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.

 

E-cigarettes banned in workplaces in Boston, and city prohibits sales to minors

page: 4
19
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 2 2011 @ 07:45 PM
link   
reply to post by dtrock78
 


I never said Diethylene glycol was used in pharmaceutical grade nicotine inhalers. I said Diethylene glycol can form naturally in nicotine. The same nicotine used in e-cigs is the same nicotine used for those inhalers patches, gum etc and they can have acceptable trace amounts of Diethylene glycol in them according to the FDA guidelines for generally accepted safe for human consumption trace amounts.

The FDA released two forms of this report.One the official report and a "made for consumer consumption" press release. The press release which was wide spread twisted the facts of the report to make it sound like e-liquid had "Diethylene glycol a chemical used in anti freeze" in it. The report said nothing of the kind.

It is when you go back over the report itself and do some digging that you find that the Diethylene glycol was only found in 2 out of 18 samples, that this was actually expected by the researchers who knew Diethylene glycol can form naturally in nicotine at safe trace amounts. Then when you discover that the very same nicotine based NRT's approved by the FDA also can contain these trace amounts of Diethylene glycol and is deemed to be at safe levels for human consumption you get a broader since of the corruption and hood winking done by the FDA.

The point is that people throw out things like Diethylene glycol used in antifreeze is found in e-cigs therefore e-cigs must be poison. These people are either ignorant of the facts or are purposefully hiding all the facts to dishonestly push their agenda.

You say,

Ah. 50% quit rate of smoking....I was under the initial assumption you were talking about a 50% quit rate, period. As in, no tobacco/nicotine products at all. Not just shuffling your money to another vendor to continue supporting your addiction.


We do not feel there is any real difference. Many people do quit all smoking even the e-cigs after weaning themselves down from nicotine and not just switch smoking/vaping methods.. The act of effectively getting someone to stop inhaling harmful tobacco is to us, QUIT For Good. ( most of the time) You see only a tiny number of vapers who have been vaping at least 6 months ever go back to smoking at all. Most of us cannot stand cigarettes anymore. The nicotine is different in the way it effects you, without all the extra added harmful carcinogens of burning tobacco. We are less addicted to this milder form of nicotine and still vape because it's enjoyable. We do not see the need to quit vaping altogether if one does not choose to because there is very little health risk in it like other forms of tobacco consumption.


edit on 2-12-2011 by JohnPhoenix because: addition




posted on Dec, 2 2011 @ 08:40 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 12:13 AM
link   
reply to post by dtrock78
 


Many people, like myself, had difficulties with other smoking cessation products, because second only to the nicotine addiction, I CRAVED the feel of the inhale and have a general oral fixation. i wore down one side of my tooth biting my nails and pens during previous attempts to quit. Though initially I switched over to an e-cigarette as a less harmful way to subdue nicotine cravings, I actually found that my severe highs and lows of cravings and nic buzz were leveled out because I was just grabbing one or two puffs about every 15 minutes, and found that I can go hours longer without even thinking about needing it than I ever could with a cigarette. If I left for the grocery store, a mere mile away, and realized I forgot my cigs, I would stop to buy a pack, no way around it. But after the initial withdrawal of the other thousands of added ADDICTIVE chemicals added to keep smokers smoking, I get by on a markedly reduced dose of nicotine daily, and have actually gradually been decreasing the nicotine strength liquid - not because I'm forcing myself to get down to 0, but I naturally just crave less. This was of course, without an immediate set plan to do so (though I had planned on starting weaning off within the year), while many people actually intend to lower dosages down to 0 mg, until they feel that then they can do without the physical oral habit.

Nothing pisses me off more than the rampant QuitSmoking Forums who say that this is cheating, because it's still smoking, but uh, wasn't the idea to quit smoking (key word here, kids - SMOKE-ing) cigarettes? I haven't had a cigarette, and you can't call this little metal black stick a cigarette, because it isn't one. One reason people choose the gum is to satiate the oral fixation, also why years ago a product similar to the e-cig was put out, and was called a Nicotine Inhaler (sounds smart and doctor-y, doesn't it?). Yet their [ahem] NICOTINE REPLACEMENT THERAPY methods, ie: patch, gum are on such a different level, because they come with fancy pharmacy names thought up by smart marketing teams. You're getting your nicotine, I'm getting mine. Get off your high horses, thinking you're better, and realize that all the 'patchys, chewers, and vapers are all really peers, with the fact that they all know what it's like to be addicted to burning carcinogenic tobacco sticks, and should just frickin support each other.

I didn't realize this topic gets me so heated, but... damn. (shakes shoulders, stretches neck)
edit on 3-12-2011 by Wifabif because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 12:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Wifabif
 


If it helps you quit, it helps you quit, regardless if you think it "counts" or not.



posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 12:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Maslo
 


Nicotine is found in eggplants, tomatoes, and other vegetables... I wouldn't worry about inhaling the particles of the vapor when people readily eat it daily!



posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 06:44 AM
link   
I would say by all means ban the selling of these to minors, the same as for regular cigarettes and also alchohol, but at the very least these should be available to tobacco smokers.
I've been using one for two and a half years now and when I look back at my time as a smoker (25 years) it was like I was ill.
NO MORE Coughing like crazy in the shower, chest pains, shortness of breath, being 'smelly' etc.
Every day I wake up feeling great and yet I still enjoy my 'habit'.
It was easy. Much cheaper as well.
Oh yeah, and I stopped smoking pot, don't need it now to feel good.
edit on 3-12-2011 by ENGLISH BOB because: bad grammar



posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 07:54 AM
link   
Inch by inch, bit by bit.



posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 12:34 PM
link   
You have to realize anti-smoking nazis were never really interested in people's health as an end unto itself.

1. They have been planning something like Obamacare for a long time (IMHO). Lung cancer costs money. This is the same reason why insurance companies refused to cover preexisting conditions in the first place. They don't like losing money. It's a business. Not a service that is actually there to benefit the people who pay these leeches.

2. So they set out to find every reason to ban smoking. No matter how petty. Obviously, even smoking real cigarettes outdoors isn't really going to harm passers by unless they happen to have some seriously sensitive asthma or something (Which happens but is rare and those who have it can easily avoid smokers standing in a designated smoking area.

No. The real reason is that they do believe they own your body. Because they intend to force everyone in the country into a health insurance policy, they literally feel they have the right to tell us how to live.

So where do these e cigarettes fit in? Well, obviously they're not as harmful as a real cigarette. But there could be some health effects and we all know how insurance companies are. They pinch every last penny.

Nextly, even smoking a fake cigarette is an expression of individuality. These people are absolutely opposed to all individuality unless it doesn't conflict with anything they have going on at the moment.

Additionally, it's difficult for cops and other "enforcers" to tell the difference between an e cigarette and a real one from a glance. When the smoking bans are basically worldwide, they want to be able to spot anyone who might even possibly be breaking the law at a glance.

Finally, in this day and age, smokers tend to be individualists. There was a time when being a smoker was just following the herd (when everyone was doing it). Now that it's so unpopular, it takes balls to light a cigarette anywhere near a group of people. So, as usual, it's easy to spot and punish individualists by the things that make them stand out from the crowd. If you have a citation on your record for smoking they know right away that you're not a sheep.

They simply don't care about people. As evidence of that fact, if they really cared about people, they would have to take the wishes of individuals into account. And they obviously don't. It's all about money and control. As usual.
edit on 3-12-2011 by BrianFlanders because: I suck

edit on 3-12-2011 by BrianFlanders because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 03:30 PM
link   
You have to realize anti-smoking nazis were never really interested in people's health as an end unto itself.

1. They have been planning Obamacare for a long time (IMHO). Lung cancer costs money. This is the same reason why insurance companies refused to cover preexisting conditions in the first place. They don't like losing money. It's a business. Not a service that is actually there to benefit the people who pay these leeches.

2. So they set out to find every reason to ban smoking. No matter how petty. Obviously, even smoking real cigarettes outdoors isn't really going to harm passers by unless they happen to have some seriously sensitive asthma or something (Which happens but is rare and those who have it can easily avoid smokers standing in a designated smoking area.

No. The real reason is that they do believe they own your body. Because they intend to force everyone in the country into a health insurance policy, they literally feel they have the right to tell us how to live.



posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by BrianFlanders
Additionally, it's difficult for cops and other "enforcers" to tell the difference between an e cigarette and a real one from a glance. When the smoking bans are basically worldwide, they want to be able to spot anyone who might even possibly be breaking the law at a glance.


That part is not really that correct. Some e-cigs look like analogs. Most don't. I have 2 models in use and neither of them look anything like real cigs even though their design is a rod. Then there is tons of box mods etc. that are actually square boxes etc.



posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 08:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps

Originally posted by BrianFlanders
Additionally, it's difficult for cops and other "enforcers" to tell the difference between an e cigarette and a real one from a glance. When the smoking bans are basically worldwide, they want to be able to spot anyone who might even possibly be breaking the law at a glance.


That part is not really that correct. Some e-cigs look like analogs. Most don't. I have 2 models in use and neither of them look anything like real cigs even though their design is a rod. Then there is tons of box mods etc. that are actually square boxes etc.


Well, again, from a distance, you're putting an object that (more or less) looks like a cigarette into your mouth and blowing what looks like smoke. They would generally have to get and look closer to see it's not a cigarette.



posted on Dec, 4 2011 @ 12:08 AM
link   
Yeah but most of those you can see from 10 meters easily to not be real cigs. Blue leds, big ass tanks, huge cones etc. are a dead give away



posted on Dec, 4 2011 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by sarra1833

E-cigarettes banned in workplaces in Boston, and city prohibits sales to minors


www.boston.com

The new Boston regulations require that e-cigarettes be placed behind store counters, like tobacco products, and that they not be sold to anyone under age 18. The workplace ban includes restaurant patios and decks, and loading dock.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
bostonglobe.com


The second part(about outlawing it's sale to minors) I agree with. The first part sounds like typical Puritanism, leftist do gooders that smell their own fart BS.



posted on Dec, 4 2011 @ 07:25 PM
link   
reply to post by BrianFlanders
 


I don't understand why it matters that some look like analog cigarettes. Because something looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, smells like a duck, it's a duck? Not all the time. Generally speaking, many of the brands that are made to look like analogs have LED lights on the end that are different colors, other than an imitation of a burning ember. Personally i chose a model that, in terms of shape and size, resembles an analog (but always fun colors like lime green or simple black), so as not to draw unnecessary attention to myself with something that could be perceived as some sort of paraphernalia in my car, but I tend to like the LEDs that are blue or green so that from a distance, or in a room with someone else, it is clear that there is no combustion or tobacco involved. (I also, when receiving odd glances, hold it in my hand or put it in my pocket to passively say, "this is not a cigarette."

I can imagine you are against hand-rolled cigarettes, and believe they should be just as illegal as marijuana, as they resemble them so closely. I just don't see this argument as holding much weight, and could really only be used as a last resort against the e-cig's future, not as a substantial qualifier for discontinuation.



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 12:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wifabif
reply to post by BrianFlanders
 


I don't understand why it matters that some look like analog cigarettes.

I can imagine you are against hand-rolled cigarettes, and believe they should be just as illegal as marijuana, as they resemble them so closely. I just don't see this argument as holding much weight, and could really only be used as a last resort against the e-cig's future, not as a substantial qualifier for discontinuation.


Me?

Oh no. I think you got my post wrong. I was just speculating as to some of the possible reasons why TPTB might attack e cigs. If there is even the slightest possibility they could get away with saying they thought it was the real thing, they will no doubt try. I wasn't saying they should. I think people should (at the very least) be able to smoke real cigs outdoors.



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 01:30 AM
link   
This is cigarette industrys worst nightmare pretty much. Those guys have made billions from selling their cancer rolls. Now there is an alternative that delivers the nicotine in a better format and they didn't get to patent it first. So there's the reason why there is a huge resistance to this.



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 02:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps
This is cigarette industrys worst nightmare pretty much. Those guys have made billions from selling their cancer rolls. Now there is an alternative that delivers the nicotine in a better format and they didn't get to patent it first. So there's the reason why there is a huge resistance to this.


Then jump on the band wagon, start selling their own brand of e cigs, or their own flavors of juice..

Break into the juice market and start doing research, they could make tons of money.....

Adapt to change, you cant stop it............



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 01:38 PM
link   
Yeah that would've been the right way to go. Just like music industry tobacco industry is reluctant to accept a fundamental change on how things work. They made billions with the old ways so any change scares them. They recon they can fight this and get it banned rather than join in and then have to compete with all the smaller businesses that are already in.



posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 08:39 AM
link   
reply to post by godWhisperer
 


Its strange to me because if the government loved us they would possibly encourage ecig above actual cigs. I wonder who instigated the ban.
I react to any perfume too. Migraine.
I also know alot of other people who get a bad reaction, I do wonder whether the fuss is a distraction from the really toxic pollution that is truly destroying many more lives.



posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 09:41 AM
link   
All governments love exactly two things. Taxes and power. They dont love people. We made quick estimates of the impact of e-cigs in Finland and came around direct loss of 30 million € next year in lost cigarette taxes. They just raised the taxes hoping to gather additional 50 million €. We're costing them money hence we are the enemy. This estimate doesn't even include effects of prolonged life expectancy which is even higher.



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join