European Ban on E-Cigs?

songbot

Hi,

I don't normally post that much on forums but i have been reading a little bit about the proposed ban on e-cigs and its enough to get me worried. I read today that France has proposed a blanket ban on them and Italy is about to follow suit.
I have only been vaping for 5 months, I use the VIP cigarette like ones and I haven't smoked since i started using them. I smoked for 23 years before this. they have quite literally changed my life. But I know if they ban them that i will go back to smoking again. I don't want to, but i know myself well enough to know that i have a habit and it will continue on being a habit.
I was wondering if maybe we should set up some kind of petition like they have done in england to tell our stories to our government? I know they are useless but if we do nothing at all then we will just be accepting this and not having our voices heard.
I am not hugely knowledgeable about politicians and how to get the petition to them but am willing to set it up if someone can just give me a little help on where to direct it - Our opinions need to be heard not just by our own government, but by the European Commission too.

this is the english site: www.fightthevapingban.com

thanks, I hope we can do something to help in the fight against the ban!

steam123

Yes, This is problem that government start ban on E Cigarette. This is not for help people but help their fund. If they allow E Cigarette then their income on real Cigarette goes down.

Karl_c

December. It's pencilled in for December.

lensman

Karl_c wrote: »

December. It's pencilled in for December.

have a look at my post just below this thread, e liquid in Irish customs, what do you think ?

Karl_c

Tough ****.

Xantia

They are looking at it now I think

Link Here

Karl_c

Xantia wrote: »

They are looking at it now I think

Link Here

That's interesting.

Going Forward

Just to give an example of what "we" as vapers in Ireland are up against, have a look at this example of the conclusions of a US report, supposedly written by medically qualified academics:

http://www.irishhealth.com/article.html?id=18332

It was posted a couple of years ago alright, but for those of us adults who vape it raises very very few valid points.

Nothing but a pure example of paper never refusing ink; most of the points raised in it could be applied to other consumer chemicals such as moisturising creams etc. or buying anything over the net.:mad:

Going Forward

songbot wrote: »

Hi,

I don't normally post that much on forums but i have been reading a little bit about the proposed ban on e-cigs and its enough to get me worried. I read today that France has proposed a blanket ban on them and Italy is about to follow suit.
I have only been vaping for 5 months, I use the VIP cigarette like ones and I haven't smoked since i started using them. I smoked for 23 years before this. they have quite literally changed my life. But I know if they ban them that i will go back to smoking again. I don't want to, but i know myself well enough to know that i have a habit and it will continue on being a habit.
I was wondering if maybe we should set up some kind of petition like they have done in england to tell our stories to our government? I know they are useless but if we do nothing at all then we will just be accepting this and not having our voices heard.
I am not hugely knowledgeable about politicians and how to get the petition to them but am willing to set it up if someone can just give me a little help on where to direct it - Our opinions need to be heard not just by our own government, but by the European Commission too.

this is the english site: www.fightthevapingban.com

thanks, I hope we can do something to help in the fight against the ban!

A simple, polite, short letter emailed to your local TD (or all TDs) and your local MEP outlining the issues whilst politely requesting a reply should suffice.

Remember, they will be quite thick in the main, and also tend to give bland responses, so you could direct them to this quite intelligent unbiased presentation from ASH.org.uk, a vehement anti tobacco charity, to assist them "informing" themselves without the usual hysteria.

http://ash.org.uk/files/documents/ASH_715.pdf

And FFS, dont call it "vaping", its way too cool and it'll make em think we're smoking pot.

IMO there is a feeling amongst vapers that, what with austerity, the recession etc. that something as trite or "low down the list" as vaping, we shouldnt be bothering politicians etc., but unless we do they are just going to ban them.

BTW, if anyone is wavering about going back on fags and Big Tobacco, read this:
http://www.ash.org.uk/files/documents/ASH_599.pdf

Cavehill Red

It will be important to keep a record of how politicians respond to queries and how they vote on this matter at national and EU levels.
Those who vote for a ban should then be publicised as such, and vilified for wholeheartedly promoting the agenda of big tobacco.

grindle

Going Forward wrote: »

And FFS, dont call it "vaping", its way too cool and it'll make em think we're smoking pot.

What should we call it?

Going Forward

grindle wrote: »

What should we call it?

Don't know, if you could patent a new phrase you'd make a mint!

Esmoking? Smoke free inhaling?

Ideally it would be something that doesn't mention smoke, nicotine or cigarettes.

Lile vaping!!!!!!!!

richardw001

Something that people might find interesting

German Cancer Research Centre:

http://www.dkfz.de/en/presse/download/RS-Vol19-E-Cigarettes-EN.pdf


Not sure if its research is completely unbiased - it seems to be affiliated with Pharma companies. However I guess most if all drug research is.

The leap to deciding that they should be regulated seems to be based on a very small sample of data.

I imagine though its papers such as the one above that are what drives the EU.

Karl_c

http://blog.casaa.org/2013/08/new-study-confirms-that-chemicals-in.html?spref=fb&m=1

rock whore

I'm with Going Forward on this one. Having seen some articles featuring ominous quotes from Reilly and his Chief Whip, I emailed them both outlining my concerns and telling them my Vaping story.

i did call it Vaping though;)

DubTony

richardw001 wrote: »

Something that people might find interesting

German Cancer Research Centre:

http://www.dkfz.de/en/presse/download/RS-Vol19-E-Cigarettes-EN.pdf


Not sure if its research is completely unbiased - it seems to be affiliated with Pharma companies. However I guess most if all drug research is.

The leap to deciding that they should be regulated seems to be based on a very small sample of data.

I imagine though its papers such as the one above that are what drives the EU.

I've just read to the end of section 3 of this nonsense. I've never seen so many sentences containing the word "may" in a single document in my life.
If you're right about reports like this driving the EU, we're all doomed. Not just with regard to e-cigs, but every other piece of legislation they like to control us with.

These are, after all, the people who effectively banned bent bananas and cucumbers in the 90's.

tommy2bad

DubTony wrote: »

I've just read to the end of section 3 of this nonsense. I've never seen so many sentences containing the word "may" in a single document in my life.
If you're right about reports like this driving the EU, we're all doomed. Not just with regard to e-cigs, but every other piece of legislation they like to control us with.

These are, after all, the people who effectively banned bent bananas and cucumbers in the 90's.

No they didn't ban bent bananas or cucumbers.
They do intend restricting ecig though. Ideally completely removing them but as thats not possible anymore then placing them under the most restrictive regulation they can. Remember that the WHO are driving this, their framework for tobacco control was drawn up before ecigs came on the market. They now regard ecigs as some subterfuge to undermine their efforts to achieve a tobacco free world.
Ideology is behind most of the efforts to ban or restrict ecigs. Facts are not going to win this, they have all the facts already and are still not convinced. I (god help me) read through all the submissions to the MHRA and in every case it was the possibility of ecigs undermining smoking bans and the 'denormalization' of smoking that they used as a reason to push for restriction. Health concerns were seldom raised beyond a lip service reference.
No point telling them that ecigs are safer, whats needed is numbers. People who vote and see this for what it is, an experiment in social control.

Going Forward

I'll be contacting my TD and explaining that e cigs are like little tiny kettles with an element which boils the liquid and I inhale the steam/vapour, and they use rechargeable batteries similar to mobile phones. Tobacco and smoke free. Yippee!!

Might make it easy to understand.

All the paraphernalia that goes with vaping is completely alien to and can actually scare off some people and even make basic vapers (like me) feel like they're left out of the loop by not being up to scratch with all the different terms!:)

rock whore

would it be wise to collaborate on wording for subsequent letters or would that hurt the cause?

open question...

although that's actually a closed question. damn you logic!

grindle

The more similar our responses the more it looks like lobbying on behalf of a guiding entity with vested interests. Which is what the scumbags already think, completely oblivious to how it looks when they ignore all of the scientific data in favour of sensationalist reactions that will cost lives.
Honestly... "Normalise smoking"... What a bunch of fücking idiots.
As if eating a salad will normalise eating pounds of butter at a time.
One of the stupidest arguments I've ever seen, they'd be laughed out of a debate if everybody else wasn't on their level.

rock whore

I'm sure the other side are lobbying hard to get their way. And it could be argued that we (vapers)are indeed a special interest group. It's a pity we don't have our own lobby group to counteract some of the propaganda in the media.

Going Forward

rock whore wrote: »

would it be wise to collaborate on wording for subsequent letters or would that hurt the cause?

open question...

although that's actually a closed question. damn you logic!

Hard to know, would personal experiences be better?

grindle

rock whore wrote: »

I'm sure the other side are lobbying hard to get their way. And it could be argued that we (vapers)are indeed a special interest group. It's a pity we don't have our own lobby group to counteract some of the propaganda in the media.

Of course they are, and we are a special interest group, and ECITA has been lobbying along with Pharma and Tobacco but all of our emails leading up to the last vote were seen as shill emails from paid-off biased astroturfers acting on behalf of the tobacco industry (seriously, many politicians actually said this on the day - absolutely fùcking braindead...these people vote on our laws? Reeeeally?).
In fairness, their malicious idiocy is probably a fair representation of the populace.

The more homogenous the message the easier it is for them to filter and push us into that bracket. Even with a different message from every one of us most of those scumbags will still lump us in with tobacco.

So many politician's commit political suicide but far too few choose the real deal. We can dream...

redkid

rock whore wrote: »

It's a pity we don't have our own lobby group to counteract some of the propaganda in the media.

What are you suggesting ??

rock whore

redkid wrote: »

What are you suggesting ??

You know the way if there is a tobacco related story on the news, RTE are guaranteed to have an interview with an ASH representative. Or when there is a retail story you inevitably see your man Jewell from the Consumer Association. It would probably help the cause, at least on a national level, if there were a go-to person or union rep for vaping & e-cigs.

That group ECITA that Grindle mentioned seem to have their heads screwed on but they are a British organisation and represent the industry rather than those who use the products.

"Tonight on Six-One, James Reilly says something bad about e-cigs, joining us in the studio is X from the National Vapers Association" kind of thing

tommy2bad

rock whore wrote: »

You know the way if there is a tobacco related story on the news, RTE are guaranteed to have an interview with an ASH representative. Or when there is a retail story you inevitably see your man Jewell from the Consumer Association. It would probably help the cause, at least on a national level, if there were a go-to person or union rep for vaping & e-cigs.

That group ECITA that Grindle mentioned seem to have their heads screwed on but they are a British organisation and represent the industry rather than those who use the products.

"Tonight on Six-One, James Reilly says something bad about e-cigs, joining us in the studio is X from the National Vapers Association" kind of thing

That would help, wouldn't want to end up like the forest guys (ever notice the lack of women in forest?) brought on to be laughed at or worse, token balance.
So far we have had someone from our side on most shows and they have been quite good.
Trouble is, this is now a PR campaign, facts won't win this, it's become about the appearance of vaping and looking like smoking. Bans are being imposed by pubs trains and taxis on the grounds it looks like smoking and may upset others.

Fratton Fred

tommy2bad wrote: »

That would help, wouldn't want to end up like the forest guys (ever notice the lack of women in forest?) brought on to be laughed at or worse, token balance.
So far we have had someone from our side on most shows and they have been quite good.
Trouble is, this is now a PR campaign, facts won't win this, it's become about the appearance of vaping and looking like smoking. Bans are being imposed by pubs trains and taxis on the grounds it looks like smoking and may upset others.

I've no problem with pub/train etc bans, most vapers I know use smoking areas anyway.

I agree though, it is vital that users concerns are raised to a decent level. Most pro vaping people so far (at least from a cynical perspective) have had a commercial interest in the industry.

If an Irish vapers association takes off, it must be impartial and any facts it comes out with must be accurate.

How many people vape in Ireland? Is there enough to get an organisation together that can fund a pr campaign.

tommy2bad

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I've no problem with pub/train etc bans, most vapers I know use smoking areas anyway.

I agree though, it is vital that users concerns are raised to a decent level. Most pro vaping people so far (at least from a cynical perspective) have had a commercial interest in the industry.

If an Irish vapers association takes off, it must be impartial and any facts it comes out with must be accurate.

How many people vape in Ireland? Is there enough to get an organisation together that can fund a pr campaign.

I do have a problem with public area bans, it sends out the message that vaping is wrong and disapproved of. It has no basis in law or science. It's counterproductive if encouraging people to stop smoking is the aim, imagine banning NRT! It an example of this creeping homogenization of public space as if it belonged to the state and not the people. I could go on but I'd start to sound like a grumpy old man again.
I suggest we have a talk about forming a users representation group at Vapefest this year if it e-cig are not already dead and buried by then.

Going Forward

tommy2bad wrote: »

I do have a problem with public area bans, it sends out the message that vaping is wrong and disapproved of. It has no basis in law or science. It's counterproductive if encouraging people to stop smoking is the aim, imagine banning NRT! It an example of this creeping homogenization of public space as if it belonged to the state and not the people. I could go on but I'd start to sound like a grumpy old man again.
I suggest we have a talk about forming a users representation group at Vapefest this year if it e-cig are not already dead and buried by then.

Excellent point about vaping in public.
Needs more debate though.

One sticky point is that vaping can be seen as 'aping' smoking.

Do you think teachers should be allowed vape in the classroom for example?

tommy2bad

Going Forward wrote: »

Excellent point about vaping in public.
Needs more debate though.

One sticky point is that vaping can be seen as 'aping' smoking.

Do you think teachers should be allowed vape in the classroom for example?

Yeah the 'modelling' behavioral thing.Should they be aloud to use phones in the class room, eat food?
Once the argument comes down to 'but it looks like' I get a bit miffed. If I started drinking my 7up from a martini glass complete with olive would I be breaking any law? Should that be forbidden because it looks like drinking? Admittedly drinking like a sir but still drinking.

grindle

Going Forward wrote: »

One sticky point is that vaping can be seen as 'aping' smoking.

Do you think teachers should be allowed vape in the classroom for example?

No more than they should be drinking a pint or texting on their phone or watching Netflix. That would be common sense coming into action.

Vaping can be seen as aping smoking all they want, their bias should have no say in what is or isn't acceptable.
When society has to ask these questions or presume that someone will try to hinder what makes sense, you know something's gone very badly wrong.

artyeva

the tobacco companies in ireland - well one anyway - seems to be planning on gearing up the 'astroturf' to voice their displeasure about the menthol/slim cigarette ban. in a way i still think personal testimony, sending ''them'' the research that's already out there, and hammering home the point that the ecigs they think we use aren't the ecigs we actually use is the way to go. tommy's right though, it's down to a PR campaign. maybe we need an irish version of farsalinos? or fly him in for a working holiday?! i'd love to see paul kehoe trying to use all his scientific knowledge in a debate with dr farsalinos :rolleyes:

Going Forward

grindle wrote: »

No more than they should be drinking a pint or texting on their phone or watching Netflix. That would be common sense coming into action.

Vaping can be seen as aping smoking all they want, their bias should have no say in what is or isn't acceptable.
When society has to ask these questions or presume that someone will try to hinder what makes sense, you know something's gone very badly wrong.

Yes i agree but to the ignorant, vaping very much looks like drinking water from a vodka bottle.

This won't be easily overcome.

Going Forward

grindle wrote: »

No more than they should be drinking a pint or texting on their phone or watching Netflix. That would be common sense coming into action.

Vaping can be seen as aping smoking all they want, their bias should have no say in what is or isn't acceptable.
When society has to ask these questions or presume that someone will try to hinder what makes sense, you know something's gone very badly wrong.

Yes i agree but to the ignorant, to borrow someone elses analogy, vaping very much looks like drinking water from a vodka bottle.

This won't be easily overcome.

Mr. Chrome

Slightly off topic but can someone clear something up for me. I have read and always believed that there is no harm from 2nd or 3rd hand vapour.
But if you inhale vapour with nicotine in it and you exhale vapour.....how can 100% of the nicotine be absorbed by your body. Surly there must be some nicotine in what you exhale.
I know we are talking about tiny and probably harmless amounts, but still....
I never smoked around my kid but I constantly vape around her.
Can someone put my mind at ease?

tommy2bad

Mr. Chrome wrote: »

Slightly off topic but can someone clear something up for me. I have read and always believed that there is no harm from 2nd or 3rd hand vapour.
But if you inhale vapour with nicotine in it and you exhale vapour.....how can 100% of the nicotine be absorbed by your body. Surly there must be some nicotine in what you exhale.
I know we are talking about tiny and probably harmless amounts, but still....
I never smoked around my kid but I constantly vape around her.
Can someone put my mind at ease?

OK this is as I understand it. Secondhand vapor has so little left in it that it poses no danger to passive vapers. First hand vapor has so little in it that it poses little danger to the user based on acceptable environmental levels. Thats not even taking into account the fact that a vaper is doing so voluntarily.
All this is based on what we know, unknowns are the effects of long term inhalation of PG, theirs no data so no conclusion or indication is available. As far as long term secondhand vapor inhalation is concerned the amounts are so small that we shouldn't be concerned.
The other consideration is the example you are setting, smokers children are more likely to smoke and I doubt that it because their already slightly addicted to nicotine. Or it could be that the example your setting will give the kid the option of vaping should they be tempted to smoke. Who knows?
Parental guilt, no getting away from it, then grankids show up and back on the guilt merry go round again.

artyeva

Mr. Chrome wrote: »

Slightly off topic but can someone clear something up for me. I have read and always believed that there is no harm from 2nd or 3rd hand vapour.
But if you inhale vapour with nicotine in it and you exhale vapour.....how can 100% of the nicotine be absorbed by your body. Surly there must be some nicotine in what you exhale.
I know we are talking about tiny and probably harmless amounts, but still....
I never smoked around my kid but I constantly vape around her.
Can someone put my mind at ease?

pages 5 and 6 of this study talk about exhaled nic levels. there's a table on page 5 with the actual figure. how does that work? magic :eek:

grindle

artyeva wrote: »

how does that work? magic :eek:

When smoking the cig still burns when not inhaled = measurable (and very small) amounts of nic in the room's air.

When vaping everything is being inhaled = immeasurably small amounts of nic in the room's air.

For reference, the amount of nicotine found in the air after the cigarettes was about 10% more than is in the average aubergine. Not a problem.

redkid

rock whore wrote: »

You know the way if there is a tobacco related story on the news, RTE are guaranteed to have an interview with an ASH representative. Or when there is a retail story you inevitably see your man Jewell from the Consumer Association. It would probably help the cause, at least on a national level, if there were a go-to person or union rep for vaping & e-cigs.

That group ECITA that Grindle mentioned seem to have their heads screwed on but they are a British organisation and represent the industry rather than those who use the products.

"Tonight on Six-One, James Reilly says something bad about e-cigs, joining us in the studio is X from the National Vapers Association" kind of thing

I know what you me and to me that sounds like you putting yourself forward to get it going

redkid

tommy2bad wrote: »

I do have a problem with public area bans, it sends out the message that vaping is wrong and disapproved of. It has no basis in law or science. It's counterproductive if encouraging people to stop smoking is the aim, imagine banning NRT! It an example of this creeping homogenization of public space as if it belonged to the state and not the people. I could go on but I'd start to sound like a grumpy old man again.
I suggest we have a talk about forming a users representation group at Vapefest this year if it e-cig are not already dead and buried by then.

Good idea

Fratton Fred

We need a TD on board. Obviously the sellers on here can't disclose their customers names etc, but maybe they keep an eye out for a vaping TD?

Or, maybe we could find a TD that smokes and convert them?

rock whore

redkid wrote: »

I know what you me and to me that sounds like you putting yourself forward to get it going

Would be happy to help coordinate such a thing. Might be worth laying some ground work prior to Vapefest so there would be something to present to non-boardsies too.

Going Forward

rock whore wrote: »

Would be happy to help coordinate such a thing. Might be worth laying some ground work prior to Vapefest so there would be something to present to non-boardsies too.

Best of luck to you.
Great to see people actually doing something instead of just talking about it!

rock whore

http://www.ecigwizard.com/blog/vicky-ford-mep

Good to see someone being constructive.

As others have said, winning over individuals with influence could be really helpful

Going Forward

Is there any way an independent test could be carried out, say with an Institute of Technology etc.

It cannot cost that much surely?

There must be students or lecturers interested in this??

artyeva

Going Forward wrote: »

Is there any way an independent test could be carried out, say with an Institute of Technology etc.

It cannot cost that much surely?

There must be students or lecturers interested in this??

independant test on what exactly?

Going Forward

artyeva wrote: »

independant test on what exactly?

??

The components of vapour.
What juice is made from.
If burning/boiling it with a red hot element changes the structure radically of vg, pg etc.

Basic stuff really.

grindle

Whether the test was funded by an ecig company or by a friend of the pharmaceuticals, all studies have come back in favour of ecigs. The forewords and conclusions of the anti-ecig sides were negative but their numbers told a story of levels considered safe for the workplace in the countries that have the harshest workplace safety laws.
Maybe an independent study would be welcome but I don't think any such thing exists, there are always going to be degrees of separation from one side or the other. Since we have the anti's studies in our favour as well we're really relying on politicians with no qualifications on the subject to tell us whether we can do it or not.

Occam

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Those who vote for a ban should then be publicised as such, and vilified for wholeheartedly promoting the agenda of big tobacco.

While the risks of E-Cigs are unproven and pretty speculative right now, there is no doubt that the agenda of big tobacco is PRO e-Cigs. They are all either well embedded in the market, or developing products. By your logic, everyone on this thread is promoting the agenda of big tobacco :rolleyes:

songbot

is it possibe, though, as i was asking in my original post to maybe try and get a big petition together as they have done in england and just get our voices out there to start with. i believe that our government don't know (and possibly don't care) that there are a large amount of vapers in ireland and the number is growing. maybe if they realise how many of us there are they might actually consider our side of the story.

i am not as knowlegeable as the rest of you, am new to all of this. i know nothing about lobby groups or politics. all i know is that i haven't been smoking for the last 7 months because of my e-cig and i know other people in the same position and i want someone to just take notice of the fact that it has changed peoples lives. but not just with one letter from me to a politician, with a coordinated effort that involves numbers of people so that maybe they will take notice.

i just don't know what the hell to actually do!! you know what i mean? i don't know anyone in the irish vapers association, i've been just doing all this on my own. am like a little island who cant see all the other little islands that are actually quite nearby!

tommy2bad

Occam wrote: »

While the risks of E-Cigs are unproven and pretty speculative right now, there is no doubt that the agenda of big tobacco is PRO e-Cigs. They are all either well embedded in the market, or developing products. By your logic, everyone on this thread is promoting the agenda of big tobacco :rolleyes:

Not exactly pro e-cig, BT is not against e-cigs but as far as they are concerned unless it their e-cig then they are against it.
All the big tobacco companies so far have bought into or are producing a cig alike and favor medical regulation, online sales bans and public use bans. This strategy gives them a monopoly on the market and reduces the competition with their primary product. So yes politicians clamoring for medical regulation and bans are not just playing into the hands of big tobacco but actually trying to get tobacco companies policies into law.