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.

 

Conspiracy to kill the electronic cigarette?

page: 1
12
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 12 2009 @ 01:04 PM
link   
I actually found out about the electronic cigarette here on ATS about 3-4 months ago.
I purchased one, and the day I started using it was the last day I smoked a real cigarette.

For months the news reports have been favorable to the e-cig and now congress as well as the FDA is trying to ban them in the USA. The ban is not based on the fact that they are a danger, but just because they have not been tested.
If there have been no testing to determine their safety, then what reason would Senator Lautenberg want to kill them?

thehill.com...

Historically this senator has been the most vocal critic of big tobacco, so finally when a product comes to market that gets people to quit smoking on the first try, it is suspicious that such a product would not get this senators approval.

The FDA is also to blame. They have already approved the use of nicotine substitutes in the form of hand gel, water, gum and a patch as well as a prescription pill. Nicotine is an addictive drug, but it is not a new drug that needs testing. Everyone knows what nicotine is. The rules the FDA has created when it comes to marketing an approved drug in a different method of delivery is just more Washington red tape to slow the market down so the drug industry has time to attack new products.

So far all my smoking friends have tried the electronic cigarette and have been able to quit regular cigarettes the same day. That is a 100% rate of quitting. Not one Nicotine replacement therapy device or product can make that claim.

It seems to me the senator is doing as little as possible to maintain the illusion that he is fighting tobacco companies, when in fact he is just playing politics. If he truly wanted to see the tobacco industry go away, he would be backing the NRT industry and fully supporting the electronic cigarette.

To me this move is designed to allow big tobacco the chance to counteract the e-cig industry.




posted on Apr, 12 2009 @ 02:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by robwerden
To me this move is designed to allow big tobacco the chance to counteract the e-cig industry.


100 per cent agree. The tobacco industry is worth billions. Loads of people want to quit at the moment and this could be a godsend to them. I smoked for 2 years and ended up with severe chest twinges which scared the hell out of me. If anyone out there smokes check out the works of Linus Pauling for heart health.
If you read a little on how the FDA works... Most of the people in the top echelons are pharmaceutical board members on sabbatical.



posted on Apr, 12 2009 @ 08:48 PM
link   
This is hilarious. He wants to do clinical studies to determine whether or not the product is safe and to assess the long-term health effects.

In the meantime, keep smoking those cigarettes because those studies are done and we know the long term health effects, even though they're all bad.




posted on Apr, 12 2009 @ 09:44 PM
link   
Do you wnat the results to the e-cig studies. E-Cigerettes cause cancer. This will be the result of any study given. If there is no study then we don't know if there are in side effects that aren't so good. They should have tested and been properly approved before they were sold. IMHO...Oh and I am a smoker.



posted on Apr, 12 2009 @ 09:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Ant4AU
 


Right, and just because they cause cancer doesn't mean they should be banned, especially if they help people lay off the tar -if they want to do so-.

I mean, ciggs aren't banned and they cause cancer. Tanning beds aren't banned, and they do too.



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by robwerden
 


The giant pharmaceuticals are behind many of the patches and pills designed to get people to quit smoking. Why would they want to see a cash cow disappear? It probably has more to do with big pharm than with the tobacco companies. Giant tobacco has targeted third world countries and Eastern Europe with their poison.



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 03:58 PM
link   
Check this thread to find the answer.

FDA To Control Tobacco for the first time ever!!!

The American people in recent history placed the Democrats in complete control of the Federal government. And for those not in the know, Democrats love big government and control over everything they can lay their hands on. Now with the FDA in control of tobacco and it's primary drug, nicotine, why do you find it surprising a Democratic Senator like Lautenberg would want to federally regulate e-cigarettes? It's just second nature to them to regulate everything they can lay their hands on.



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 04:25 PM
link   
I think that is just quite ridiculous. Nicotine has been tested and proved to be a safe, even good drug for human beings.


It’s a smoking fact that while we all know smokers are addicted to nicotine but it is actually a naturally occuring compound. Trace elements are found in common foods and vegetables such as potatoes, tomatoes, bell peppers, cauliflower, eggplant, chili peppers, and even some teas. Nicotine is known to switch on receptors on the surface of cells in certain parts of the brain, causing these neurons to release the Neuro-transmitter dopamine, a chemical that is associated with feelings of pleasure. In its natural state, and when ingested through the digestive system, nicotine is safe and non-toxic. It does not present the health hazards associated with smoking cigarettes. Additionally, the nicotine molecule is showing great promise in medical research and clinical studies for the treatment of diseases such as Alzheimer and Parkinson's disease.


From:

ezinearticles.com...

Anyone could search this on google and find that nicotine is natural and could even been used to cure/treat some diseases. There is nothing wrong with nicotine otherwise, our bodies would reflect that a is toxin in us and we would get sick. But we dont get sick from nicotine or e-cigarettes, it may be very addicting because it stimulates the hypothalamus to secrete dopamine causing an overall good feeling.



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 11:22 PM
link   
Of course they want to get rid of the electronic cigarette: they aren't manufactured by pharma companies. This whole anti-smoking movement was concocted by politicians, who were paid off by the pharma companies to tax and harass smokers into quitting, so they would have to rely on prescription and over-the-counter cessation aids.


TheAssociate

edit to clarify

[edit on 16-4-2009 by TheAssociate]



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 11:44 PM
link   
Same thing is happening in Canada.

Health Canada puts foot down on electronic cigarettes


"Although these electronic smoking products may be marketed as a safer alternative to conventional tobacco products and, in some cases, as an aid to quitting smoking, electronic smoking products may pose risks such as nicotine poisoning and addiction," Health Canada said.

In the U.S., Senator Frank R. Lautenberg sent the U.S. Food and Drug Administration a letter Monday asking the agency to ensure e-cigarettes are not sold until they've been studied further.



May pose addiction risk?? And cigarettes? It just looks like a way to stop selling them until they figure out a way to tax it to me.



posted on Apr, 17 2009 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by TheAssociate
 


Actually, Big Tobacco lost the argument when all those secret documents came out about cancer and addiction to their products. Big Tobacco moved their markets to selling their poison products to third world countries.

Big Pharmaceutical companies took advantage of the health craze and began marketing their pills and patches to the smokers who wanted to quit. They make quite a killing on their products and have a powerful lobby that replaced the Tobacco Lobby.

Neither Big Tobacco or Big Pharmaceutical has the middle class person in their interests.

BTW, most giant tobacco companies are well diversified, and I would not be surprised to find them sitting on a big pharmaceutical company's board of directors.



posted on Apr, 17 2009 @ 03:44 PM
link   
Although I am against an outright ban of e-cigarettes, I do think they should fall under the purview of the FDA and the sale of them be Federally regulated, just as cigarettes are.

The reasons are not because of the e-cigarette device but because of the contents of the cartridges themselves.

The cartridges, depending on the manufacturer, may contain 0 - 6% Nicotene and 0-4.5% Tobacco Essence. All of the other substances contained in them are no different than most inhalers.

So, although they could be marketed as a health-risk free smoking alternative, and that would be true for those cartridges that contain 0% Nicotene and 0% Tobacco Essence, other cartridges that do contain those substances would carry the same health risks that come with smoking normal cigarettes.

Since the contents may contain the same substances as other Tobacco Products such as cigarettes, they should be regulated in the same fashion.

Personally, I smoke. I smoke Kreteks. I have no intention or desire to give up smoking in the near future. However, after discovering that not only are there e-cigarettes, but Kretek Cartridges for e-cigarettes, I plan on throwing away the real thing and using e-cigarettes exclusively (before they get banned). Obviously it isn't going to provide me any health benefit to do such, as they will contain Nicotene and Tobacco Essence, just like their real counterparts, but it will get rid of that nasty lingering cigarette smoke smell which makes it all the more appealing to me.

Too bad they will most likely be banned.



posted on Apr, 17 2009 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by ravenshadow13
reply to post by Ant4AU
 


Right, and just because they cause cancer doesn't mean they should be banned, especially if they help people lay off the tar -if they want to do so-.

I mean, ciggs aren't banned and they cause cancer. Tanning beds aren't banned, and they do too.


If we banned everything that causes cancer, then we would have to ban everything! Oh, and stop breathing, that causes cancer too.



posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 06:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by fraterormus

Obviously it isn't going to provide me any health benefit to do such, as they will contain Nicotene and Tobacco Essence, just like their real counterparts, but it will get rid of that nasty lingering cigarette smoke smell which makes it all the more appealing to me.

Too bad they will most likely be banned.


I strongly disagree with your statement that you will not receive any health benefit. I started eCigs a month ago, and I am already able to run distances and speeds on the treadmill that I last ran when I was an 18 year old army recruit.
My body is rejoicing in all the extra oxygen it is getting, people are commenting about how good I am looking, and that my mood is so much better. I sleep, eat and love (excuse the euphemism) better, and my son is very proud of me.
Now I feel like holding hands with someone and singing Kumbaya.


I had no plans to quit! EVER! I love smoking but hated feeling my body slowly fall apart, my teeth suffering, my sinuses blocked... now I am able to get the nicotine without all the disgusting, nasty side-effect.

If they ban this here in SA, I will just make my own (albeit primitive) model ... luckily here in SA we don't get tasered for minor transgressions like that. Well, not yet.



posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 02:58 PM
link   
I first heard (or took notice) of these things a week or so ago when they were briefly mentioned during a CNN segment. Noticing this thread today, I decided to check it out and, in turn, was prodded into doing a bit more research.

For the first time, I'm excited about a product such as this - it seems a completely logical method for eliminating many negative factors of cigarette smoking and I actually think it might work for me (and that's a good part of the battle, yes?). I've found several places to purchase online but, unfortunately have not found a local vendor. None of the area smoke shops, pharmacies, etc. have ever heard of them. Too bad - I wanted to try it today, but seems I may have to wait a few days for postal delivery.

My one concern is brand quality of the starter kit. Some reviews specify some brand problems with mist quantity for inhalation, some compare taste to 'paint thinner,' etc. I'll continue to read up before actual purchase, but hoping maybe someone here has experience or recommendations for brand available in U.S.?



posted on Apr, 28 2009 @ 07:57 AM
link   
I am now unable to get my own model eCigarette as my supplier has just informed me that DHL is refusing all eCigarette parcels in Hong Kong and returning them to China.
I am still trying to find out why items shipped in DHL are getting this treatment, but it may have something to do with the eCigarette ban in Hong Kong.


This does not make sense as the items are not being sold or delivered in Hong Kong.



posted on May, 20 2009 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by robwerden
 


Not only is there a near 100% quit rate (anecdotaly) rate first try (some people still use about 3-4 cigarettes a day. But this is often going from 30-40 cigarettes a day), but MIRACULOUSLY, people are reporting that when they try smoking an analog cigarette after having quit for weeks/months, THEY FIND THAT THEY Do NOT LIKE IT. IT IS RELAPSE PROOF! What other product can do this?! This is one of a kind WORKING cure to stop smoking

They will not ban these, but a new tax is coming. (IMO)



posted on May, 21 2009 @ 05:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Kaytagg
 


A tax is understandable ... I for one would not oppose a tax on e-Cigs (not the huge tax that is being applied to alcohol and normal cigs) but a normal tax as per any other item.

A ban is downright ridiculous.

I have gone from a carton a week to a pack a week ... thats a 90% reduction in smoking!



posted on May, 21 2009 @ 05:38 AM
link   
Apart from addiction,e-cigs actually have health benefits.Nicotine is only toxic in large amounts..considering all that is in these are nicotine vapour and maybe some type of flavour.They are actually good for you,alot of research has shown quite a few benefits of nicotine including cutting the risk of alzheimers.I quit for 8 weeks once and the physical withdrawal was quite easy i must say,the habit and ritual of smoking was easily 10X harder to get over.Im going to be ordering one of these soon for this exact reason.As for the ban i dont know about america but it wont hold up in court over here in the uk.Not a chance in hell.



posted on May, 21 2009 @ 07:13 AM
link   
its is an easy one ,
its because of the Anti inside tobaco smoking laws and that they back fire , the law only applies to tobaco,

they did the same thing over here , first they bann the the normal tobaco and then when the e-cig came that dosent hold any tobaco they try and deley it by saying its not approved yet cause of lack in studies.

talk about hypocrits, they formulate laws that wont even affect them for 10 years , then most of the people that came up with this "hitler butt bann"
will have died , prematurely anyways since smoker tend to outlive non smokers by years , an other funnie thing is that non smokers tend to get cancer and die from it more frequently then smokers......

anyways , the law is not towards smokers, its toward the people working there at the place where people used to smoke, not towards the customer.




It is said that there are 400,000 premature deaths caused by smoking in the United States per year, but did you know that if a smoker dies at 92, it is still considered premature because he smoked? In an analysis of ages of those 400,000 deaths computed by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) SAMMEC (Smoking Attributable Mortality, Morbidity and Economic Costs) program shows some interesting numbers. Smoking "victims" lived longer than non-smokers, by about 2 years - 71.9 vs. 70. Over 70,000, 17% died "prematurely" at ages greater than 85. Only 1900, or 0.5% of smoking "victims" died at ages less than 35, while 143,000, or 8% of non-smokers died at ages less than 35, mostly due to auto accidents and drug abuse.




to bad the full article is not around any more for some reason but it could be found here american chronlicle

funnie thing is that adolf hitler tried the same thing on its geman followers before the second world war ,

how come the politicians always tend to do and favour what hitler did ,
one nation under the sun ,
same currency ,
enforce "national" id´s ,
the butt ban

just feels a bit hypocritic that after 60 years of numbing ww2 propaganda about , they did this and they did that , only thing we learnt is to do the same frikking things , almost as if ww2 was never fought or it was fought but people forgot why or never bothered to ask them that fought as to why they fought.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<<   2 >>

log in

join