It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Cigarettes and Vaping in Australia

page: 2
9
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 02:53 PM
link   
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

It feels like big brother wants me to vape,

So i wont.

Suck it.




posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 03:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blue Shift
Knowing a little bit about the macho attitudes in Australia, do you think vaping might be seen as "less manly" than puffing away on an old-fashioned cigarette?


Yeah well, I know a lot of people at my work refuse to switch to vaping... I suppose it could possibly be cause they consider it "less manly"... But honestly, impo, I'm almost positive its got more to do with them just being complete and utter simpletons!
edit on 12-9-2019 by Subaeruginosa because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 03:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Subaeruginosa

lol... you may have a point about it being too much effort for a lot of people to switch to vaping, especially if they require permission from a doctor to get nicotine e-liquids. I probably interpreted the question from Blue Shift the wrong way, if the question is about Australians who smoke seeing vaping as less manly, well that is probably true to some extent. It just seems more quirky to a lot of people, but I think that stigma is fading over time. Also it's not just men that smoke, and women probably have less issues switching over to a vape. Personally I don't use vapes but I do buy tobacco every now and then to mix with other "stuff" I smoke, it's actually almost as expensive as that other stuff now, and I'd have no issues cutting out the tobacco and just using a vape if it were legal here.
edit on 12/9/2019 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 04:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: solve
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

It feels like big brother wants me to vape,
So i wont.
Suck it.

I think it's more a matter of the big tobacco companies not wanting you to vape until the market shakes down and they can buy out the remaining companies at the top. Whether it's tobacco or something else. That's the way they roll.



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 04:20 PM
link   
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Your right about it being banned for retailers in Australia to sell nicotine fused vape juice. But you can order it from an overseas vendor.

It gets though customs just fine, with a full declaration of product description attached to the package.



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 04:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Your right about it being banned for retailers in Australia to sell nicotine fused vape juice. But you can order it from an overseas vendor.

From what I understand it's still illegal without a prescription regardless of how you obtain it. It may or may not make it through customs, like other drug related paraphernalia coming into Australia.



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 05:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Hefficide

oh my goodness!!!! 1/2 a million people per year you say??? So presuming you are at least 30, you alone must be aware of the 5 million people that have died since you were 20????

Surely you must personally know some of them.

Could you please name just 3 of them?

Hint: All deaths reputed to be caused by smoking each year is calculated with statistics by a computer program called SAMMEC (Smoking Attributable Mortality.......)

Please look it up yourself.

What they did is to gather death certificates by cause and ASSUMED a certain portion of the deaths were attributible to smoking ie there was 500,000 heart deaths, 10 % attributible to smoking. there was 10,000 cervical cancer deaths (now known to be 100 % caused by HPV) but still 50 % attributible to smoking and breast so on and son

No proof that smoking caused a single death....all statistics.

By the way, did you know that medical mistakes cause about 750,000 confirmed by autopsy. These actual deaths with real corpses are about twice as much as the statistical deaths attributed to smoking..

I would guess this proves that visiting your doc is far more dangerous than smoking.

PS - look up SAMMEC on your own. I ain't doing it for you



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 05:16 PM
link   
a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

I'm sure the statistics are a bit of an overestimation but that certainly doesn't mean no one is dying from smoking, it does cause serious health issues over the long term. Even if the number isn't nearly as high as reported, we should still be looking for ways to reduce the number, and using e-liquids which contain nicotine certainly seems to me like a much safer way of getting a nicotine hit. The point is, a large number of people do die from smoking real cigarettes, so it makes very little sense to ban vaping over half a dozen deaths, meaning there must be other motives at play.



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 05:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Your right about it being banned for retailers in Australia to sell nicotine fused vape juice. But you can order it from an overseas vendor.

From what I understand it's still illegal without a prescription regardless of how you obtain it. It may or may not make it through customs, like other drug related paraphernalia coming into Australia.


Its a little bit of a grey area... it may very well technically be banned for (illegal is such a harsh word) use in some states, due it not being approved for consumption. But its definitely not illegal to possess, hence why customs allow nicotine vape juice to be imported.

Its just one of those stupid red tape situations. I mean, nicotine obviously isn't illegal, its a drug your even allowed to use on the job... But at the same time, being the nanny state that Australia is, the TGA are never going to sanction a non-tobacco nicotine product for consumption.



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 06:00 PM
link   
Can they not order vape juice online?
I’m sure if you order a large enough quantity of juice, you could even make a decent side hustle.



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 07:59 PM
link   
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

The list of chemicals they put into tailor made cigarettes', has never come under scrutiny because they were all approved by the FDA .The even put rice as a filler into to them which is a known carcinogen when burnt. The rise in cost is just another tax take, which hits the poorest.



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 09:57 PM
link   
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

ok so you admit its an over-estimation. So you are at least an intelligent human being.

In amongst all of the propaganda, you need to be aware that all of the studies that were done that "added to the mounting evidence" and so sincerely shocked anti-smokers to the core, were in fact epidimiology. Statistical studies. Now epidimiology is a "soft" science. It was developed to highlight areas of potential hard science research, using mathematics so that research resources were not wasted.

But what most people don't know is that a result that was "significantly" different from the control merely meant mathematically signifant and not clinically significant. In fact, a study had to have a result that was at least 200 % and preferably 400 % different from the control, in order that the researcher could bring the results to those attention of a hard science practitioner as a subject that might be interesting for further resource.

Please google the term "Crisis of Replication"

I want to fully understand, that most if not all of the epidiology studies have NEVER been confirmed by replication and are essentially worthless.

Once you understand the implications of this, we can talk some more.



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 10:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Blue Shift

Yup.

We are just seeing an existing dominating force exert their influence to reaffirm dominance. T-Posing, if you will.

Since they were losing more market share than they wanted (which is any at all), and couldnt reassert the level of marketshare they desired (which is all of it), they decided to do the typical course of action.

Which is to grab on to an anomalous event (create one if one isnt forthcoming), and prop it up as "imperative!" "critical!" "children!"

It doesnt matter if that event is indicative of anything in the legitimate market. It only needs to be tangentially related and framed correctly for people to gobble it up.

Then, create a framework which will weed out all competitors and simply give it some time. Typically through regulation, governmental hoops which require resource levels unattainable for smaller businesses, etc. Folks will "rah rah" the whole time, delivering social and cultural support. By the time they have taken the market back over, those ardently "rah rah-ing" will have moved on and will be none the wiser.

Even better if the whole process can yield benefits for ancillary groups, like the government. And, the momentum of the "rah rah" can simply be redirected to the next thing. Only important part is to make sure there arent too many choices to "rah rah" about at a given time. But, thats achieved easily enough through controlled information vectors.

¯_(ツ)_/¯
edit on 12-9-2019 by Serdgiam because: It was a doppleganger, I swear!



posted on Sep, 13 2019 @ 05:55 AM
link   
a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

That is a big can of worms you brought up there with how the statics are measured. Transparency and accountability of data affects a lot of areas. I would like to see a lot more hard facts with vaccinations, what I have seen is concerning.

With all the skills and resources required to practically process the data, conflicts of interest do exist. When science becomes politicized we are destined for idiocracy.



posted on Sep, 13 2019 @ 07:31 AM
link   
a reply to: kwakakev

you are absolutely correct that it is a very very big can of worms.

The government has announced that it will govern with due respect to scientific evidence. Now we need to determine what scientific evidence is.

I am not proposing to do all the work while sit back and criticize. I suggest we first discuss what epidiology actually is and what exactly it can be and what its limitations are.

we can then proceed to discuss the campaign of propaganda based entirely on statistics that has people people that smoking kills half a million people a year without ever producing a single body.

And we can end with examining SAMMEC data to show how many diseases have been attributed to smoking that have actually been proven to be caused by other means and how anti-smoking have not reduced the disease burden despite the harrassment of innocent people of companies for fun and profit



posted on Sep, 13 2019 @ 07:44 AM
link   
a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

I understand exactly what you are saying but it has little relevance to the core point here, because the fact is smoking does do a lot of damage to your body even if that damage has been overstated. I know a lot of smokers and I was a smoker myself for a period of time, it's a bad habit and will cause your health to deteriorate over time. Therefore it would make sense to suggest vaping as a safer alterative or as a way for smokers to quit, and it makes very little sense to ban it.



posted on Sep, 13 2019 @ 08:15 AM
link   
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Cigarette smoking is a choice, if you choose to smoke then you choose to accept the ramifications whether that be health, financial or anything else.

Only Additive personalities have a problem with giving up smoking ! - even to the extent as you described in that your friends still smoke despite great financial difficulties.

They clearly have prioritizing issues as does all other addicts hence the financial hardship as it's not just the smokes - these personalities let this addict virus inadvertently control their lives direction in every way.

As for vaping, what a waste of time, i mean ex cigarette smokers may as well hang a sign around their necks saying - im an addict i was addicted to cigarettes, however im still an addict as i still smoke/simulate smoke through this crappy device as im still addicted to the habit itself.

"Person liberty" - No such thing unless your ignorant.

This world is take take take, most think their free - rubbish very very very few are.

If people dont know when to say stop - Even at the verge of loosing it all then tbeir choices are clear. So --

No sympathy, who cares what the taxes are or become? ???? Smokers deserve everything they get then.

ps : im a smoker i have been for 25+ yrs - i hate it, i still do it, im a addict and I deserve all ramifications that may come as a result. I was a vaporor in a attempt to give up tobacco smoking but not smoking so still a addict etc etc.
Point here- we all know- we ignore for whatever reason- we therefore are weak addicts- we deserve everything we get.

We need to drink a glass of concrete and harden up. Or shut up. Simple.

edit on 13-9-2019 by CthruU because: 1



posted on Sep, 13 2019 @ 08:42 AM
link   
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

This core to the story. It is very very much core to the story.

This is ATS. "We all know..." is a debating tactic to claim victory without even having to prove a single point.

Is smoking unhealthy??? I have looked at the evidence very very closely and I see no evidence of it at all. You quote massive numbers of dead bodies only to find out that its all mathematics.

However if you are willing to concede the point....lets talk about the government and Big Pharma started in anti-smoking campaign to convince the public that anyone who makes a choice to do something that the government has deemed to unhealthy should have to empty their wallets immediately into government coffers and how Big Pharma made Billions selling every their useless gummy patchy things.

No vaping has come along and upset the apple cart. Government is not getting their taxes and sales for Big Pharma products have fallen off the chart.

Lets talks about all the unhealthy choices out there (soda taxes, fat taxes,) and how non-smokers are now going to have to pick up the slack for the those smokers that quit.

Cant expect the government to do without its taxes do you.



posted on Sep, 13 2019 @ 10:35 AM
link   
a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

The thought of working in epidiology hurts my head, there is a lot of data and relationships between chemistry, genetics, diet, society and the environment going on. The rise of big data and processing tools is helping make some sense of it all. The pattern recognition capabilities is helping make some connections. How Google has been gaming the search algorithms is a warning when the facts don't match a corporate agenda.

The privacy concerns of open access to personal information is also a tricky one in having a peer reviewed body of evidence to work with.

As a smoker i am aware of the health impacts smoking does have. Have tried giving up many times over the years, it is a huge mental battle and without a commitment it does not work. I will buy smokes before I buy food. Took about 2 years giving up for my body and energy levels to feel better. Having a cigarette one night with a few drinks is enough to take up smoking again. On average i expect smoking will take 3-4 years off an expected life span, there are exceptions and lots of unknowns.

I have tried vaping in the past, got a sore throat and gave it up. Being something new the long term effects will take some time to work their way through. Lots of different things that can be put in it makes it a complex one to work out. Can see a potential for vaping to be cleaner than tobacco.



posted on Sep, 13 2019 @ 10:38 AM
link   
a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks


Is smoking unhealthy??? I have looked at the evidence very very closely and I see no evidence of it at all.

Have you ever actually smoked for a long period of time? You get a terrible smokers cough and at some point start coughing up chunks of black crap. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that inhaling many different dangerous chemicals is going to damage your body, and acting like it's perfectly healthy isn't going to help the case for dialing back the nanny state approach, it will only make it seem like we're completely ignoring the risks of smoking. Clearly I agree with the fundamental point you are making, that's what this entire thread is about, but we have to do it in a logical and sensible way so that the argument is taken seriously by anti-smokers.
edit on 13/9/2019 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



new topics




 
9
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join