LaceyUnderall

Diggers: http://digg.com/d319xII

Dr. Siegel did one last week and it was us asking him questions via chat and then his response via phone over the internet. I am not sure how this one exactly will go, but last weeks worked really well.

The electronic cigarette can really be traced back to 1930 patents... however, the first patent to really come out that is almost perfect in comparison to our current PV's was originally filed in 1963 and the patent was granted in 1965. A fun post about the history of the ecig as we know it today. New Invention of 1963 - The Smokeless Non-Tobacco Cigarette Herbert A. Gilbert also took his Smokeless Non-Tobacco Cigarette to the Senate Committee on Commerce in 1967 (which I am trying to find original documentation of what occurred), but also made the Guinness Book of World Records for it in 1966!!! So needless to say, the ecig is far from new

ECA President, Matt Salmon, will be doing a live chat on www.vapersplace.com on Sunday, November 8th at 7pm EST. Come with your questions!!!

Agreed. Your toothpaste analogy is a good one The other issue with the "addiction" argument is differentiating between what is actually the addiction and what is the behavior. We contacted the CDC regarding this: http://www.e-cig.org/2009/08/27/the-legal-argument-about-why-the-electronic-cigarette-is-not-an-nrt/ The slippery slope here is when using the phrase "Quit Smoking", are you treating the disease, which is the addiction to nicotine, or are you modifying behavior? For instance, if the behavior of smoking is a behavior and not a disease (according to the CDC), wouldn't the correct phrase be "Quit Nicotine"? If not, then someone could easily come out with products that modify all types of behaviors they deem as "bad" behaviors including same sex interaction. The slippery slope being that if the action of smoking is deemed as the addiction, which to many is an unacceptable behavior, then the door is wide open to include any "deviant" behavior as treatable. And please, I do not think being homosexual is a deviant behavior, choice, etc., however, then, we could see a launch of pills on the market that if you take this pill, you will no longer be homosexual. This could be true for nose pickers, hair twirlers and so on. I guess what I am trying to say is that the ecig as a "quit smoking device" just seems like an oxy-moron because you aren't quitting the action of smoking and it certainly isn't a "quit nicotine device" if you are still using nicotine. Technically, if you are using an ecig with nicotine, you are still smoking and you haven't really quit. You may have quit "combustionable smoking", but that isn't treating a disease, that's simply changing your product choice.

http://www.ecassoc.org/interview-with-james-watt-electronic-cigarette-association-vice-chair/ Here is a condensed version with just the interview.

One thing to ask yourself is how do you define "quitting"? Do you see quitting in terms of "I haven't smoked a tobacco cigarette for two weeks so I must have quit" Or do you see yourself after a year of not having a tobacco cigarette saying "I haven't had the urge for a tobacco cigarette in over a year so therefor, I quit". We can get into a semantics debate regarding whether one actually quits if they are still participating in the action and the nicotine, both or one, but we won't do that today For me... I have "quit" enough times to know that I go 4 months... tops. That's not quitting... that's a pause. And even with the ecig... I smoked cigarettes and used an ecig... didn't smoke any cigarettes for 4 months... smoked both for the summer and now find myself winding down again to probably smoke no tobacco because it's just too cold to suffer outside. For you nurses out there, I know an RN who has an amazing way of introducing the ecig to smokers with COPD, emphysema, etc and how she goes about getting the word out... and if you are interested I would certainly be happy to connect you. Please feel free to PM me.

I can't disagree with any of this. I know where all of it stems... I know that money is the deciding factor. I know there isn't much logic, if any, guiding these decisions. I know this is not about public health. I know this. I fight it every day with every blog post, smoking ban, article, comment, etc. But I do also know this: From discussions with these different organizations and discussions with public health persons who are on our side, there is a rift that is occurring. There are people within certain organizations who are very upset that their original mission to help people stop burning tobacco, which is the dangerous part of nicotine use, has transitioned into an all or nothing campaign. They are afraid to stand up because they KNOW that there are 3 people in line for their jobs as it is. These people can be reached... and level headed, non-conspiracy, fact driven discussions hounding the same message over and over *might* bring them around. These people don't realize that while their current job might be no more IF there is a solution to the burning tobacco problem, thousands of jobs will open up to begin researching the long term effects of vaping. That said, everyone should choose to use their voice in the way they are most comfortable and the way they see fit. There are also circumstances surrounding those voices that may or may not allow someone to be vocal regarding conspiracies. I know these conspiracies exist. I have researched enough to know exactly what is going on, who is involved with whom, and why they are doing what they are doing. As an American consumer I am outraged and disgusted. As a supplier in the electronic cigarette industry, it is best I keep my conspiracies to my conversations with my friends on the forums... and to keep hounding out the clear message that the ecig has great potential for fixing a public health problem.

Kmel - There isn't anything that I can disagree with that you have written. Logic is not on the table for many of these legislators and anti-smokers... but in order for average consumers to get their message across, they have to continue their focus in a logical and scientific manner so that they don't look like whining drug addicts... which vapers are not. I am very aware that these anti-smoking groups are not happy that a "solution to the problem" is on the table. If they accept this solution, then they are all out of jobs. But another interesting thing I am working on is looking further into this idea that the MSA is what actually keeps the tobacco industry from getting involved in electronic cigarettes. As it isn't a tobacco product, they can't sell or market it... Now what do you suppose is going to happen with the ecig if it does become a tobacco product? If anything we need to figure out how to "scare" these legislators into believing the truth which is... you think these are marketed to kids now... just wait!!! Get behind the ecig industry... let them stand and fight against tobacco!

http://a1135.g.akamai.net/f/1135/18227/1h/cchannel.download.akamai.com/18227/podcast/CINCINNATI-OH/WLW-AM/091026_1_WILLIE.mp3?CPROG=PCAST&MARKET=CINCINNATI-OH&NG_FORMAT=newstalk&SITE_ID=1209&STATION_ID=WLW-AM&PCAST_AUTHOR=700WLW&PCAST_CAT=Talk_Radio&PCAST_TITLE=Bill_Cunningham_On_Demand scroll about half way... you will hear football talk and then discussion about an incident at a daycare and then the ECA segment. James Watt, Vice Chair of the ECA, did a great job!!! But then again, I am very partial to James

Today at 12:30 est, the ECA will be doing a 15 minute interview with Bill Cunningham LIVE!!!! Listen In! 700WLW - THE BIG ONE 700WLW - THE BIG ONE

Kmel - One thing is for certain from this, Corbett is completely under the impression that the electronic cigarette is coming from the Tobacco Industry. If we wish to help her understand, we must continue writing letters to her that explain: A. The electronic cigarette is not from the tobacco industry, but a new industry that is willing, actually demanding, the same mistakes not be made. Examples of this would be the ECA's efforts in Congress to have something actually set in stone that the ecig not be sold to minors across the board AND that guidance from anyone regarding what regulations should be in place is greatly appreciated. B. There is a difference between combustion and vaporization. Combustion is the most harmful component of tobacco cigarettes and vaporization eliminates the harmful by-products of combustion. Smoke and vapor are not one in the same. C. It isn't the nicotine that is most harmful in cigarettes and as many users are finding, it isn't the true "addictive" nature of the habit. It is the ritual of the habit. People have different rituals to relieve stress. Some go shopping. Some have a cup of coffee. Some have sex. Some sit down to have a cigarette. In all cases, it is up to good legislation to ensure that the adult engaging in such behavior has the most responsible way of fulfilling their desired action. Whether that be a sheltered environment for purchasing their merchandise, a ceramic coffee mug instead of a styrofoam cup (which heat from coffee leaches chemicals from the styrofoam), a condom, or a non-combustable method for the hand to mouth action of smoking.

It's my understanding that SB400 was originally a bill to give credits to those who purchased Green Cars. At the same time, Corbett had SJR 8 going. Then they eliminated all of the wording for SB400, and pulled the wording over from SJR 8, changing it to be sales towards minors... and then, changed it all back to the original wording of SJR 8 but under SB 400. It's no wonder that people can't stay on top of what their legislators are doing. However, that said, I don't believe that SJR 8 is a threat going forward for this year. I do believe we will see this issue arise in their next session though... of course depending on whether or not we hear a ruling from Judge Leon. We should definitely keep an eye on what Corbett is doing as it is apparent that she is on a mission to not see good legislation regarding the ecig (ie no sales to minors), but a full out ban.

You bet your musical arse!!! I am ready to go... sent in the info to the CAC... going to a meeting tomorrow to find out how the business owners in the area feel and what steps they plan on taking... showing them all an ecig... Going Wednesday to the Public Hearing to answer questions they may have... SHOW them how an ecig works and actually USE it in their committee room (with permission of course...) We are set and ready to go!!!

Keenan - I was most impressed with what the Governor had to say as well. It was logical, well thought out and rational. It noted that adults are adults and should have freedom to choose. I feel like I haven't seen this type of talk since HR1256... which was the way our government should have gone towards tobacco regulation and tobacco harm reduction. I do hope that the statement from the Governor is the first step towards an overall change in philosophy. The Quit or Die philosophy... must simply be put to rest.