Their own worst enemy
Sunday, November 7, 2010 I am trying hard to be supportive of electronic cigarettes, I really am. Having read some of the comments on this blog when the subject has come up, I think they are a genuine alternative to cigarettes in places where smoking is banned.
I would object strongly if anyone tried to prohibit them. (As far as I can tell, the only reason some campaigners want e-cigarettes outlawed is because they, er, look like cigarettes - from a distance.)
Sometimes, though, the people promoting e-cigs are their own worst enemy. Last week, for example, someone called ElectronicCigFan added the following comment on my post about Nick Clegg choosing "a stash of cigarettes" as his luxury item on Desert Island Discs:
"Not sure a cigarette is a 'luxury' item, particularly with all the damage they do to your body!"
Fair enough. ElectronicCigFan is entitled to his point of view and I have no wish to censor an honest opinion.
But then I noticed that he had added the following URL - www.smokestik.com - and I thought, "Uh-oh".
Look, I have no problem with people saying how wonderful or how horrible e-cigs are (the jury seems to be out), but please don't use this blog as a crude marketing tool.
Reader Comments (7)
To be fair Simon, while I take your point on "crude marketing" and there is the odd smug ex smoker who has a zeal for scoring points, I have found E cigarette users, "vapers" and distributors generally constructive. Lets be blunt, smoker's websites are one of the best ways of advertising your product.
Having met with a number of representatives we do have a common cause in being the victim of junk science, a dislike of ASH and undue influence from pharmaceutical companies. For example, despite there being an abudance of evidence that E cigarettes are completely safe the UK's Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) look to all but ban them. They will make them subject to extensive medical checks like a new drug and it is a costly and time consuming business, which any E cigarette vendor will be forced into bankrupcy.
Anti smoker Bill Godshall, executive director of Smokefree Pennsylvania exposed the fundamentalism to nicotine from the anti smoking groups in the USA.
"While drug company funding is one reason why some organizations have been advocating a ban on e-cigarettes, there also are other reasons including:
- some are tobacco/nicotine prohibition ideologues,
- some don't want to be reminded of cigarettes (which occurs when they see an e-cigarette),
- most haven't actually read the research and empirical evidence on e-cigarettes,
- some truly believe the inaccurate and misleading claims by FDA and others,
- some prefer letting all smokers die if doing so prevents even one youth from using tobacco/nicotine, and
- some would be fired by Campaign For Tobacco Free Kids (CTFK), ALF, American Cancer Society (ACS), American Heart Association (AHA), American Lung Association (ALA), etc. if they told the truth about e-cigarettes"
The bigoty to both smokers and vapers is laid bare here.
I feel the same about E smokers. Some are great and on our side and are shouting loud and proud to their fellow e-cig smokers that we are all in this fight together and I'm very grateful for that.
Other e cig smokers feel somehow superior to tobacco smokers and think that by criticising tobacco smokers they can somehow turn public opinion towards their product.
My fear of E cigs has always been that they could be used as "divide and rule" tool to coerce tobacco smokers into a very small minority which would then be easier to criminalise.
I am amazed but assured that the antis are shooting themselves in the foot by turning on E cigs and E smokers because that can only serve to bring E smokers who hate us over to our cause of Freedom of Choice.
Simon, abosultely agree. These 'scam' marketers do more harm than good. They even do the same on articles about e-cigs, especially in the US. It doesn't help.
As for Bill Godshall. Yes he does advocate e-cigs, though he also advocates outdoor smoking bans in 'certain circumstances'. He also advocated e-cigs being tobacco products in the US. This position also doesn't help as e-cigs are neither tobacco or pharma products. They are an alternative.
He has at least helped to show some of the BigP money behind 'grass roots' anti-smoking campains. This helps expose the hypocricy of the groups which both smokers and e-smokers need to opose. It also helps expose the massive conflicts of interest these groups have.
The MHRA are now in a difficult position (as the ECITA has shown) over e-cigs and are probably waiting for the outcome of the NJOY/FDA case or the EU tobacco directive consultation.
There is a lot of spamming, scamming and unethical marketing about ecigs, particularly from the US and China.
Apologies to anyone who was offended and a request to remember that vapers aren't the same as vested interests any more than smokers are the same as tobacco companies. We may use the product but we aren't all in agreement on what it is and what it means to other people.
Bill Godshall advocates medicalising nicotine for maintenance purposes, turning health services into drug dealers and removing the only argument that exists to prevent ecigs from being medical products. At the same time he claims they are quit smoking and tobacco products in order to bring them into tobacco control - another route to an effective ban. Bill lobbies to have the free market closed in order to capture the market for TC.
The WHO intends to capture nicotine into the FCTC later this month so it looks like ecigs will be subject to bans anyway. There's no support for harm reduction or safer products, they are bad for business as far as pharm companies and the tobacco control industry are concerned.
If "Kate" is my delightful Facebook buddy Kate Vapersnet she posted this on her page yesterday. The scorecard of fines levied on pharmaceutical companies for making false claims on their products it racks up $5.3 billions.
http://pharmagossip.blogspot.com/2010/11/big-pharma-settlements-with-department.html
Hi Dave, yes it's me from Facebook :-)
Isn't it ironic how tobacco control call the tobacco industry baddies and demonise them whenever they get a chance in order to promote big pharm. It's the pharm companies who appear to be running the WHO and most of tobacco control and they're the biggest crooks on the planet.
The major problem the authorities have with ecigs is that they look like cigarettes and this is a particular problem for cctv. Next time I'm in London I'll puff on an ecig on an overgound station platform (acompanied by a witness of very good standing) and see what transpires. Banning them won't solve the problem. A satisfying piece of subversion will be the cig ring - a soft flexible flexible length of white sponge attached to a flesh coloured ring - available in several skin tones. Can't possibly interfere with driving. Perfect for the school run.