European Ban on E-Cigs?

tommy2bad

OK you win, cant beat a seasoned debating society member.
As to the flavor thing is we include the one exception you are right, so what?
For god sake man your counters mean nothing at all and come across as the type of propaganda spewed by the ANTZ.
I show you how the research failed to provide evidence of the harm that is claimed in most of the press releases, you tell me I don't understand science!
I show that lobbying by the ecig industry is minuscule and not professional, best you can do is link to an association of amateurs?
Your just being contrary and don't seem to understand either the ecig industry or the proposed legislation.
As to sources, do your own goggling
I'v been following this debate for 2 years now and so far the tobacco companies are seeking to have ecigs classed as tobacco products. This will result in public use bans and advertising restrictions, possibly online sales.
Any way you haven't given your position on how ecigs should be regulated, care to?

tommy2bad

http://dailycaller.com/2013/04/06/big-tobacco-stubs-out-e-cigarette-competitors/
http://www.nicolitesonline.co.uk/2013/06/12/nicolites-welcomes-licensing-of-e-cigarettes/
Ah what the hell, I'l save your fingers.

Occam

tommy2bad wrote: »

I show that lobbying by the ecig industry is minuscule and not professional

No, you claimed that professional e-Cig lobbying didn't exist, then that it didn't exist in Europe, and now that its small.

You are still wrong, but getting closer to the truth.

tommy2bad wrote: »

best you can do is link to an association of amateurs?

They claim to represent 60% of e-Cig makers, 6 of which have turnovers in excess of 1M sterling. What is amateur about that?

tommy2bad wrote: »

As to sources, do your own goggling

I have, I can't find it from any first hand source. Generally when people make wild claims here, they will provide some backup.

tommy2bad wrote: »

so far the tobacco companies are seeking to have ecigs classed as tobacco products.

Meaningless unless you can back it up and provide a proper source.

tommy2bad wrote: »

Any way you haven't given your position on how ecigs should be regulated, care to?

I have, but I'll repeat myself. I believe in light regulation on the basis of significant harm reduction.

Occam

tommy2bad wrote: »

http://dailycaller.com/2013/04/06/big-tobacco-stubs-out-e-cigarette-competitors/
http://www.nicolitesonline.co.uk/2013/06/12/nicolites-welcomes-licensing-of-e-cigarettes/
Ah what the hell, I'l save your fingers.

These are your sources :rolleyes: The first link just has speculation, with no supporting evidence. The second link mentions nothing about lobbying.

Why can't you show something more credible, some official documentation?

For example here is some official, EU documentation relating to the lobbying by the e-Cig industry

http://ec.europa.eu/health/tobacco/docs/ev_20120703_mi_en.pdf

tommy2bad

Occam wrote: »

These are your sources :rolleyes: The first link just has speculation, with no supporting evidence. The second link mentions nothing about lobbying.
No suporting evidence apart from the sponsoring bills to restrict ecigs...OK then.
Second one was to back up my claim of support for medical regs, different jurisdiction different tactics.
Why can't you show something more credible, some official documentation?
That last one is from Nicolites themselves, horses mouth as it were!
For example here is some official, EU documentation relating to the lobbying by the e-Cig industry

http://ec.europa.eu/health/tobacco/docs/ev_20120703_mi_en.pdf

No that's evidence of representation. To describe that as lobbying is being disingenuous. I suspect you (like me ) enjoy argument for argument sake.
At this stage theirs only you and me left. Good to hear the other side but candy crush is calling

DubTony

Occam wrote: »

They are ditching their old brands (which are some of the most valuable in the world) to try and lose the image, but I'm afraid its the same shady companies that told us cigarettes were harmless.

If they're doing it at all, it's got nothing to do with ecigs or image. Since many countries have adopted or are in the process of adopting a dark market (cigarettes are not allowed to be seen for sale) retailers are limiting their purchases to the top selling lines. If they are ditching brands, as you claim, this is most likely the reason.
Tobacco companies have held onto slow sellers for decades after they were as good as dead, as the cost of production is ridiculously low, and the risk of losing customers to another brand is very high.
A cig company rep said to me one day about a dying brand, "they won't pull them until all the customers are dead."


edit: Australia's packaging laws, also proposed here in Ireland, make the brands as good as irrelevant.

Occam

tommy2bad wrote: »

No that's evidence of representation. To describe that as lobbying is being disingenuous

I've already provided you with a quote, and a link where the e-Cig industry trade association describe it as lobbying themselves. I'm pretty sure they know what they are doing better than you do, and they call it lobbying. You are making yourself look stupid at this stage.

tommy2bad wrote: »

http://dailycaller.com/2013/04/06/big-tobacco-stubs-out-e-cigarette-competitors/

You are kidding nobody with those links, it is just more unsubstantiated claims with no citations or references.

tommy2bad wrote: »

The last one is from Nicolites .... From the horses mouth

Which one of the tobacco firms do you think owns nicolites ??? How is this relevant ???

Occam

DubTony wrote: »

If they're doing it at all, it's got nothing to do with ecigs or image. Since many countries have adopted or are in the process of adopting a dark market (cigarettes are not allowed to be seen for sale) retailers are limiting their purchases to the top selling lines. If they are ditching brands, as you claim, this is most likely the reason.
Tobacco companies have held onto slow sellers for decades after they were as good as dead, as the cost of production is ridiculously low, and the risk of losing customers to another brand is very high.
A cig company rep said to me one day about a dying brand, "they won't pull them until all the customers are dead."

What I meant was they are ditching their old brands as they move into e-Cigs. I.e. we are seeing Vype and Blu rather than E-Marlboro , or e-Camels.

Agree with you re the tobacco brands, they are doing all they can to protect them.

tommy2bad

Occam wrote: »

I've already provided you with a quote, and a link where the e-Cig industry trade association describe it as lobbying themselves. I'm pretty sure they know what they are doing better than you do, and they call it lobbying. You are making yourself look stupid at this stage.



You are kidding nobody with those links, it is just more unsubstantiated claims with no citations or references.



Which one of the tobacco firms do you think owns nicolites ??? How is this relevant ???

Ok at this stage your getting insulting. I'm out.
Enjoy your life.

rock whore

has this been posted here before?

http://www.ecigwizard.com/blog/e-cigarettes-likely-to-pose-little-harm-in-comparison-to-cigarettes

source seems legit. surprising but encouraging.

rock whore

Going Forward wrote: »

Did email a minister, no reply.

yeah, only responses I got were from staffers at Mairead McGuinness' and James Reilly's offices that the mail had been received and/or passed on and thanks very much.

I don't expect much else in the way of responses but will continue anyway, something might just get through

was.deevey

They claim to represent 60% of e-Cig makers, 6 of which have turnovers in excess of 1M sterling. What is amateur about that?

1 Million Turnover is less than an well running Average Pub

Vs

£13 BILLION Turnover for Cigarette manufacturers in the UK alone.

Occam

was.deevey wrote: »

1 Million Turnover is less than an well running Average Pub

Vs

£13 BILLION Turnover for Cigarette manufacturers in the UK alone.

Agree - By far the biggest part of the e-Cig lobby is funded by Big Tobacco

Calibos

Occam wrote: »

Agree - By far the biggest part of the e-Cig lobby is funded by Big Tobacco

:rolleyes:

Going Forward

Mr Clancy from ASH was just interviewed on RTE News at 1 radio.

Very nervous of ecigs...........

Occam

Going Forward wrote: »

Mr Clancy from ASH was just interviewed on RTE News at 1 radio.

Very nervous of ecigs...........

I didn't hear this but I can't imagine why he would be nervous.

ASH UK which fund ASH Ireland are supportive of e-Cigs, and their paymasters, the Big Tobacco companies are the biggest companies in the E-cig industry, and investing heavily.

Would have expected him to be promoting e-cigs....what did he say that made you think he was not towing the company line?

Edit : woops as tommy2bad pointed I mistook this guy as being from Forest rather than ASH ! Forest are the big tobacco pro e-cig group, ASH are a public health charity with concerns about e-Cigs, as you would expect e-Cigs are making them nervous. Pretend this post never existed !

tommy2bad

Occam wrote: »

I didn't hear this but I can't imagine why he would be nervous.

ASH UK which fund ASH Ireland are supportive of e-Cigs, and their paymasters, the Big Tobacco companies are the biggest companies in the E-cig industry, and investing heavily.

Would have expected him to be promoting e-cigs....what did he say that made you think he was not towing the company line?

Ahem ASH UK are in favor of the medicalization of ecigs, they used to be in favor of general consumer regulation with some specific regs but changed their stance last year.
Actually ASH get most of their funding from the Government and the rest from big pharma, they are prohibited by law from dealing in anyway with tobacco companies.

Occam

tommy2bad wrote: »

Ahem ASH UK are in favor of the medicalization of ecigs, they used to be in favor of general consumer regulation with some specific regs but changed their stance last year.
Actually ASH get most of their funding from the Government and the rest from big pharma, they are prohibited by law from dealing in anyway with tobacco companies.

Sorry, of course I was confusing ASH with Forest Eireann the Big Tobbacco lobby group !

I was thinking it didn't make sense for Big Tobacco to be against their own product !

DubTony

Just listened to that interview with Luke Clancy.

Wanna listen? Follow this

www.rte.ie/radio/

Scroll down to the graphic
CATCH UP NOW - RTE RADIO PLAYER
on the right side of the page (Below the fold)

Click on that to launch the Player

SEARCH THE PLAYER (Bottom Right)
Type in News at One and hit return and click on the FULL SHOW BROADCAST: FRI 4th OCT

Interview starts at 25:30

Clancy talks a load of sh*te. Makes nonsensical points about evidence that "they're not as good as the programmes that exists" ... but finishes with this gem

"It's incredible to me that an addictive product is there with the sweets and available to everyone, and that doesn't make sense to me."

It seems since the smokes were put behind a door, he's forgotten where they're sold.

Going Forward

He couldn't actually say anything bad about ecigs either though, to his credit.

I'd still say his arce is a bit sore from sitting on the fence. Still sounded ridiculous.

tommy2bad

He went with the usual we don't know whats in them, we don't know they work (unlike proven nrt), we don't know who's using them and their out their with the sweets.
It the usual illinformed propaganda from the anti nicotine zealots.
Lets face it ASH are beholden to their Pharma grants and don't want to endanger that.
Oh and Luke is a prohibitionist on most things from drink to cannabis to tobacco, he makes no distinction between the relative harm of any product because what he hates is that someone might be enjoying themselves.

dePeatrick

Tommy I would be very interested in hearing how you see this playing out over the next few years regarding eCigs.

Do you think that the majority of existing cigarette smokers will change over to eCigs?

Do you see the big tobacco companies advertising aggressively to capture existing market and create a new one?

Do you envisage groups like ASH, HSE etc supporting esmoking as a safer alternative?

I know you have not got a crystal ball but you seem to be very knowledgeable about all of this and un-biased.

tommy2bad

dePeatrick wrote: »

Tommy I would be very interested in hearing how you see this playing out over the next few years regarding eCigs.
OK?
Do you think that the majority of existing cigarette smokers will change over to eCigs?
Long term, yes but it will take about 10 years before vaping is where smoking is now.
Do you see the big tobacco companies advertising aggressively to capture existing market and create a new one?
Yes and not just advertizing but influencing regs to capture the market.
Do you envisage groups like ASH, HSE etc supporting esmoking as a safer alternative?
Depends, see below.
I know you have not got a crystal ball but you seem to be very knowledgeable about all of this and un-biased.

Sorry, didnt see this till today.
More detail now. I think vaping will replace smoking completely as the nicotine delivery system of choice, cigarettes will still be around but as a niche like pipes and cigars.

‘Our typical response to a disrupting new technology, is to recreate the old environment instead of heeding the new opportunities of the new environment.’ said Marshall McLuhan. Ecigs are that disruptive tech and we see both big T and big P fighting over which existing environment to have them recreate.
Tobacco want them to become cigarettes, disposable, sold in supermarkets and tobacconists, advertised as cool and glamorous.
Pharma wants them to become medicines, unglamorous, dose regulated, sold in pharmacies or at least in the aspirin and lemsip shelves of supermarkets.

Neither side can see that ecigs are not a reproduction of or incremental improvement of existing products. No more than cell phones were a reproductions with small improvements on the land line. Before the mobile we thought that video phones on a landline would be the bestest thing ever. We were wrong. It took some years and some selling before the mobile became the ubiquitious piece of kit we now have. At the start no one realized that the wireless signal was the big breakthrough not for the freedom from a wall socket but because of the nature of wireless. It could carry data.

The ecig is not so lucky as the mobile, the product it's seen as a reproduction off is now being eradicated, the ecig which could eradicate smoking is unfortuniatly seen as smoking 2.0 not the new opportunity it may actually be.

Think of it ! vaping as a way to administer pain medication, self tirtulated and convient and capable of small doses. Or vaping as a way to self inoculate. A non invasive therapy. OK I'm blue skying a lot but so far I havn't heard one voice looking at ecigs as anything other than as the new cigarette or the new NRT. Old models replicated. New models stifled.

Tuesday the EU vote happens, the choices are medical regs or tobacco regs.
You ask what I think will happen ecigs? It will be smoking 2.0 sadly, an addictive habit that is viewed as a moral failing and restricted the same as cigarettes. The thing is this won't reduce the smoking prevalence rates because vaping will be classed as smoking on health questionnaires, medical reports and insurance forms, what it will reduce is the smoking related mortality so a small win at a big cost. The delay in uptake of vaping as an alternative to smoking and the lives lost because their won't be much advantage to vaping apart from the health gain which is as we all know the least convincing argument to a committed smoker.

And this is all guessing, I could be wrong, my crystal ball isn't what it used to be since the digital switch over.

was.deevey

Tuesday the EU vote happens, the choices are medical regs or tobacco regs.
You ask what I think will happen ecigs? It will be smoking 2.0 sadly, an addictive habit that is viewed as a moral failing and restricted the same as cigarettes. The thing is this won't reduce the smoking prevalence rates because vaping will be classed as smoking on health questionnaires, medical reports and insurance forms, what it will reduce is the smoking related mortality so a small win at a big cost. The delay in uptake of vaping as an alternative to smoking and the lives lost because their won't be much advantage to vaping apart from the health gain which is as we all know the least convincing argument to a committed smoker.

However, if this happens, the good news is in 5/10 years when insurance companies see vapers not being the same medical risk as a tobacco smoker they will be forced to create a new category to accommodate.

I just hope the sale or raw materials will not be hit too badly whichever way this goes although either way I reckon there will be big tax increases like on any other "luxury" product.

Samba

REJECTED! Woohoo!

Medical regulatory proposals were rejected by 362-298 votes. Attempts to to ban flavourings have also been rejected. A good day for vapers across Europe. :cool:

DubTony

Samba wrote: »

REJECTED! Woohoo!

Medical regulatory proposals were rejected by 362-298 votes. Attempts to to ban flavourings have also been rejected. A good day for vapers across Europe. :cool:

Have you got a source for that yet?

DublinCJM

great result!

ben36

So what does it mean in plain English?Carry on as it is or restrictions on importing from outside eu or what?

halkar

DubTony wrote: »

Have you got a source for that yet?

On BBC .
Good day

Samba

DubTony wrote: »

Have you got a source for that yet?

BBC

Hopefully devices and products won't be taxed to the hilts, but look, at least the products will still be on the market and out of the hands of the pharmaceutical industry.


Common sense prevailed today, but there are still some battles to be fought.