ECigWizard Vaping Lounge

Whenever you are out in public whether you are stood at a bus stop, sat in the pub or whatever, if you are enjoying a vape you run the risk of being approached and being told some half remembered misinformation originating from the media. This type of approach is easy to recognise because it often contains a reference to the 'they' - e.g. 'They have banned those..' etc.

If someone is genuinely interested in ecigs or vaping in general, as they often are, I am happy to offer any help and advice that I can. But if someone just wants to 'yank my chain' I sometimes wish that I had a simple way to get rid of them so that I may be left in piece. It is with this thought in mind that I herein present the 'ECigWizard's cut-out and keep - stupid questions reply kit', my idea here is to supply a selection of the sort of dumb things that people say followed by a suitable reply. All that you have to do is print this page out, cut the paper along the dotted lines between each answer and carry the resulting 'pearls of wisdom' with you, ready to hand out to the next person who says something moronic to you about ecigs.

"They made it illegal to smoke that in here!"

I am not smoking, I am vaping. Smoke comes from combustion, ecigs just produce vapour. Currently the U.K. has no legislation regarding the use of ecigs in public places, however I do respect the property owner’s rights to allow or forbid me to vape in their premises.

"They have tested them things, they are more harmful than fags!"

Indeed ecigs have been tested; I'd welcome more tests too. The very worst results from the tests currently conducted only recorded a trace level of tobacco-specific nitrosamines, at about the same level as NRT patches and 500 times or more, lower than fags. Professor Mike Kelly, (Director of the NICE Centre for Public Health) has stated that he will tell his patients that using e-cigarettes is ‘better than smoking.'

"They don't know what is in that liquid stuff!"

You may not know but I certainly do, it’s Glycerol, Glycerine, Nicotine and flavours. I got mine from ECigWizard, their ejuice is made in their own clean-room facilities in the U.K, all of the raw materials and ingredients are from pharmaceutical or food grade sources and it is all 'CHIP' compliant, fully tested and batch traceable.

"They don’t know how much nicotine is in that liquid!"

Why would anyone not know? It is simple enough to mix the ingredients at the correct percentages using accurate scientific equipment; reputable manufacturers will also have e-liquids fully tested by independent labs. Eliquid is available in a range of strengths from 0% nicotine up to 2.4%, some manufacturers might even produce eliquid with a greater concentration of nicotine but whatever the nicotine content is, it will be stated on the bottle.

"Those things are not safe because they don’t regulate them"

Ecigs are like any other consumer product sold in the UK. They are subject to a whole plethora of consumer regulation and protection in addition to 'health and safety' laws and trading standards, all of which they must comply with.

"Did you know that you can be allergic to the vapour?"

It is possible to be allergic to many things in the environment including many things in everyday use; allergies to wheat or milk are very common for example. If you are allergic to the vapour I’d advise you not to use an ecig yourself, but rest assured, any vapour that I exhale is in far too low concentration in the atmosphere to effect you.

"They said that those things turn kids into smokers!"

Recent surveys have shown that only a very small percentage of under 18's have ever tried ecigs and that the amount that continued to use them was not statistically significant. Alcohol free beer does not turn kids into beer drinkers, it’s beer that turns kids into beer drinkers and it's fags that turn kids into smokers not ecigs. Ecigs just ain’t cool with the kids and reputable vendors would not sell to them anyway.

"They say those things are only to stop you smoking!"

I don’t vape to stop smoking but because I vape I do not want to smoke and have no need to do so. This also means that I am avoiding the thousands of chemicals caused by tobacco combustion that is inhaled by smokers and saving money too.

"Those fake fags don’t even look real!"

My ecig is not a ‘fake fag’ it is a nicotine delivery device. The less that I look like a smoker the happier I am, I don’t like cigarettes; I dislike their smell and their taste.

"They say all the smokers are using those things now"

There are about one million of us in the U.K. who vape, sadly there are many more people than that who still smoke cigarettes but every day, many more people are changing from smoking and taking up vaping as an alternative.

"You won’t be able to buy them when they ban them!"

There are proposals to regulate ecigs from 2016 in the U.K., this would not ban them but it would greatly restrict the choice of equipment and juice available however it is unlikely that such regulation will withstand legal challenge. Don’t worry though, I’m not going to go back to smoking cigarettes, whatever ‘they’ do or say, I will always vape!

Some Vapers argue that engaging in the media's - Ecig's healthy or harmful - debate just leads us into a discussion that has irrelevant parameters, Ecigs are not a medical device. Their position is that as adults we should be free to enjoy nicotine recreationally however we choose and that it is our right to do what we like with our own bodies so long as it does no harm to others. This liberal (small 'L’), 'individual freedom' stance has many strengths - in the UK adults are permitted to drink alcohol as part of normal social and recreational behaviour, this is widely accepted in our society despite the fact that alcohol is known to be a contributory factor in a wide variety of antisocial behaviours. In comparison vaping an Ecig does not unduly effect others around us, yet Vapers face the threat of legislative action to control, curb or curtail our habit. Unfortunately whatever the merits of 'individual freedom' are it must be recognised that a parallel argument has been made for the legalisation of Cannabis without much success. Governments like to 'Govern'.

Wetherspoons

J.D. Wetherspoons have forbidden the use of ecigs in any of their pubs, their rational for this is that staff face difficulty recognising the difference between Vapers and smokers. Given that the trend in Ecig design is moving away from the mimicking of tobacco cigarettes in shape, size and colour, J.D. Wetherspoon's argument will soon be (if not already) irrational however they are unlikely to reverse their decision especially given that they where the first major UK chain to ban smoking in their pubs. J.D. Wetherspoons are perfectly within their rights to dictate our conduct on their premises, as we equally, are within our rights to choose not to go to their pubs.

The French Government looks likely to ban the use of ecigs in public buildings and Italy may also soon do so too. Their excuse for this planned action is that passive vaping may be harmful and that vaping 'normalises' smoking and may become a 'gateway' to smoking however there is no evidence that any of these excuses have any validity. It seems that politicians view ecigs as nothing more than a way of circumventing the smoking legislation that they have enacted and therefore it must be stopped - they fail to see that vaping and smoking are two very different activities and that there is a realistic potential for the former to largely replace the latter to the great benefit of many people. Unfortunately I think that it is probable that the UK Parliament will follow the lead of the French and Italian legislators and introduce similar restrictions here too. Despite a general trend toward civil liberty freedoms being given to the citizens of Europe it seems that the association of vapers with smokers that is perceived by politicians, makes us an exception.

Research

Personally I think it is valid to conduct research into any health implications that may result from the use of ecigs, if there are any long term risks then knowing about them can help me make an informed choice as to whether or not no vape. It does though seem obvious that vaping is likely to be less harmful than smoking tobacco, it's the main reason that many of us choose to vape as an alternative to smoking, there is however, a central difficulty in presenting this as an argument for our continued freedom to vape. Because ecigs are not classified as medical devices they are not judged to be worthy of consideration as a potential aid to smoking cessation, conversely if ecigs were to be classified as medical devices then the time and financial requirements needed to get a medical licence for each individual product would restrict development and innovation to the point that ecigs as we know them would no longer be available. It is a classic 'Catch 22' situation.

NICE

The recent National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) advice on smoking policy accepted the principle of 'harm reduction', sensibly conceding that the use of nicotine delivery systems other than cigarettes is preferable however they did not endorse the use of ecigs specifically, because as a non-medical device, it is outside of their remit. Despite this NICE director, Professor Mike Kelly, did say that he will tell patients that using e-cigarettes is "better than smoking."

I think that we all would accept (and even welcome) legislation that bans the sale or marketing of ecigs to children under 18 years old and also support the enforcement of the various consumer product and health & safety legislation that already exists with regards to ecigs however if the Parliaments of both the European Union and the UK wish to encourage the revolution in the health of smokers through 'harm reduction' that is promised by ecigs then they must not stifle this opportunity with restrictive or heavy handed legislation. Vaping as a substitute for smoking needs to be positively encouraged by policy makers and medical professionals in order to fully capitalise on the potential benefits to the approximately 20% of the UK population that smoke tobacco.

Report

The probable health benefits of vaping over smoking are clearly demonstrated in a report entitled ”Electronic cigarette: a possible substitute for cigarette dependence” that was published in Monaldi's Archives for Chest Disease Journal last month, it is a scholarly work looking at our current knowledge of ecigs in relation to their usefulness in harm reduction for smokers. I am reluctant to 'cherry pick' a quote or two for fear that readers might imagine that they do not represent the overall picture provided by the report which everyone should read for themselves (pdf - Click Here)  however I can't resist just giving this little taste of its overall tone... "Electronic cigarettes, for its specific characteristics, could be used as a lower risk substitute for tobacco cigarettes. This tool may prove to be a hopeful solution for reduction in the use of traditional cigarettes and their related risk, with the pros of these products clearly outweighing the cons".

When we first started Ecigwizard, just over 24 months ago, we did it because we saw a viable business opportunity. We've never hid that. Originally, we started with one staff member, and we are now approaching 30 members of staff. The last 24 months have been the most exciting in my life, as I've been involved in the innovation of the latest technology in ecigs and eliquid.

Ecigwizard is the first business I've been involved in where I've truly felt happy in the service provided. I say happy, because I've seen countless smokers come to our doors, and walk away "vapers". They've thrown away the cigarettes, and the death sentence.

It's not hard as a vaper, and ex-smoker, to be enthusiastic 24 hours a day about a product that does so much good!

Enter MHRA

Today MHRA circulated a press release on their stance on electronic cigarettes. As vapers, we've been waiting for this for a long, long time. It is worth noting MHRA are mainly funded by pharma companies. The same pharma companies whose products are likely to have taken a hit since the rise in popularity and success of ecigs.

There have already been responses to the statement from both Ecita and Clive Bates. If you haven't already read Clive Bates' blog, I suggest you do. In a sea of bureaucracy, corruption and misinformation, Clive Bates is a bright light for us vapers. We are quoting in large from Clive's response today.

First, to the brunt and bottom line of the MHRA's statement:

"All nicotine-containing products (NCPs), such as electronic cigarettes, are to be regulated as medicines in a move to make these products safer and more effective to reduce the harms of smoking."

Jeremy Mean, the MHRA's Group Manager of Vigilance and Risk Management of Medicines said:

"The decision announced today provides a framework that will enable good quality products to be widely available. It’s not about banning products that some people find useful, it’s about making sure that smokers have an effective alternative that they can rely on to meet their needs."

Really? How will that work?

Products such as nicotine patches, gums etc are already regulated as NRT (nicotine replacement therapy) products. But how successful are these licensed products? From Ecita:

"...this does not address the fact that these licensed products FAIL for over 95% of smokers trying to stop smoking."

In terms of costs and logistics, the process of becoming 'regulated' costs hundreds of thousands of pounds PER PRODUCT and takes around two years.

To put that into perspective, when we talk 'per product', this means every single e-liquid flavour, every cartomiser, tank, battery etc.

Even with the money tobacco companies have made from the problem they caused, they are still likely to reap the benefits. If this motion is to pass, with their deep pockets, they will be able to lap up the ecig market, post regulation.

The same tobacco companies that created the problem and now are poised to profit from the cure.

You couldn't make it up!

Back to the proposed 'regulation', Clive Bates states:

"The real health challenge is to get e-cigarettes to eat into cigarette sales as rapidly as possible, and for as many smokers as possible to switch. This type of regulation works against that. A limited authorised range of dull but perfectly safe medicialised products that no-one wants to use is worthless and counterproductive."

Electronic cigarettes work because they are a fantastic innovation. They give the ex-smoker what they want, without causing harm to their health. The different flavours give a real attractive alternative to smoking and as such, they work.

If the government is to have its own way, then you can expect a staple tobacco product, in a 'ciggalike' pack, at extortionate prices. Although on the plus side, given it borrows from the electronic cigarette design, it'll be at least more effective than the NRT's available.

Clive Bates continues, Ecigarettes are not medicines:

"E-cigarettes are not medicines – it is poor policymaking to just hammer them into a regulatory framework designed for something else. They should design something specific to the products, starting with consumer protection legislation, and extending it if needed (the approach taken with cosmetics for example)."

We are vapers. We are not sick. We do not need medicine, so don't try and prescribe us it.

"Medicines regulation involves disproportionate costs, compliance burdens and restrictions – none of which apply to cigarettes. So this is a good day for the cigarette makers, and their competition will be weakened. We need regulation to encourage these products to compete with cigarettes, not smother them with red tape."

Again, in cloud cuckoo land, where the policy makers are currently residing, electronic cigarettes, which have burnt a hole in cigarette sales are put up for medicinal regulation. That's right, the first invention that has grasped smokers from the jaws of tobacco death, is staring the red-tape brigade square on in the face.

You couldn't make it up!

"Medicines regulation will slow down innovation – the lengthy and costly authorisation process does not lend itself to rapid change or the more experimental approach to innovation that works for consumer products (ie. try lots of things and invest in what works or follow changing tastes and buzz)."

Ecigarettes have been such a huge success, because of the invention of new technology. Ignoring the Joe Bloggs / mass market ciggalike, the tanks, the rebuildables have all attributed to the soaring success of electronic cigarettes as a viable smoking alternative. The liquids make this product work.

Regulation will knock this all on the head, and put a dumb-dumb staple product as the only option. Yet even more interference from an ever growing 'Nanny State' that makes 1984 read like a children's book.

"Medicines regulation will reduce the diversity of products available – the process has to be repeated for each product – slow and time consuming and not worth it for niche products. Many products will be deemed unsuitable or will never be put forward in the first place. This is bad because it narrows the potential appeal and removes some of the pleasures vapers find in experimenting with new products. It is likely that regulators will impose counterproductive restrictions to the product design – for example the dozens of frivolous flavours are part of the appeal as an alternative to smoking – but will the stern suits of the MHRA really approve ‘pina colada’ flavour?"

Absolutely not, as above, say goodbye to your Vanilla, Cola, maybe even Menthol flavours.

"Medicines regulation requires pharmaceutical ‘clean room’ room manufacturing facilities – this is regulatory overkill, given that most consumer nicotine is delivered in a filthy mix of burning particles of tobacco and hot toxic gases. But the current supply chain is long and extends to China – most factories will not be able to attain this standard, so MHRA will destroy the existing supply chain."

In our case, we already have clean room facilities in place. Our PG/VG and nicotine base is pharmaceutical grade. Our flavourings are all food grade. We have extensive batch testing in place to ensure the correct levels of nicotines in our e-liquid. So, contrary the the churlish ignorance that has been splashed around the media today, we do monitor and regulate nicotine content in our e-liquid.

Of course, as we've said before, we welcome light regulation that makes this a standard- something that a small handful of businesses flout. But why punish the many e-liquid / ecig companies, such as ourselves, that have been so careful to put such quality control in, in the first place?

"They want to substitute their own view of ‘efficacy‘ (what works) for the consumers’ view. Markets work by people buying the good products and the poor products failing, not by regulators deciding what works. It would be different if they were making health claims, and could be tested to see if the claim are valid. But the e-cig vendors aren’t making any claims. The truth is they don’t know what efficacy means with e-cigarettes."

The bulk of the statement reads as though they know very little about the respectable ecig vendors.

"What the e-cigarette sector doesn’t need is ‘boring’. That has been tried and failed with NRT. It needs marketing verve, style and buzz, not the dull deadening hand of bureaucratic approvals. That applies to product design, packing, marketing, sponsorship – the works… the public health challenge is to get as many smokers to switch as possible, not to make perfectly safe products that no-one wants."

As quoted above, NRT has a less than 5% success rate. I'm pretty sure you've got better odds when chucking ten pound into a fruit machine!

"They will focus on eliminating minute risks but obstruct great potential. There is great danger they will make the products less attractive to smokers who might otherwise switch. So they get the risk down from 99% lower than cigarettes to 99.5%. Big deal… and harmful if it means more people stay smoking as a result. There is no evidence at all of gateway effects – those exist mainly in the imagination of health lobbyists. E-cigs are a major gateway out of smoking, and an alternative to ever smoking."

The very worse of Orwellian bureaucracy. As of yet, there has been no harm linked to vaping. In fact, Dr Konstantinos Farsalinos found:

"First toxiology study on vapor electronic cigarettes are much better than tobacco."

Finally, from Clive Bates:

"This will give a boost to the home-made and black market – all likely to be more dangerous than a lightly regulated commercial market. So it will fail anyway."

A prevalent and worrying menace in our industry. There are too many unscrupulous people that have jumped on the bandwagon, selling e-liquid in bottles marked with biro (zero respect, let alone knowledge for CHIP compliancy).

There are 'vendors' out there, totally unregulated selling extremely questionable, and in some cases, dangerous products.

Please regulate them!

However, we shouldn't all be tarred with the same brush. There are so many responsible, excellent ecig vendors (large and small) that have taken extensive care and cost to look after their customers.

For the sake of the lives of us millions of vapers, do not remove our alternative to smoking. The bland, medicinal pharma product might make the big companies money, but as previously tested, has a less than 5% success rate.

Should MHRA get their own way, this will be a death sentence to the millions of ex smokers, turned to vapers.

There is hope in abundance

There is plenty of hope. This is a fight, and a fight we as vapers must win.

It is worth noting, mirror organisations in Holland and Germany, both put across the same proposals, which were thrown out in court. The year before the proposed ruling, in 2015, there will be general election held. Now is time to tell your politicians what you think and to give them their support. If they listen to your views and rights.

Finally, an official statement from our Managing Director, Aaron Taylor:

As a company it has always been our policy to supply a safe and quality product which provides efficacy to all of our customers regardless of need.

We pride ourselves in meeting all current regulations and going beyond by carrying out extra steps such as full traceability and regular GC-MS testing.

Our site and retail outlets have always followed a strict protocol of not selling to anyone under the age of 18, this would go against the industry as a whole, and anyone doing this should not be part of our industry.

In its current understood form medical marketing authority licensing would “kill” the electronic cigarette industry as we currently know it. It would likely mean being limited to using one product, with a few variations on flavour from 2016.

Our company alongside Ecita fully intend to legally challenge any unsuitable regulation which may appear in the next few years.

Electronic Cigarettes LTD will endeavor to provide a licensed product should we be forced down that route, however, as mentioned above this product will be severely limited.

As an organisation we hope the MHRA will take a different approach to this regulation and listen to the consumer, businesses currently operating ethically, and health experts who have given their invaluable opinion supporting electronic cigarettes.

Many thanks for your continued support,

Aaron Taylor
Managing Director
Electronic Cigarettes LTD.

You might find this hard to believe. Having placed my order with ECigWizard I decided that 'getting VapeMail' might be a topic for this blog so I determined that when it arrived I would calmly photograph the 'unboxing' so as to have some pictures to upload with it, a problem arose though.. having signed for the Jiffy bag that our Postman proffered I found that I was so excited about ripping it open and starting to play with the contents that I was actually shaking, I feared that talking pictures of this event in my life might not prove possible with my unsteady hands. I reminded myself that I am a grown man and not a 5 year old on his Birthday, took a couple of deep breaths and thankfully captured a couple of shots on my camera before proceeding to spend the next couple of hours behaving like the aforementioned boy. Publicly admitting such child-like behaviour may seem strange, but I know from talking with other Vapers that I am not alone in getting just too excited when receiving more vaping supplies, I have even seen it referred to as the 'VapeMail Shakes'.

What?

For those that have no idea what I am talking about 'VapeMail' is nothing more than a delivery of vaping supplies, not just it's arrival but also the anticipation that begins once the order confirmation arrives right through to the pleasure of unpacking and finally trying out your carefully chosen goods. Have you ever noticed that you can spend a good half hour deciding between two similar cartomisers which cost about £5 each while as a smoker you would spend about £7.00 on a pack of 20 without giving it a second thought?

Cost

Back when I was a smoker I bought a pack every day, £7 x 7 days equals a spend of £49 every week, I know that some weeks I might spend more than that on vaping gear but over the months my average spending on vaping supplies is far lower than my past smoking expenditure, so I never feel guilty about ordering Ecig stuff, even if, strictly speaking I don't always need it. I view a delivery from ECigWizard as a Jiffy bag full of little rewards for not smoking.

Custard

This latest VapeMail was a bit special, I had not ordered any supplies for about six weeks so I felt that I had earned the right to splash out a bit. In my Jiffy bag of goodies I had unexciting things like AW18650 batteries (which are very good but a bit dull) but I also had things that where new to me like a Octopus Dripping Atomiser, a Smok Zmax mod and some of Mrs B's Vanilla Custard Eliquid. Actually it was the last of these Items that I was most excited about, I personally like sweet flavours to vape and this new Wizzmix has received some great reviews - I was not disappointed, it is sweet and creamy and reminded me of my Mom's Treacle Steam Sponge liberally covered with hot custard. I know that ECigWizard are proud of their new range of Wizmix ejuices, their aim was to produce a premium range of flavours using the best available ingredients at the same price of a normal, everyday ejuice and on the evidence of Mrs B's Vanilla Custard I think that they have achieved it wonderfully. I can't wait to try some of the other flavours now.

Dripping

The Octopus Dripping Atomiser is also pretty great. I have not used a dripping atomiser since I first started vaping and the design has certainly moved on, like most dripping atomisers produced now the Octopus's atomising element is constructed from silica wick and Nichrome wire. It comes ready coiled for use but once the supplied coil has gunked up or burnt out then it can be replaced with one that you wind yourself. What impressed me most was how well it is made, I have seen dripping atomisers at twice the price of the Octopus so wasn't expecting it to be as well finished as it is.

Mod

I have been looking for a new mod for a while, I have a couple of mechanical mods and a Lavatube already so strictly speaking I didn't really need another mod but I did really fancy trying a variable wattage device. I wanted one that uses the same 18650 size battery of my other mods and as a fan of Smok products the ZMax v2 was the obvious choice. It is the most expensive mod that I have ever owned but from the moment that I first held it I knew that I had made the right choice. It's chrome finish is smooth to the touch, the body is slim (for a 18650 mod) so it sits happily in the hand and the blue LED display has a curved screen, the immediate impression is of quality. There is only one button which is used both for firing and for the setting menu which is cleverly controlled with a number of clicks, it even let's you control if the display should light when it is fired or not and whether atomiser impedance or remaining battery voltage is shown.

I'm very happy with my VapeMail.... I just wish that I had ordered more of Mrs B's Vanilla Custard.

Dangerous Dogs Act 1991

The Dangerous Dogs Act was introduced as a parliamentary knee jerk reaction to some truly tragic cases of dogs attacking people, especially children. The Act is quite wide ranging, covering a number of dog 'types' (rather than breads), these dogs have to be kept on a lead and muzzled in public, they must also be registered, insured, neutered, tattooed and receive microchip implants. The Act also bans the breeding, sale or exchange of these dogs. Whatever the merits of this legislation the important thing to note is that it was empowered quickly and without long considered debate by a government reacting to public opinion stirred up by tabloid newspapers, the combined lobbying of the breed fanciers not withstanding. And remember too that we often style ourselves as a 'Nation of Dog Lovers'.

Public Opinion

Public opinion is very powerful, not least because democratic government predisposes politicians to act on it. The vendors of vaping supplies have an important roll with respect to public relations; they can affect it positively or negatively.

The first responsibility of vendors is to comply with the many and various laws that apply to the selling of ecigs and ejuices, this may sound too obvious to state, however too often vendors fail to do so, maybe because of ignorance or possibly by design. The main problem is that if vendors fail to comply with existing statute they inevitably invite a 'total ban' solution from exasperated law makers. Some sellers of ecigs and/or ejuice don't even have public liability insurance leaving them potentially liable to ruinous legal consequences.

Vendors can project a positive view of vaping by having clean, welcoming shops with friendly, knowledgeable staff and by offering good, honest advice to online enquiries. Clear nicotine warnings and age restrictions on vendor’s websites also convey an impression of a reasonable and mature supply chain.

This blog is itself part of ECig Wizards contribution to its positive public face of vaping as is their You Tube channel and Facebook site. The 'Kickstarter' funded 'Smoke without fire' project also contributes by disseminating information to Vapers and the public alike through it's number of short, professionally produced films available on YouTube. ECig Wizard made a significant pledge of £3,700 to this project with no obvious direct return to themselves.

Self regulation

Another important way to avoid unwanted legal restrictions on Vapers and vendors alike is to be seen to have effective self regulation and to comply with it. This is the roll of a trade association who for the UK's ECig vending businesses is the 'Electronic Cigarette Industry Trade Association' (ECITA) . Membership currently costs each company £600 per month, membership is not available to individual Vapers, so if you want to support the work of the ECITA you need to do so by supporting the vendors that are members. The obligations placed on members are wide ranging, far reaching and the consistency of implementation is regularly audited, this ensures a 'Gold Standard' of customer service and the assurance of full compliance to all applicable legal requirements. The ECITA also produce an array of documents and maintain an excellent blog  of their own, all in the aid of conveying knowledge and accurate information about ecigs as widely as possible.

To quote the ECITA site "Membership of ECITA is contingent upon a commitment to compliance with the regulatory law under the General Product Safety Regulations, CHIP et al, as amended over time, as well the ISE program....... (and)  immediately tells consumers that you are a serious vendor who has made a genuine commitment to this Standard of Excellence."

You might assume that membership is almost universal amongst UK vendors because it gives substantial benefit to the vender and purchaser however you will be surprised at how many suppliers do not bother supporting the ECITA, look at it's website for a list of their members.

 Non-compliance Consequences

One of the most important areas of compliance with regulations and the law is the bottling and labelling of ejuice containing nicotine. We risk becoming complacent about handling ejuice but just pick up an ejuice bottle now and have a look at it; it has a child resistant cap, a tactile warning triangle and a printed label with a danger warning, content description and manufacturer details. If the bottle in your hand lacks any of these the supplier may be breaking the law and additionally risking all of our future vaping freedom.

Now let's return to the dangerous dogs mentioned at the start. Nicotine is potentially dangerous if swallowed or allowed to contact the skin, even at the relatively diluted levels of standard ejuice, children are at an even greater risk from the dangers of nicotine because of their lower body weight. All of the legislation surrounding ejuice packaging is in place to help minimise these risks, however (and this is important) you too have a responsibility to keep it safe and out of the reach of children and pets.

Who let the dogs out?

Now imagine how the tabloid newspapers would react to Electric Cigarettes, vapers and Vapors if the nightmare scenario occurred and a child in the U.K. lost his or her life as a result of coming into contact with or consuming ejuice because it was incorrectly stored, bottled or labelled. Under the pressure of public opinion the government is likely to conclude that if reasonable and sensible regulations can not be adhered to by ejuice buyers and sellers then the only suitable response is an immediate, outright ban. In such circumstances I too would support such a ban; if we can't act responsibly then we don't deserve to be trusted.

Child's eye view

I have seen bottles of ejuice with just the flavour marked on the label, I have even been able to order them online.  A small child faced with an orange coloured liquid in a bottle labelled only with the word 'Orange' has no way to know that it is not a cordial to be added to water and drunk. THINK ABOUT IT!

I know that this has not been the most entertaining blog contribution however I think it is the most important piece that I have written here and is something that I feel strongly about. You are naturally welcome to add your own comments. The views expressed here are my own and are not necessarily shared by ECig Wizard (although I jolly well hope they are).

Some Vapers are lucky enough to stumble straight into using an eGo battery with a Vision clearomizer others find their way via ecigs that do a fair job at looking like a cigarette but fall short of being a decent vaping tool. Either way, just about every vaper uses an eGo battery, some use it full time others use it as a back-up or an out-and-about device.  ECig Wizard's Starter Bundle is built on this configuration and it's the ideal vaping starting point - many Vapers never feel the need to try other, more complex devices.

I have been using a CE8 SS Mesh Cartomiser recently, I have attached it to a standard eGo battery and it is just perfect. It is a sensible size, it looks good, it holds 2mm of ejuice, is easy to refill, it has a replaceable atomiser head and most importantly it consistently produces plenty of well flavoured vapour.

Snob?

So why then do I also have a small (and growing) collection of ’Mods' and 'rebuildables'. Let us start with a couple of quick definitions (at least in the context that I am using) ; Mods are the power supply part of an Ecig but unlike eGo batteries they have a removable, rechargeable battery, they also often have adjustable power outputs. Rebuildables are the ejuice end of an Ecig but unlike normal cartomizers these are designed to incorporate a home made heating coil and wick as the replaceable atomiser.

If I was to be accused of being a vaping snob because of the variety of Ecig devices that I use then I would find it hard to refute the suggestion however I do not believe that this is really true. Mods and rebuildables are synonymous with each other because variable output is useful when using home made atomisers of inconsistent impedance, this explains why people who are into using rebuildables are often the same people who also use mods but it does not explain why some enthusiasts faff around with either device in the first place, especially when there is a perfectly good and simple alternative.

Shinyitis

The term 'Shinyitis' was coined by users of a Facebook Vapers group called 'Vapers Unite', the admins of the group (Jim Jam and Lou Lou) have given me permission to share pictures of their mod collections which clearly show the symptoms of Shinyitis at an advanced stage. Put simply Shinyitis is the compelling need to buy every piece of newly available vaping equipment at the first possible opportunity, especially if it is.... Shiny. This is not snobbishness or oneupmanship, it is just part of a human desire to collect things. In my days as a smoker I collected Zippo lighters, I didn't keep them in glass cabinets or anything like that, I just used them. Mods are in many ways analogous to lighters in that they fit in the hand and are pleasing both tactually and visually to the connoisseur, a natural thing to collect and a source of pleasure to the collector.

You would be forgiven for thinking that Shinyitis would be a condition exclusively experienced by men but I know of many ladies who also exhibit advanced symptoms such as hiding a secret credit card account from their partner to finance the obsession. It must be acknowledged though that those who choose to fiddle endlessly with rebuildables are more likely to be male and the world of DIY Mod making is (as far as I know) exclusively so.

Practicalities.

The use of mods as a vaping tool is more than just obsessional collection. As alluded to above, if you coil your own atomisers a variable voltage (VV) mod is almost a necessity as in addition to giving the ability to adjust power output to compensate for unpredicted atomiser impedance many VV Mods can also measure the ohm rating of your atomiser and often also have short circuit protection built in.

In the search for the perfect vaping experience some mod/rebuildable users will purposefully coil an atomiser with either a higher or lower impedance than is normally commercially available and then adjust the mod's power output accordingly to vary the vape. In addition to this further variables such as the type and size or grade of wick and the type or thickness of wire used for the coil can alter the perceived quality of the vape produced by effecting the temperature, volume, flavour and/or throat hit produced.

You Tube is a great place to experience the intricate detail that vaping enthusiast find important but be careful, even if you are a happy user of a Vision/eGo setup you might find yourself being drawn into this behaviour yourself and there really is no need to be, if your vaping experience, with the equipment that you have, is already satisfying you then be content, and be happy that you have a less complicated life than some other vapers and probably have a healthier bank balance too.

Electronic cigarettes are a relatively new phenomenon and inevitably a great deal of inaccurate, ill-informed or even maliciously damaging opinions are published, the worst of these come disguised as research. Poor quality or biased research and the reporting of it can be very damaging to the public perception of electronic cigarettes. Whenever you read a report about research you should try, when possible, to look at the original paper written by the researchers, regrettably this is not always possible as many are published in subscription only periodicals, recently however there has been a (very welcome) increase in the number of articles published 'Open Access' which offers you the opportunity to judge the validity of the paper yourself. When evaluating any research you should look at who the authors are and check their academic qualification and their 'Declaration of Interests' along with the source of funding for the research. The size of the sample tested/examined is important as is the balance of the sample. A good report will be peer reviewed, will fully explain its methods and it's limitations and list references for all of it's citations.

As you might guess, once put under the spotlight of critical review many reports on electronic cigarettes show their weaknesses therefore I am pleased to inform you of a paper entitled "E-Cigarettes: Prevalence and Attitudes in Great Britain". The report does not attempt to make any direct claim as to the benefit or otherwise of ecigs but it does claim that "The principle strength of our population survey is the potential to provide policy makers up-to-date information with data from a large representative sample of British adults. Electronic cigarettes use is a rapidly growing phenomenon, with potential to greatly influence smoking and quitting behaviour in the United Kingdom."

The Paper

The paper is published online by Oxford Journals, as an Open Access article in 'Nicotine & Tobacco Research'. The authors are well qualified to write with authority on the subject:

Martin Dockrell, BA - Action on Smoking and Health, London.

Rory Morison, BSc - Centre for Population Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh Medical School, Edinburgh.

Linda Bauld, PhD - UK Centre for Tobacco Control Studies, Stirling Management School, University of Stirling, Stirling.

Ann McNeill, PhD - UK Centre for Tobacco Control Studies, National Addiction Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, King’s College London.

The authors gratefully acknowledged "funding from the British Heart Foundation, Cancer Research UK, Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), the Medical Research Council (MRC), and the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), under the auspices of the UK Clinical Research Collaboration."

I really don't think that there is likely to be any question about the credibility of this report. I recommend reading it yourself, Click Here

The introduction to the paper gives a comprehensive overview of published studies that would prove useful to anyone wanting further information on Ecig research, this also introduces an acronym that is new to me, 'ENDS' apparently stands for 'Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems', personally I prefer this to PV or PVD i.e. Personal Vaping Device', which is an acronym I have seen used by some Vapers.

Analysis

The reported results are very interesting, not only does it potentially provide policy makers up-to-date information, as is it's aim, it also provides a great deal of information that is useful to anybody wishing to promote the use of electronic cigarettes as an alternative to tobacco smoking whether they seek to do so altruistically or for marketing gain. It is from this latter point of view that I will attempt some analysis of their results.

The report clearly shows an increase in the awareness of ecigs among cigarette smokers which is encouraging news however one suspects that there is a huge gap between awareness of ecigs and understanding or knowledge of them.

It is also salient that only one third of smokers who had tried ecigs were found to be current Ecig users, this suggests that the inverse proportion (two thirds) had tried ecigs but either have not made, or have made but abandoned the attempt, to vape as a permanent alternative to smoking. In tobacco cessation terms one third could be viewed as a high conversion rate but I fear that it represents a large number of would-be 'converters' who have reverted to tobacco because the quality of Ecig that they tried was poor. We have all seen the cheap 'Cig-a-Like' ecigs, indeed many of us were introduced to 'vaping' by them, however I am sure we would all have struggled to continue with ecigs had we not found a better quality alternative to 'Cig-a-Likes'. There is a marketing opportunity to be gained by telling current tobacco cigarette users who have tried ecigs but not converted to them that, there are better, more effective ecigs available.

The most common perceived advantage of ecigs is that 'They might satisfy desire to smoke', followed closely by ecigs presenting the 'possibility to reduce smoking' and then 'to give up smoking'. Interestingly the research suggested that only 39% thought that they might be good for health and just 17% thought that they might taste good. The largest perceived disadvantage of ecigs is that 'they might be too expensive'. These figures suggest that those wishing to market ecigs still have a lot of work to do, or to put it another way, there is still a great deal of market opportunity remaining.  Unsurprisingly The most commonly given reason for trying e-cigs was “as a substitute for smoking where smoking is not allowed” however I fear that many of these smokers would not necessarily be those who will move on to switch permanently from tobacco use to ecigs as they are using ecigs when they can't smoke and not as a freely made choice, and therefore may not be the right target for marketing to, especially as future legislation may restrict Ecig use too.

Education

The paper also says "...smokers believe e-cigarettes represent a much smaller threat to their health than smoking and this appears to be justified by a literature, which has so far failed to identify any widespread health threats either to e-cigarettes users or to those around them."

Curiously 28% of people in this survey thought that ecigs are safer than NRT, which is a claim that I have never seen made by any vapour's forums or ecig vendors, this demonstrates the amount of educations that is still needed. The report also notes that ”quitters in an NHS stop-smoking service will receive support and education on the use of NRT, e-cigarette users are largely untutored and better education may result in greater satisfaction and substitution for cigarettes” and in their conclusion it suggests that ”The failure to support and educate smokers on the effective use, risks, and benefits of e-cigarettes may represent a lost opportunity for public health.”

Aromatherapy

Aromatherapy involves being massaged with essential oils mixed into a carrier base for therapeutic reasons. Personally I'm not really into the whole 'alternative therapy' notion however if one is expertly massaged with some pleasantly scented warm oil while relaxing on a couch you are almost bound to feel better after than you did before. Aromatherapists have in recent years faced regulation however this is being implemented through close discussion with the organisations that represent them with the aim of restricting ad hoc treatment by untrained and uninsured individuals. Essential oils can be absorbed through the skin which can cause positive or negative results depending partly on the person being massaged, for example if you have high blood pressure it is advisable not to be massaged with a preparation containing Rosemary Essential oil. In addition to Aromatherapy Massage there is also 'Steam Inhalation with essential oils' intended to help treat some ailments, especially those of the upper respiratory tract, nose and sinuses (ref www.essentialoils.co.za/steam-inhalation.htm).

I'm telling you about Aromatherapy because there are some parallels to the world of vaping, not least that smell is an important factor of taste, I have even seen ejuice flavour concentrates described as 'Aromas'. Aromatherapy is sometimes scorned by health practitioners but for it's devotees it's health benefits are beyond question, not unlike the situation that Vapers are in and there may be lessons for Vapers to be taken from the dialogue between Aromatherapist representative organisations and legislative bodies. The similarity between 'Steam Inhalation' and vaping seems obvious however this is where the parallel breaks down, Aromatherapists use Essential Oils whereas Vapers do not use oils in their ejuice - Glycerol, Glycerin, Nicotine and the flavours used in ejuice are water soluble unlike oil which is not.

Cancer Research

Given all of the above I was rather shocked by Dr Michael Siegel's report over at 'The Rest of the Story' blog, called "German Cancer Research Center Lies about Health Effects of Electronic Cigarettes to Scare Users and Unfairly Influence EU Directive", in it he claims that "According to the German Cancer Research Center, the inhalation of glycerin can cause lipoid pneumonia. Lipoid pneumonia is a form of pneumonia - lung inflammation - in which lipids (oils) accumulate in the bronchial tree. It can be caused by exogenous factors, such as the inhalation of oils."

Dr Michael Siegel who is one of the foremost commentators on tobacco control bluntly states "...that the German Cancer Research Center is lying. It is not true that glycerin causes, or can cause, lipoid pneumonia. In fact, it is impossible for glycerin inhalation to cause lipoid pneumonia" and goes on to explain "Basic chemistry tells us that glycerin is an alcohol. Specifically, it is a polyol, which is a compound with multiple hydroxyl groups. The hydroxyl group (OH) is the hallmark of an alcohol. Oils, on the other hand, are characterized by the presence of either a carboxyl group (COOH) or a sterol. The bottom line is that glycerin is not an oil, but an alcohol."

Reasons?

I think it is legitimate to ask why the German Cancer Research Center have made these claims, the headline to 'The Rest of the Story' blog indicates the belief that it is to "Scare Users and Unfairly Influence EU Directive", if this is true it is absolutely outrageous! I guess that alternatively they may have just misunderstood what ejuices contain but that would be very sloppy science indeed, another option is that they have been confused by poor translation on Chinese websites which sometimes describe ejuice as 'oil', although you might think that a description of a Ecig as a 'portable pocket sauna' (I kid you not) would ring some alarm bells regarding the accuracy of the source.

Why are medical institution so often opposed to vaping while medical individuals from Doctors to Dentists anecdotally applaud ecigs as a substitute for cigarette smoking? Could it be that the institutions are just too remote from the 'health coalface' or is it that they are selfishly motivated by the desire to preserve their jobs, advising us of smoking related diseases.

DIY flavours

As Dr Michael Siegel's blog says; ”It is theoretically possible that lipoid pneumonia could result from an electronic cigarette product that used oils in its formulation. For example, a product that used essential oils in a flavoring or fragrance would introduce a real - although still very small - risk”. One can be sure that any ejuice purchased from a reputable supplier is free from essential oils but it is worth DIY ejuice makers remembering that they are not suitable as an ejuice ingredient. As a DIY mixer myself I have tried 'Cup cake' flavours from my local supermarket, however in my experience they tend not to have a sufficiently concentrated flavour for good ejuice and some use Vegtable oil as a base which should most defiantly be avoided.

Doctor, Doctor.

Dr. Konstantinos Farsalinos who is credited by Dr Michael Siegel for scientific insights incorporated in his blog has also analysed the results of an online survey, his report PDF can be read here.  The survey does have a limitation (acknowledged at the beginning of the report) in that the participants were self selected, mainly from an interested group. Participation in the survey was open to all but it was promoted via vaping forums and blogs etc therefor the results mainly relate to the experience of current Vapers. Anybody who has had a strongly negative experience of vaping is likely to have given up on ecigs and presumably will be ignoring vaping forums etc so are less likely to have contributed their experience to the survey.

For us Vapers though, the analysis is encouraging with relation to lung function and exercise capacity, his conclusion contains "..in a group of motivated e-cigarette users we observe positive effects on respiratory function, while duration of e-cigarette use is associated with improvement in cough symptoms and exercise capacity."
You can read Dr Michael Siegel's blog by clicking here and I'd like to end with another quote from his blog, "Of course, if the German Cancer Research Center's statement were true, we would have seen many cases of lipoid pneumonia in vapers by now".

Biting the bullet

It is possible that we will avoid Ecigs being regulated within the EU Tobacco Directive, the reported opinion from the EU council that advises on legal affairs (JURI) that the inclusion of Ecigs would not withstand legal challenge can at least offer us some hope. However even if we do win this particular EU battle, the war to keep our freedom to vape is far from over, we need to have public opinion on our side to avoid the possibility of our national or regional governments introducing legislation to unduly restrict us. We might like to imagine that we live in a truly free market society however the truth is that our society is highly regulated, this is especially so with respect to health and safety. Politicians like to make laws, it makes them feel useful.

Love me, I'm a vaper

Currently Vapers are not universally loved, in fact we have very few natural allies. Smokers despise us because they feel that we have deserted their camp and non-smokers think we are just as bad as the tobacco burners are. Any new group of people who are doing something that is not understood are treated with suspicion at the very least. It is our responsibility as Vapers to convince the public as a whole that we are normal, rational and friendly individuals who choose to vape in preference to smoking tobacco and to present the reasons why we vape. If we can get public opinion supporting our effort not to smoke tobacco then we are far less likely to face restrictions from government.

Where I Vape

Having a surreptitious vape may be appealing, it may even be reminiscent for some of us of our younger days having a sneaky drag in the school loos but this type of behaviour does not represent Vapers well to the public. You may recall the debacle arising from someone allegedly attempting to secretly vape on a coach on the M6 toll near Birmingham in July 2012, The Guardian headline at the time read 'M6 toll coach terror scare caused by vapour from electronic cigarette', this was the first time that many members of the public had seen a report concerning ecigs in the mass media and it certainly was not a good start.

Vaping is not illegal in enclosed public areas but we should be careful not to confuse legality with permission, personally I do not presume that vaping is allowed anywhere other than in my our own property or in open outdoor space. Permission to vape in or on anyone else's property is within their gift to grant or refuse, I always comply with their wishes, if I am refused authorisation to vape after seeking the property owners permission I take it as a good opportunity to educate them about vaping but I always try to do so in a friendly and non-confrontational manner.

Past life
When I was much younger I remember feeling quite aggrieved that cinemas had started to insist that those who wished to smoke sat together on one side of the cinema, in hindsight this was the start of the long slide to the complete banning of indoor public smoking but at the time the move was derided by smokers who initially flouted the new rule and continued to smoke wherever they wished within the cinema. The smokers had ignored the public opinion shift against them and quickened the demise of their freedom to smoke in public by antagonising non-smokers. As Vapers we are currently in the same position as smokers were at that time, if we behave in anyway that makes non-Vapers unhappy we leave ourselves vulnerable to draconian legislation.

Long haul

My brother is still a dedicated smoker, he refuses to use any transport that requires him not to smoke for two hours or more, he therefor doesn't get to go on any holidays to distant climes. I'm really not sure if he expects that his self imposed boycott will result in a change of airline policy or not but I think that it is obvious that his action will have no effect on anyone other than himself.

Like my brother, I don't enjoy being nicotine deprived for long periods either but that is not going to dictate my travel choices. I know that some Vapers are tempted to have a stealth vape on-route however I always take the less risky path and just slap on a nicotine patch for the duration of the journey. Once, after an eight hour flight, I landed in Amsterdam to transfer to my next flight to the U.K. I was stuck indoors on the secure side of the airport but the airport authorities had thoughtfully provided a smoking room and as a responsible vaper I went and joined the smokers where no one could be upset by my vaping... O'h gosh, I wish that I had not done so, despite powerful extractors the smoking room was an absolute fog, I didn't need to vape as just breathing in gave me a nicotine rush. I left Amsterdam wishing that I had just kept my patch on and stayed away from the smokers, I was feeling quite ill.

Future

If in the long term we Vapers can persuade the public that we present no threat and pose no danger to them then we do have a chance of a future in which we can vape freely when and where we choose however if we push our habit too forcefully where it is unwelcome we risk a public backlash and the permanent loss of our current freedoms.

I know that this article won't represent the universal view of all Vapers, I therefore invite you to express your opinion, either in agreement or opposition - please comment in the box below.

17/06/13

Here is an interesting document, from the UK’s Official Parliament site;  it’s a letter to Anna Soubry MP from Lord Boswell, Chairman of European Committee (.pdf HERE).  I can’t give you a quote without re-typing it because the pdf is from scanned text, so I encourage you to read Page 3 (Guaranteed boob free).

 

17/06/13

The Statehouse File has a report entitled “INDIANAPOLIS – Minors will no longer be able to buy electronic cigarettes under a law that will take effect July 1.”  Which says “House Bill 1225 – enacted by the General Assembly this spring – makes the sale of electronic cigarettes to minors a class C felony. It will also make the purchase of electronic cigarettes with the intention of giving them to minors a Class C felony.”

I would welcome banning the sale of ecigs to minors in the UK too; all responsible ecig vendors already have such a ban, self-imposed.

17/06/13

In an aricle in TopNews from New Zealand headlined “NCPs to be Regulated as Medicines Announces MHRA” they say that “Initially, it was considered that electronic cigarette is an option for people to give up smoking. But with passage of time, it has been found that people have been using the same as a lifestyle product. This has led a number of places to ban the same; among them are ScotRail and Abertay University.” This seems to confirm the view that ecigs face being regulated just because people like using them as a cigarette alternative and so they must be regulated even if said regulation reduces the chance that cigarette smokers might start to use them as a safer alternative.

15/06/13

In 'ECigs in the Media' I sometimes think that all I do is ‘right writers wrongs’, these is loads of misinformation printed and uploaded, often it is just the same rubbish over and over again, that was written elsewhere and has been badly rehashed. At the moment most of the reports are exclusively about the MHRA announcement which I am sure we all have our own opinion of.

Today I’d like to highlight “E-cigarettes: To Vape Or Not To Vape” by L’Oréal Blackett in Body Confidential. There are a couple of points that L’Oreal could have phrased differently and maybe there is more about ‘shisha pens’ than I really needed to know but overall it’s well written, balanced and interesting. Just as a taste: “Like many bad habits though, especially ones you’d really like to carry on with, the ‘lesser than two evils’ alternatives are often created to wean off the pretty ferociously hooked. Like fat-free ice cream and Diet Coke. In this case, tobacco companies have introduced smoking phenomenon, e-cigarettes.”.

 

14/06/13

 

It was very refreshing to read a well considered, clearly written opinion piece about the MHRA ecig proposals, I have not seen any of the author’s other work and this is the first time that I have become aware of the site however if this article is an indication of their standard reporting I will defiantly become a regular visitor. The site is called Politics.co.uk and the article is entitled “This puritanical attack on electronic cigarettes will cost lives” by Ian Dunt.

 

13/06/13

 

The MHRA press release has naturally gained significant interest within the media – mostly just reiterating the statement. There are a few web links worth following; ECigWizard’s own statement and the post from Clive Bates (The Counterfactual) which is widely quoted in the ECigWizard statement, the press release from ECITA (the trade body) and Dr Konstantinos Farsalinos comment piece.

VapourTrailsTV on YouTube with Ben Potter of ECig Wizard discuss the MHRA announcement.

USA Today’s coverage of the MHRA press release carries a picture of a cig-a-like held by the worst hands that I have seen in close-up. They appear to have the Nicotine stains of a three pack a day smoker and chewed nails.

 

12/06/13

 

The MHRA press release is now available CLICK HERE to read it for yourself. “UK moves towards safe and effective electronic cigarettes and other nicotine-containing products”

My initial thoughts are that given that “All nicotine-containing products (NCPs), such as electronic cigarettes, are to be regulated as medicines… “ then tobacco cigarettes should also require licensing as a medical product given that they contain nicotine.

The statement only refers to ‘Electronic Cigarettes’ and does not indicate whether it intends to attempt to enforce regulation of just the nicotine containing ejuice or the ejuice and the delivery devices.  In reality only Nicotine containing ejuice and products containing it could be regulated,  remember that recreational drugs are illegal but you can still buy the paraphernalia. If this is the case then mods, cartos and nico-free ejuice could still be sold but Nicotine (as an eliquid, base or juice additive) would have to be licensed (by 2016).

I predict that if licences for nicotine are too restrictive, expensive or difficult to obtain then we will see a flood of unlicensed product being sold in markets, under the counter and on street corners which would inevitably be a less regulated market than we currently have.

12/06/13

 

You have to laugh; if not you would cry, reading headlines like this one in ‘International Deign Times’ "E-Cigarettes A Hoax? No Nicotine, But Not Safer, Critics Say; Nevertheless Tobacco Companies Will Still Rake In $1 Billion On Battery-Powered Smokes [REPORT]"

In the ‘REPORT’ they again repeat the assertion the ecigs do not contain nicotine “Containing no nicotine, e-cigarettes seem heaven-sent for cancer-concerned consumers” as if Nicotine and cancer are somehow linked. All too often we see people confused between Tobacco and Nicotine yet these same people think themselves qualified to tell us what to think.

The article continues by discussing the roll of ‘Big Tobacco’ in ecig brands but ends by stating “But tobacco company marketers are ready with pre-packaged comebacks. "The most amazing thing about this cigarette?" NJOY's website asks, "It isn't one." When it comes to cancer, we'd rather not take any risks.”

All I can say is… why not just go away and design something instead of talking BULLOCKS.

12/06/13

The ‘NHS Choices’ website added a new article yesterday with the heading “Decision over e-cigarettes and 'vaping' imminent”, I understand that there is to be some sort of announcement today. Naturally I will post analysis of it and it’s implications in due course should it prove to be significant. This might be a good time to bookmark ECig’s in the Media :-)

Although the NHS is Government funded it is not in their remit to promote the Government’s policies, the article does not give any clue about the direction of thought regarding ecig regulation. It is however a well balanced and informative information piece that provides both pro-ecig “compared with regular cigarettes, they are certainly the lesser of two evils. First, e-cigarettes don’t contain any tobacco – only nicotine, which is highly addictive but much less dangerous. For this reason, smoking e-cigarettes (known as ‘vaping’) is generally regarded a safer alternative to smoking for those unable or unwilling to stop using nicotine. Also, while the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) found the liquid and vapour to contain traces of toxins, including cancer-causing chemicals nitrosamines and formaldehyde, the level of these toxins is about one thousandth of that in cigarette smoke. We cannot be certain that these traces of toxins are harmless, but tests on animals and a small study of 40 smokers are reassuring, providing some evidence that e-cigarettes are well tolerated and only associated with mild adverse effects (slight mouth or throat irritation, a dry cough).” And anti-ecig views “Some health professionals do not recommend them because they believe the potential for harm is significant. It is worth bearing in mind that nicotine is not altogether harmless – for example, it has been linked to anxiety – and research suggests nicotine plays a direct role in the development of blood vessel disease. E-cigarettes are banned by other countries and by some UK schools concerned about their influence on adolescents”.

 

11/06/13

The-Ecigarette.co.uk has an article titled ‘Vaping Science’. I think that I understand the thrust of what it is trying to say… the mind set of the anti-smoking brigade is so fixed that they have decided against ecigs just because they resemble tobacco cigarettes.. It is a view that I heartily agree with.

Unfortunately the article starts with the line “The truth is: “Smoking an e-cigarette is a step towards quitting smoking.” and then fails to quote any scientific study to substantiate the assertion while simultaneously failing to state whom it is quoting, not to mention that the term “Smoking an e-cigarette” is itself a misnomer because ecigs are vaped, not smoked.

The last paragraph lost me entirely “In todays modern world lets use the science, not peoples word. For years we were openly told by the cigarette companies that smoking was actually good out health and those same people are now telling us vaping is bad for us, doesnt seem right somehow!!!!!”

It looks like the site is just a vehicle for advertising but I think that their heart is in the right place.

 

08/06/13

God bless the Internet. A new site opened yesterday, I quickly scanned over it and it looked good, it goes by the name of Ecigarette-Politics. and describes itself as “an online resource for materials related to e-cigarette politics, legal issues, regulatory issues and health-related topics.” This could develop into a very usefull site. :-)

Another site worthy of a gander is ‘Steve V’s Vaping World’ it is advert funded and I have to admit that it had not previously been on my RADAR but looking at the Ecigarette News area yesterday I was rather impressed.

07/06/13

 

The Business Standard’s headline “Italy may ban smoking e-cigarettes in public places” is a good demonstration of how misinformation spreads.

As we all know we don’t ‘Smoke’ ecigarettes, we are not burning anything when we vape, QED there is no smoke however they quote France's Health Minister Marisol Touraine as saying "Smoking an e-cigarette is smoking”, you have to wonder how anybody who is making decisions effecting so many French citizens can be so wrong, and why nobody challenged her counter-logical assertion.

Another paragraph reads “Although the devices are considered safer than smoking, doctors continue to debate the possible impact of some of the vapours' ingredients - including propylene glycol, which irritates airways, and formaldehyde, which is known to raise lung and nasal cancer risk.” Here we see again the regurgitation of earlier erroneous articles so I can simply counter that with a copy & paste from my response the first time I read it - I think that they maybe are relying on research that erroneously confused glycol with oil when they say “propylene glycol, which irritates airways” and the line “and formaldehyde, which is known to raise lung and nasal cancer risk.” Is misleading because although formaldehyde is a nasty chemical and can raise lung and nasal cancer risk it is NOT an ingredient of ejuice and most defiantly should not be in the vapour.

The article is in fact  very short but it does contain another unchallenged view “opponents also claim there is evidence they encourage children who have tried them to "graduate" to smoking real cigarettes.” – Evidence, what evidence, the only research that I have seen indicates that children do not want to vape, it really is not seen by them as ‘cool’.

The article ends by adding “Several countries have already outlawed e-cigarettes including Turkey, Brazil, Argentina and Singapore.” All that I can say to that is ‘more fool them’ we certainly have nothing to gain by emulating their error.

 

It is a lovely sunny day outside so I will just let you ‘take it as read’ that there are loads of other stupid media reports that I could have highlighted today– I’m going to go and sit in the sun :-)

 

05/06/13

 

The BBC is famously impartial and fair, that is why I was pleased to hear an 18 min radio program called Business Daily on BBC Word Service Radio. You can (and should) listen to it HERE

The program is divided into four main sections (giving the balance that the BBC like), the first is a short report from Helen Fitzhenry at Wigan Market where she spoke to ecig traders and users, one of whom correctly said that most vendors will not sell to anyone under 18 years old and mentioned the roll of ECITA (Electronic Cigarette Industry Trade Association).

In the studio they then interviewed three people in turn, the first John Britton, Head of the Department for Epidemiology (the study of population level causes and effects of disease) and Public Health at Nottingham City University) had some very encouraging things to say about ecigs;

“for the great majority of people, electronic cigarettes are going to be a very good thing” .. as a alternative to tobacco cigarettes.

”People could use nicotine without significant damage to their health for the rest of their lives if they wanted to.”

”Overwhelmingly, that is an absolute no brainer.  If you are a cigarette smoker, moving to electronic cigarettes would be an extremely positive move.”

“Cigarettes kill around half of all regular users….  On a scale of 1 to 100, I’d have electronic cigarettes under 5 when cigarettes are 100”

The second interviewee was the spokesman for health and consumer policy at the Europian Comission - Frederic Vincent. His position was that ecigs need to be regulated because the EU has an internal market but we have a patchwork of legislation - because goods move across boarders there should be the same national rules throughout the E.U.

Interviewee number three was Mike Ryan, Chairman of ECITA. He said “ecigs displaced the sale of 2.5 million cigarettes in Europe in the last year” and continued to give a good account of ecigs – clearly stating the policy positions of ECITA even under intense questioning.

It was really good to hear such a good report; it is a pity that it was not ‘picked up’ by the Radio 4 ‘Today Program’ as World Service reports sometimes are.

05/06/13

The Daily Mail has an article headlined “Cut down if you can't quit: Doctors concede that some smokers just can't stop - and that gum and patches are safe alternative” which refers to today’s guidance issued by NICE (National Institute of Health and Care Excellence).

Basically NICE have accepted the ‘Harm Reduction’ principle of tobacco control, which is a good thing. Unfortunately they do not  directly offer advice on Electronic Cigarettes however according to the article Professor Mike Kelly, (Director of the NICE Centre for Public Health) did say that he will tell patients that using e-cigarettes is ‘better than smoking.'

 

03/06/13

 

The International Business Times has a shocking headline in it’s Business & Health section; “e-Cigarettes, Vaping: Worse than Smoking Due to Cancer-Causing Components Found in Brands” – having read that headline I immediately threw away my ecig and went back to smoking tobacco! Fortunately I took the trouble to read the text that accompanied the headline and found that it was absolute BULLOCKS!

The first thing to note is that nowhere in the article do they repeat the claim “Vaping: Worse than Smoking” found in the headline, in fact the first line of the article includes “..vaping is no less dangerous than actual smoking..” which is somewhat watered down from the headline but is still BULLOCKS!

A little bit further on you can read “The said electronic devices have been found with nicotine” – gosh, really?

And then it digs up a couple of old chestnuts that we have seen before: a “component called tobacco-specific nitrosamines were also found in all cartridges from one brand and two of the cartridges from the other brand. These tobacco-specific nitrosamines are known for causing cancer in the body.” – but it does not state that these were found only as trace components, actually about the same as NRT patch levels. Tobacco-specific nitrosamines can also be found in potatoes, carrots, tomatoes etc. According to an article in Medscape today “Tobacco-specific nitrosamines were reported in two studies, but at trace levels, which are similar to those found in a nicotine patch, and, most importantly, approximately 500–1400-fold lower than Tobacco-specific nitrosamines levels measured in regular cigarettes” – so not “Worse than Smoking” then.

The second chestnut came while quoting Mike Feinstein M.D., spokesman of the American Lung Association "People are inhaling some type of chemical vaporised compound into their lungs without really knowing what's in it” - but we DO know what is in ejuice, it’s Glycerol, Glycerin, Nicotine and flavours, I can’t understand why that is difficult for ecig opponents to understand?

Confusingly the report also includes the paragraph “The famous electronic replacement for tobacco allows user to replicate smoking in any places without the smell of tobacco and reduced risk of carcinogenic components found in regular cigarettes. E-Cigarettes have received support from certain groups such the American Association of Public Health Physicians for helping save lives against tobacco-related illnesses. "Because the possibility exists to save the lives of four million of the eight million current adult American smokers who will otherwise die of a tobacco-related illness over the next twenty years," according the association.” – Which shows that “Vaping: Worse than Smoking” is absolute BULLOCKS!

 

03/06/13

A piece in Nursing in Practice is interesting, it looks at a survey of GP’s in the UK & Sweden, it’s titled “Nicotine most harmful cigarette ingredient, GPs think” and explains that a “substantial proportion of GPs (40%) believe nicotine to be the first or second riskiest component of cigarettes, incorrectly identifying it as more harmful than smoke.” And that “..the views held by some GPs in both the UK and Sweden may influence their willingness to recommend the use of alternative nicotine products to help smokers quit outright or to cut down to quit.”

Intriguingly the study published in Drugs & Alcohol Today that is being reported on is sponsored by British American Tobacco. The interest that BAT are showing in ‘harm reduction’ may reflect their move into the electronic cigarette market.

 

01/06/13

The Star Phoenix, “Are nicotine e-cigarettes less harmful for smokers?” This article shares with us some quotes from Jordan Hamilton who is identified as “started using nicotine e-cigarettes "non-stop" in January” - I think that maybe Jordan Hamilton was trying his best to put forward the pro-vape viewpoint but either got confused, was misquoted or was taken out of context. Here is an example of what Jordan Hamilton is quoted saying “"I'm just taking what they say as fact. Because from what I understand all the fluids are made from the individual dealers and they put nicotine into their flavoured fuel liquid,".

The report goes on to further imply that ejuice manufacture is somewhat haphazard, saying of The Lung Association of Saskatchewan’s Jennifer Miller, (vice president of health promotion)  “Miller would like to be able to recommend e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation aid, like the patch or a traditional inhaler, but said the lack of information ties the health community's hands. "Because they're not a regulated product, people are mixing the liquid in their basements and selling it online. Some of the reports we've seen are certainly that you don't really know what's in it. Ecstasy, nicotine, many different things, alcohol even." and “She urges the federal government to regulate and study e-cigarettes, like the U.K. is doing with its harm reduction plan.”
Gosh, where do I begin pulling that lot apart? Well remember that this is a Canadian report and nicotine ejuice can not be legally sold over there so I guess that might lead to some idiot putting Ecstasy into it as he would already be breaking the law adding nicotine.

 

 

01/06/13

It is sometimes fascinating to see how ecigs are seen in other countries, The New Indian Express has an article called “Ciggie substitutes still struggling to light up in city” in which they say that although ecigs “may seem a perfectly natural substitute” for tobacco cigarettes they then explain that “In reality, things are very different. Most Chennaiites who have admitted to having a smoking addiction choose counselling over cigarette replacement aids, according to specialists in the de-addiction field. “Every time we get someone who has a smoking related addiction issue (tobacco or marijuana), we always offer them the option of using e-cigarettes or nicotine patches. But for some reason they all refuse and ask for medicines instead,” said Nambi R, a clinical psychologist who has been working with addicts for a long time.”.

It seems that buying ecigs is also not very popular either, it quotes Raju Vinod, as saying “I kept seeing cheap Chinese makes in customs-notified shops and finally I saw it on a website,” and it explains that “After he ordered it he was taken aback when he found that refills cost twice as much as the device itself.” Maybe tobacco cigarettes are cheaper in India because it continued by saying “he said he returned to cigarettes to ‘save’ money.”

 

31/05/13

 

You might assume that I have to put a great deal of effort into finding, identifying and highlighting errors in media reports about electronic cigarettes, unfortunately it is not so.  There is so much sloppy or biased ecig reporting in the media that it’s the easiest job in the world.

A report on WPTV has the headline “E-cigarettes: Some say vaping e-cigarettes is worse than smoking the real thing”, you can guess that they are going to give some stupid quote about ecigs!

… and here it is - Dr. Mike Feinstein, a spokesman for the American Lung Association said, “People are inhaling some type of chemical vaporized compound into their lungs without really knowing what's in it." - but we DO know what is in ejuice, it’s Glycerol, Glycerin, Nicotine and flavours, I can’t understand why that is difficult for ecig opponents to understand?

 

31/05/13

Gazzetta del Sud,  reports that consumer group Codacons has formerly request that the ministry of health and to the department of economic development in Italy ban vaping in public. The report quotes Codacons as saying “…until it's clear what harmful substances might be contained and diffused by e-cigarettes, they should be banned in public..” , it’s Glycerol, Glycerin, Nicotine and flavours – I can’t understand why that is difficult for ecig opponents to understand?

 

31/05/13

At least the San Diego Entertainer Magazine has a clever headline “E-Cigarettes: the e-volution of smoking, or just another e-vil habit?” but that is where the fun ends, the final paragraph of the article says “(a German).. study suggests that what is exhaled from e-cigs is not only water vapor, but also contains measurable particles of nicotine and a compound used in theatrical fog-making devices, propylene glycol. There are some people who are allergic to propylene glycol.“

I guess we have to be thankful that at least they understand what ingredients are in ejuice, and it’s no real surprise that exhaled vapour would contain traces of these ingredients and it may be true that some people are allergic to propylene glycol, (after all there are some people who are allergic to bread or milk or almost anything else).

Obviously, if you are allergic to the ingredients of ejuice then don’t vape and also don’t lock yourself in a small box with anyone who is vaping, in normal use the amount of exhaled Propylene Glycol is unlikely to affect anyone passively inhaling it. It sounds to me as if they are grasping at straws.

 

29/05/13

 

The Guardian reports further on the controls proposed by the French government on Electronic Cigarettes and discusses the outcome of the report that the French government commissioned.

Generally the Guardian report is fair and measured however they go well off track two thirds of the way into the article by stating “Although e-cigarettes are considered safer than smoking, doctors continue to debate the possible impact of some of the vapours' ingredients – including propylene glycol, which irritates airways, and formaldehyde, which is known to raise lung and nasal cancer risk.”

I think that they maybe are relying on research that erroneously confused glycol with oil when they say “propylene glycol, which irritates airways” and the line “and formaldehyde, which is known to raise lung and nasal cancer risk.” Is misleading because although formaldehyde is a nasty chemical and can raise lung and nasal cancer risk it is NOT an ingredient of ejuice and most defiantly should not be in the vapour.

28/05/13

 

My favourite ecig expert Dr Konstantinos Farsalinos has produced an almost forensic analysis of the recent ‘Global Advisors on SmokeFree Policy (GASP)’ report on Electronic Cigarettes, page by page, clearly exposing it as just flim-flam. I highly recommend that you take a few moments to read it so as to inform yourself what GASP are claiming and in exactly which ways it is just junk. “An organized attack against electronic cigarettes”.

Dr Konstantinos Farsalinos conclusion is that “the document by Global Advisors on SmokeFree Policy (GASP) is a report consisting of misinterpreting data, mispresenting science and selectively ignoring facts that do not fit into their opinion that e-cigarettes, the most promising product in reducing smoking-related harm, should be banned from the market and thus deprive smokers from a very effective tool in their battle to improve their health."

I’m proud to say that Dr Konstantinos Farsalinos recently accepted me as a ‘facebook friend’ :)

 

28/05/13

 

Is France set to ban e-cigarettes in public? This frightening question headlines a report at ‘The Local’ which presents ‘France’s News in English’

In the piece they say “France’s Minister for Health, Marisol Touraine, could be ready to introduce a ban on the use of e-cigarettes in certain public places, once she receives an expert report on Tuesday into the health effects of the smokeless devices. Despite what is thought to be a largely positive report, commissioned in March and carried out by pulmonologist Professor Bertrand Dautzenberg, sources for French radio RTL claim that Touraine is planning a bill to outlaw e-cigarettes in public.” and go on to explain the ramifications for the growing ecig market in France.

Such a ban, if introduced, may have implications within the UK because if such legislation is accepted in one country it can easily spread.

 

28/05/13

Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) are a campaigning charity who generally take a wise and pragmatic view of ecigs. Their survey titled “Use of e-cigarettes continues to rise among British adult smokers but use among young people is negligible” says that “The survey findings have been submitted as evidence to a committee of the European Parliament...” It shows that ecigs are just not cool with the kids, which should reassure some of those who are erroneously concerned that ecigs might lead children into smoking tobacco.
The article quotes ASH Chief Executive, Deborah Arnott, as saying “E-cigarettes offer a potentially safer option for smokers wishing to reduce their risk of ill-health from tobacco use.”

 

27/05/13

On the This is Money site there is interesting analysis of the possible gains to be made as an ecig advertiser and also the regulatory hurdles involved. They also state that “The e-cigarette market is worth £1.3 billion globally, with the US and Britain two of the fastest-growing countries”

 

27/05/13

New Canaan is a town in Fairfield County, Connecticut, the New Canaan News caries an article by Dr. Michael Schwartz which describes smoking cessation tactics and includes the use of ecigs as one of them. Ecigs are not a smoking cessation device but never-the-less it is interesting to read the doctor’s view.

 

27/05/13

Language is important, the terms that we use regarding vaping effects public perceptions. Vape News Magazine highlights the phenomena of being asked ‘What are you smoking?’ It’s a short and sweet article that makes its point well, I partilually like the quote “A vaper vapes vapour” which I think would make a good Tee Shirt slogan at the very least.

 

25/05/13

 

Here are some pearls of wisdom to catch while they fly from your screen. Dade Deckard’s Blog at Bostllno “E-Cigarettes Aren't Just for Quitting: Imagining the Future of Smoking” is a fascinating look at vaping, how it relates to smoking culture and what the future possibly holds.

Do yourselves a favour and click here to go and read it. I wish that I had written it myself :)

25/05/13

 

Over at the Mercury News they report that a new bill would mean that “California would treat electronic cigarettes like any other tobacco product by restricting where people can use them in public”.

I do wish that the media would not refer to ecigs as a ‘tobacco product’ along with products that burn tobacco, it really should be called a ‘nicotine delivery product’, this sort of woolly description contributes to exactly the sort of stupid decision that they are reporting on.

Still, it is worth a read (click here)… remember where America leads, we will probably follow.

They quote Sen. Ellen Corbett as saying “Amtrak has already banned their use on trains, and the Navy doesn't allow their use below decks in submarines. The U.S. Department of Transportation is also proposing to ban their use on airplanes because of the possible health risks”.

 

25/05/13

 

Mark Kleinman on Sky News (click here) reports that “British American Tobacco (BAT) is preparing to launch its biggest assault to date on the electronic cigarette market”. It should come to no surprise to us that ‘Big Tobacco’ wants a slice of the ecig market however just how big a part they want to play can be seen from the quote “Nicandro Durante, BAT chief executive, has previously forecast that tobacco alternatives could make up 40% of the company's revenue in 20 years' time, which would probably make them responsible for at least £10bn of annual sales based on current growth rates.”

We can assume that they will want to push something that looks like a traditional cigarette and is either disposable or uses proprietary nicotine cartridges because this would make sense from a marketing point of view however such associations and devices don’t help us to distance ourselves from cigarette smokers and carry an increased risk that ecigs will be taxed and regulated like cigarettes if they look too similar and have a similar distribution network.

The article goes on to say that “The push into a category dubbed 'safer cigarettes' has angered some campaigners who believe they are a public relations exercise whose real purpose is to encourage young consumers to become familiar with the habit of smoking.”, that is possible, it could also be a plot to flood the market with poor quality ecigs so that if a smoker does try them as an alternative to smoking then it would not be a good experience, however I believe that ‘Big Tobacco’ genuinely sees ecigs as a market opportunity that fits nicely into their existing distribution network that can offer them potentially huge profits.

 

24/05/13

 

I recently wrote about how poor quality research concerning ecigs can be a problem. If you have not read it yet then click here to do so.

I was alerted to another written piece which is talking about the same bit of research as I did, what is interesting is how far this sort of news can travel without being intelligently analysed; it seems to be posted onto the net without any thought added to it.  The article (click here) is all the way from Africa.

 

24/05/03

 

SBWire consistantly get good Google rankings but seem to me to spend a lot of their time doing ‘puff pieces’ about expensive 510 starter kits and the like from American companies. Today’s article from them does sneak in the odd link (which I assume is sponsored) but is never-the–less an interesting appraisal of “A bill (that) has passed in South Carolina Wednesday that gives green signal to accelerate tax on electric cigarette products”

Spot the typo: “...it has been found that electronic cigarette industry has become a great treat to the tobacco industry”, I’m guessing that they mean ‘Threat’ not ‘Treat’  but really I’m the last one who should be pointing out errors in blogs :-/

Judge for yourself here

 

24/05/13

 

I’m not one for following celebrity culture myself  but it does seem to be the mainstay of much of our traditional ‘Dead Tree’ media, maybe faced with the competition from instant online news this is the right strategy for them to adopt.

The Daily Mail today carries the headline “So little time! Katherine Heigl eats lunch on the go as she films new movie North Of Hell”.  The report does contain the line “E-cigarettes can be used in public places such as bars, restaurants, and on public transport, where tobacco smoking is now illegal”  this is strictly true but it may be a little misleading however the real reason for mentioning the article here is that it has a few photos of a pleasing looking woman holding a white ‘Mod’ ecig.

This is not an article about ecigs, just one that mentions them in passing, maybe we vapers are now on the road to public acceptance?

Read it online here.

 

24/05/13

 

 

The path of an EU Draft Directive appears obscure to us mere mortals, in short an idea is presented as a draft by the EU Commissioners to the appropriate EU committees and EU Parliament for consideration and amendment before being accepted or rejected by the EU Parliament, the procedure seems to rely as much on convention as constitution. At this stage in the process it is difficult to know what exactly the EU Tobacco Control Directive will contain when the EU Parliament vote on it however we do know that if it is voted for by the EU Parliament then our Government are obliged to implement it.

Over at the ECITA blog Tom Pruen and Katherine Devlin have written in depth about Linda McAvan, MEP (Rapporteur on the TPD for the ENVI Committee) proposed amendments to the EU Draft Tobacco Directive. The shorthand headline pushed elsewhere is that ENVI (who are one of the really important committees regarding this directive) have agreed to drop ecigs from the legislation except that flavours are to be forbidden. Naturally it is much more convoluted and nuanced than the headline and the ECITA blog explains it all. Click here.

Still you have to laugh, our vaping habit is in the hands of someone who clearly thinks that we all use cig-a-like ejuice cartridges from which flavour can be excluded.

 

22/05/13

 

I have to admit that I'm not a regular user of 'reddit', I guess it's just one of the many areas of the Internet that mainly pass by me while I hang out in familiar haunts using well worn apps, so if you are a 'reddit' regular please excuse me for highlighting something so pedestrian as a 'reddit" post.

Here is a short story from someone who found a Vaping friendly pub and landlord while visiting Yorkshire. It's great to have confirmation of a possible Nirvana in our vaping future and it also shows that enlightened landlords can benefit from welcoming us into their establishments.

It's refreshing to read positive media and the comments are good too, click here to jump to it.

Note to self: Nevada is a State in America, Nirvana is a state of mind, mixing these two up in a blog would cause confusion :)

 

21/05/13

 

 

The Manasquan-Belmar Patch website reports New Jersey's Smoke-free Air Act of 2006 makes it illegal to vape in restaurants and bars.

It quotes Assembly Woman Mary Pat Angelini as saying  “Different manufacturers use different vapors. People think it’s not an issue because they’re not inhaling nicotine, but there might be something in there that’s worse for you than nicotine" and “Manufacturers use flavors to entice young people to smoke to try and get them to become addicted to smoking”

You may need to read that again, I missed it first time, the quote does contain “..because they’re not inhaling nicotine..”

Why does this matter to us? New Jersey is a long way away isn't it?  Well yes, but the USA is proud to be the land of the free, if vaping freedom is curtailed in an American state it can happen anywhere. Furthermore allowing a platform to anyone (even an Assembly Woman) to spout ill-informed and counterfactual statements like these in the media is bad news for vaping public relations worldwide.

To be fair the website has also tried to represent the vaping proponent’s point of view but without a 'go to' place for the media to get intelligent, reasoned rebuttal their reporting is inevitably unbalanced.

You can read the article yourself here.

ECig's in the Media

 

ECigs in the Media is a category within ECig Wizard's Blog in which we will highlight some of the funny, outrageous, incorrect and/or positive reporting of ecigs in the media including websites, blogs and YouTube.

The public perception of vaping is important to vapers because it effects what politicians will try to get away with when they consider how to tax or regulate us in the future. This category will be updated several times a week, to keep yourself informed go to the ECig's in the Media category, make a bookmark and come back regularly.

If there is something that you think we need to see please add it to the comments.

ECig Wizard are not responsible for the content of external links and furthermore my commentary about other media is a personal view which may differ from ECig Wizard’s.