesn't tar up walls. It doesn't pose a significant fire risk. You can get caffinated vapor as well, so hey, maybe you want to quit drinking all that coffee. Maybe you have an oral fixation and want to stop chewing on nails, pencils, toothpicks or bendy straws.
They may be referred to as ecigs, but they aren't really cigarettes at all. They can contain nicotine. They could probably contain anything you can distill into an oil. Most of said oil remains in the mouth of the person using the vapor device.
But I wouldn't want to sit next to someone chewing gum loudly so I think you're perfectly entitled to want to sit somewhere else.
Plusses are no cigarette butts. No need for ashtrays that people seem to think are trash cans.
Most of the newer versions are huge cyberpunk monstrosities that look like e-hookahs or some kind of crazy mad scientist torture device, so I think innocuous isn't a word I'd use, the tiny cigarette sized ones have a very low output comparatively, and not much battery life.
I find it a very interesting idea. I don't see any real downsides other than personal preferences and overblown fears of other peoples actions -- something you shouldn't be controlling anyhow. Please do not support a ban.0 -
But as a mum, I wouldn't want people smoking fake cigarettes around my kids. I don't want them seeing adults doing it and thinking it is fine. Luckily no one in my immediate family smokes so they don't really have to be around real smoking or e cigarettes at all right now.
^^ Yes!
Absolutely. If I had kids I wouldn't want to have to teach them about the dangers of smoking (or drinking, driving too fast, eating too much, unprotected sex, and so on.) You can't expect parents to, you know, actually parent their kids. Banning e-cigs is a much better option — particularly considering I don't smoke them.
FFS, people... :grumble:0 -
:drinker:But as a mum, I wouldn't want people smoking fake cigarettes around my kids. I don't want them seeing adults doing it and thinking it is fine. Luckily no one in my immediate family smokes so they don't really have to be around real smoking or e cigarettes at all right now.
^^ Yes!
Absolutely. If I had kids I wouldn't want to have to teach them about the dangers of smoking (or drinking, driving too fast, eating too much, unprotected sex, and so on.) You can't expect parents to, you know, actually parent their kids. Banning e-cigs is a much better option — particularly considering I don't smoke them.
FFS, people... :grumble:0 -
Typical liberal progressive bull****.
Typical Texan.OH and no one asked you to be a guinea pig, no one is asking to use them, so your point is mute.
ETA: I live in Texas. I'm just in for making sweeping generalizations about groups of people.0 -
Sorry, but my fat doesn't blow off of me and into someone's face.
You clearly don't ride the same public transport I ride, then...
EDIT: In all seriousness, if the differing impact that obesity and smoking have on other people is going to be used as a factor in arguing for a ban on the latter but not the former, a fairly convincing counterargument can be made by noting that the health costs associated with both obesity and smoking will ultimately be borne by others who aren't fat and/or don't smoke...0 -
I got to the end of this thread and my only real opinion was, "PLEASE, SOMEONE, EXPLAIN TO THAT PERSON WHAT 'MOOT' IS!!!!"
Damnit.
Okay. Wait. I lied: Opinion Forming. Honestly, I don't see the logic behind banning ecigs, as they don't produce smoke, or a bad smell, or anything that could reasonably be considered offensive to anyone else other than the fact that they sort of, sometimes, look like cigarettes. I don't get why we would even have the discussion (on a legal level) about banning ecigs when there are so many other- far more harmful- things out there that are not banned.0 -
haven't read other comments: my issue with e-cigs (as a perpetually quitting smoker) is that the physical habit is too close to actually smoking, which makes for one slippery slope in the right (wrong) environment. have done and seen this many times! better to use a substitution that's 2-3 degrees removed from holding a smoke in your hand.
when i quit for longer periods (longest duration: 18 months), patch PLUS gum or mini-lozenge, together, absolutely covered the physical part of the equation, allowing me to develop different body habits. Initially very weird -- you're never sure what to do with yourself. I carried a manicure set around and also chewed tons of regular & nicotine gum. At that time I could do burpees, that helped with rare cravings when i'd go down a step.
key thing for me was controlling negative affect (read: DON'T GO HOME FOR CHRISTMAS!) Good luck to your SO
banning them: idk. the e-cig does look like a cigarette. the stigma around smoking is vitally important in preventing future smokers & in encouraging existing smokers to quit.
maybe they could make it look different & get smokers to do different things with it, so it resembles a smoke less. more studies needed to figure out if actually dangerous, that would help. but i support people smoker-shaming.0 -
No, not banned. They are helping lots of people quit. There is no discernible odor. OOPs, I'm an older woman. 0
-
I got to the end of this thread and my only real opinion was, "PLEASE, SOMEONE, EXPLAIN TO THAT PERSON WHAT 'MOOT' IS!!!!"
Seriously, that whole exchange was painful to read.Okay. Wait. I lied: Opinion Forming. Honestly, I don't see the logic behind banning ecigs, as they don't produce smoke, or a bad smell, or anything that could reasonably be considered offensive to anyone else other than the fact that they sort of, sometimes, look like cigarettes. I don't get why we would even have the discussion (on a legal level) about banning ecigs when there are so many other- far more harmful- things out there that are not banned.
This.0 -
I was a smoker for over 36 years....the last few years I smoked almost 2 packets per day. Thanks to the E-cig I am now ONE YEAR less 20 days nicotine free and 3 mths E-cig free. I had tried several times before and never made it past a week. So I will support the E-cig....0
-
"Cigarette smoke stinks its offensive to the senses as well as the toxins emitted. Even still, they are not nearly as bad as what pours out of every single car."
Let's ban cars. I hate the smell of exhaust and it is poisoning ALL the air.0 -
I for one don't believe in banning anything. I don't want a government babysitter.0
-
If they can ban that then they can ban other things right? More government control? NO THANK YOU!
E-Cigs are helping our nation get healthier. Please don't do anything to deter that.0 -
The big tobacco companies are the ones coming up with the alternative technology for smokers....so I highly doubt it's a push by them.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions