No fire, no smoke, no SHS & still a smoking hazard?

[Christopher]

Smoking bans around the world have been promoted as essential to protect the public from the alleged hazards of secondhand smoke.

In Ontario, for example, smoking has been banned in public buildings, bars, restaurants, casinos, in cars with minors under the age of sixteen, etc. Anti-smoker radicals are promoting bans in multi-unit apartment buildings, encouraging employers not to hire people who choose to smoke on or off the job and even advocating bans outside in public parks.

Most anti-smoker groups have been encouraging the use of “alternate nicotine delivery systems”, like Nicoderm and Nicorettes, to help smokers “kick the habit.” This has been a big boost to the pharmaceutical industry as far as marketing their nicotine replacement products. They’ve got The Canadian Cancer Society, Physicians for a Smoke-free Canada, etc promoting pharmaceutical nicotine, so they’re saving millions on advertising and marketing.

That’s why the big drug companies are the biggest supporters, financially and otherwise, of smoke free policies such as smoking bans and punitive levels of tobacco taxation. Coercing smokers into quitting creates a demand for their smoking cessation line of products and the anti-smoker radicals provide them with free advertising.

So, the drug companies and anti-smoker fanatics must really be chagrined at the apparently growing popularity of the new kid on the block. The electronic cigarette, or "e-cig", allows the user to "go through the motions" of smoking without the potential risks associated with smoking tobacco.

And, according to the advertising, the e-cig can provide the smoker with the sensation of smoking, without offending the non-smokers in the crowd with the smell so many of them have come to dislike so intensely. It can provide the nicotine hit demanded by the average smoker, without the need to inhale the chemical additives in cigarette tobacco thought to cause chronic disease in smokers.

However, for many smokers the e-cig may not be a satisfactory alternative to the real thing. Some have complained about a definite and definitive lack of tobacco taste. But it appears that many are ready to give the e-cig a try.

I should note that I haven’t actually tried the e-cig yet. The $100.00 to $150.00 for the Starter Kit is a sizable cash expenditure for an old age pensioner; especially for an experiment which may or may not prove satisfactory. But, maybe I’ll get a chance to try it before it’s banned.

Yes, banned. Some anti-smoker cultists, it seems, have already made up their minds about the perils of the cigarette substitute. The World Health Organization (WHO), for example, has come out against the e-cig.

WHO is warning there’s no evidence to back up contentions that e-cigarettes are a safe substitute for smoking or a way to help smokers quit. They’re also concerned that "the product may undermine smoking prevention efforts because they look like the real thing and may lure nonsmokers, including children."

However, I suspect the real problem is that they don’t want anything cutting into the sales volume of their sponsors in the pharmaceutical industry.

Some have questioned the advisability of exposing people to the addictive qualities of nicotine. But, I’ve made the same argument myself regarding the patch, gum and nicotine inhalers. Assuming of course that nicotine is addictive, they may help you quit smoking, but the nicotine addiction would remain, leaving you dependent on the patch or gum. That’s greater cost and less satisfaction, and that’s a bad bargain.

And, some anti-smoker fanatics, naturally enough, have gone completely over the top in attacking the e-cig (and smokers who might choose to use them). For example, Serena Chen, a regional tobacco policy director of the American Lung Association is quoted in an article on The Ashtray Blog as saying: "I understand why people use the nicotine replacement aids. But I don't understand why people want to pretend that they're smoking."

Nicorettes good; e-cig bad. Because it looks like you’re smoking tobacco? To what does Ms. Chen object? There’s no smell to whine about, no SHS to feed her irrational fear and she doesn’t even have to concern herself with saving the smoker from himself (or herself).

I wonder if it would do any good to explain to Ms. Chen that most smokers don’t want to pretend they’re smoking, they want to smoke. And, yes most of us do understand the potential consequences of our actions.

Says Ms. Chen: "If you had a serial killer who liked to stab people, would you give him a rubber knife?"

Huh? Really, Ms. Chen, if a serial killer comes after me, I hope all he’s armed with is a rubber knife. It will certainly reduce my risk of bodily injury; the concept of reduced risk being one with which you should make yourself familiar.

Maybe when I have a few bucks to spare, I’ll give the e-cig a try and write a proper review. Until then I’ll take a fair amount of comfort in knowing some anti-smoker cultists have their knickers in a knot over the rising popularity of the electronic cigarette.

Taken from: http://fightantismokertyranny.blogspot.com...ll-smoking.html

[Sean]

Man, Ms. Chen sounds smart. What an idiot, who says, "If you had a serial killer who liked to stab people, would you give him a rubber knife?" when referring to NRT products? Also, of coarse there's a lot of negative talk about e-cigs out there, at least in the U.S., the pharmasuetical companies who produce some sort of NRT product make waaaaaayyyyyy tooooooooooo much money on them and don't want anything to possibly "dent" their profits. That reminds me, if those companies really want you to quite smoking, why is it that a freakin gum or a simple "patch" with a nicotine additive costs soooooo damn much??? I almost want to just send an e-cig starter kit to this guy for writing this article. Good job finding it Chris and thanks for posting it.

[PoppaC]

"Ignorance Is Bliss" is an old saying and if it is true then this Ms Chen must be in heaven. What an ignorant person. You know that these followers of the militant non-smoker idea are going to be just like sheep and follow her blindly. Glad to see this fellow use some common sense. Good for him and thanks for this article and your efforts Chris.....

[Sean]

Ya your probably right about anti-smokers simply following this lady, which is too bad. Specially when she can make herself look like an idiot and none of them will even realize that they're following one. I really don't see how even a non or anti-smoker can put these products down like they're a bad thing, just doesn't make sense to me. How can you call yourself some sort of national representative, put down some sort of "new" technology, and not even know what it is really or how it works or what makes it work.

[PoppaC]

You know, Sean, these people say e-cig needs to be tested before approval to use it and they know nothing about it. Yet they can say it is bad before being tested and they get away with it. What the hell is the difference. Keep their mouths shut and test it already.... leave it alone until then!