New from Steve K's Vaping World:
Hello, hello, hello my friends! Welcome to another Friday jam packed with e-cigarette news. This week is actually kind of like the last several weeks full of e-cigarette news goodies. The good news column has a great big check in it this week in the shape of the state of California. It appears that vaper activism, along with activists on the 420 side of the vaporizer were effective in getting the state to at least table the bill for the rest of the year. Meanwhile Massachusetts appears primed to take up the state-wide indoor use ban banner. Will they succeed? Only time will tell. For now, let’s dig into this week’s helpin’ of e-cigarette news.
Many Groups Aided to Table CA e-Cigarette Ban
California has tabled its planned legislation to roll e-cigarettes into the same category as cigarettes, effectively banning their use pretty much anywhere. CASAA gleefully announced recently the proposal is dead until at least next year thanks to the actions of consumer advocates and the industry. It turns out vapers weren’t the only ones with a dog in this fight.
Activists Defeat CA. Vaporizer Ban
Medical marijuana activists across the state lobbied to defeat the bill, which would have banned e-cigarette use wherever tobacco use was banned. Marijuana patients adapt e-cigarette devices for cannabis-use, and patient advocates say it’s sometimes the only way they can use the pain and nausea drug.
A 100-person citizen lobbying campaign in Sacramento orchestrated by Americans for Safe Access lobbied Monday to kill the bill, said Don Duncan with ASA.
I can’t help but wonder which group had the most pull. What an odd world we live in if it was the cannabis users who put the thing over the top rather than the vapers.
Switching to Vaping Doesn't Save Kate Moss any Money
Many people who vape report cost savings over smoking. Unless, of course, you’re into e-cigarettes as a hobby or you’re a somewhat clueless celeb. It seems that Kate Moss went on vacation and forgot her e-cigarettes (we’ve all been there). Since the locals didn’t carry any brands she’s familiar with, she did what any reasonable person did. She flew someone out to bring her her usual brand at the cost of about $2000.
Kate Moss – Kate Moss’ £2,000 e-cig bill
‘But sometimes, especially on holiday, she craves them more and more. When she realised she had forgotten her e-cigarettes, she tried to buy some but couldn’t find a recognisable brand.
”So she called home and had them couriered, paying more than £300 for a last-minute flight, more than £1,000 for a hotel room for the driver and hundreds on other related expenses.”
Kate was first introduced to e-cigarettes by media mogul Simon Cowell and has been using them ever since vowing to cut back on her tobacco consumption.
Makes perfect sense to me. Or, if you’re willing to spend that kind of scratch but aren’t familiar with the brands, you could literally buy one of each until you found one you liked then run with it. Kate, if you’re reading, have your people call mine I’m sure I can help you figure out what to buy.
Ban-o-Rama: MA Plotting Vaping Ban
I think Massachusetts might hold some sort of record for most local e-cigarette usage bans per square mile or something. Cities and towns in the Bay State seem to like them some bans. Apparently the state feels like helping the slower towns by simply enacting a public use ban at the state level.
State bill would tamp down e-cigs
“And that’s what this bill is about. How do we keep electronic cigarettes out of the hands of kids?”
But the bill goes further by banning the distribution of free samples of e-cigarettes and prohibiting using them anyplace it’s illegal to smoke traditional cigarettes, including bars, restaurants and workplaces.
Because nothing protects kids like banning vaping in bars.
Local Health Department Finds Troubling e-Liquid Results
It seems that local entities are falling all over themselves to be the first to regulate e-cigarettes. Most are misguided at best. One health department in Utah decided to do something wacky and actually conduct tests of e-liquid to see if there are any issues of concern. I’m sad to say that it seems like some of their results are enough to give one pause if true.
Davis County researches e-cigarettes controls
After establishing with shop owners that the general belief was that the amount of nicotine was believed to be measured in milligrams per milliliter, they compared the measurements indicated on the labels and the amount of nicotine actually found in the products when taken to a laboratory.
All samples were found to have excess nicotine to what was indicated on the label. The sample believed to have no nicotine was found to have a trace amount, believed to have come from cross contamination when the same equipment was used for mixing.
In some cases levels were way off. Naturally some of the departments concerns are unfounded in other areas, but this should serve as a warning to e-liquid manufacturers. It’s stuff like this that likely will lead to overbearing regulations of the industry and will continue to provide ammunition to e-cigarette opponents. They make up enough ammunition on their own, we could really do without them having actual facts. These groups would be intolerable if they were actually right about something. What I’m saying is e-liquid companies you need to get your crap together, and fast.
Prohibitionist is Either Lying or Really Dumb
You know, I’ve given up on covering the small news stories, and especially letters to the editor recently. There’s just too many of them and they all start to blend together. Although sometimes one stands out among the crowd. Like this gem from some random grant money sponge group who’s making some seriously wild claims.
Letter: Are e-cigarettes really worth the cost?
One has to wonder if it’s worth the cost to the consumer of these products; both financially and the cost to one’s physical health. There’s no guarantee that the e-cigarette makers have designed a product that has no unintended consequences. Although there aren’t the thousands of chemicals, or the tar in them which regular cig’s have, there are chemical(s) in them. Some of those chemicals found in an e-cigarette are: nitrosamine, diethylene glycol, anti-freeze and, of course, nicotine. It may take a few years before consumers realize that there are actually side effects to their use. Who really knows until it’s often too late. As Mr. Felderbaum mentioned in his article, “There’s not much scientific evidence showing e-cigarettes help smokers quit or smoke less, and it’s unclear how safe they are.”
And you thought it was just the cigarette companies who would say anything to sell their product. Not even the infamous FDA advisory actually said there was antifreeze in e-cigarettes. So I think the options are the guy’s exaggerating to create fear, not terribly bright, or so lazy he didn’t read the first FDA advisory and hasn’t looked into the subject since.
The City of Mankato Leads the Way... In Paranoia
The city of Mankato, somewhere in Minnesota, is banning indoor use of electronic cigarettes. This move caused problems from a company attempting to open a vape shop in the town since customers can’t sample anything in the store. The motivation to try and keep townies on the cancer sticks has a solid foundation. A foundation built on sheer and utter fantasy.
Mankato limits e-cigs
But others — ranging from representatives of the American Lung Association to childrens’ advocates to early advocates for Mankato’s groundbreaking anti-smoking ordinance nearly a decade ago — said banning electronic cigarettes in bars, restaurants and other indoor spaces was the prudent choice.
“It’s right on your shirt,” said Councilman Mark Frost, pointing to Mattick’s municipal polo shirt. “‘The City of Mankato Leads the Way.”
Council members were also concerned that the small cigarette-shaped vaporizers will inevitably be used to deliver liquefied versions of mind-altering substances beyond nicotine. And because e-cigarettes don’t emit the tell-tale aromas of marijuana and other drugs, they could be used to “smoke” illegal substances anywhere.
I wonder if the town’s school still has shop class if they’re so worried about potential drug delivery devices. The Algonquin Round Table of a city council also suggested they don’t know what’s in e-cigarettes. At this point if you don’t know what’s in e-cigarettes, you’re flat out too lazy to use Google.
Canton, MA Likely to Ditch eCig Sales Ban
In an article on the WSJ blog that was essentially supposed to be about something else, it was revealed that the burgh of Canton, MA will likely back down on their e-cigarette ban. The town’s actions were the focus of calls to action to speak up against the proposal to not only raise the smoking age to 21, but to completely forbid the sales of e-cigarettes to anyone. Apparently the reaction against the idea of propping up cigarette sales didn’t go over well and the town is having second thoughts after a huge response from citizens.
Enjoy the Lassez-Faire Electronic Cigarette Party While You Can
Gregory Conley, the legislative spokesman for Consumer Advocates for Smoke-free Alternatives Association, said that e-cigarettes were a way for smokers to quit, not to take up the habit. Mr Conley, whose organization does receives some funding from e-cigarette companies, said there was strong opposition to the proposed ban in Canton.
“The head of the board of health said that he had received 200 comments in opposition of the ban and he didn’t receive a single comment in support of it,” he said.
I’d have to say if you really wanted a glimpse of what’s in store for e-cigarettes, the crap NYC is trying to pull is probably a little closer to what the reality will become under the mantle of overbearing regulation.
TechCrunch Points Out Big Tobacco Albatross for eCig Industry
Major technology site TechCrunch recently published a post about e-cigarettes. The piece was a fairly even-handed approach to the history of e-cigarettes and current state of regulation. There were a couple things that missed the mark, like idle speculation about batteries venting into the liquid, but in general the piece had good basic information and quotes from Dr. Siegel. However the big takeaway from the article (and something I brought up last year) was that Big Tobacco’s entry into the industry may taint everyone else thanks to tobacco companies’ less than stellar track record.
E-Cig Companies Will Never Promise To Help You Quit Smoking
Big Tobacco’s involvement in the matter only muddles things further. The industry doesn’t have a great track record when it comes to reducing public harm (or even admitting their products cause it in the first place), so in a way, Big Tobacco’s investment in the industry almost discredits e-cigarettes as just another marketing ploy.
The article also mentions that Big Tobacco has some lobbying muscle that could help the small companies in the industry as well. Of course based on the examples we’ve seen already at the state level, I’m going to guess they’ll only help the industry where it directly intersects with big tobacco.
Christian Science Monitor: Prohibit All the Things
This should probably come as a surprise to nobody, but the
Puritan
Christian Science Monitor doesn’t like e-cigarettes (or the lottery or medical marijuana, or probably a bunch of other things). They demonstrated this in one article aimed mostly at screeching at the FDA to outright ban e-cigarettes because nobody wants nicotine. Clearly the monitor is not at all interested in the health of current smokers since they made no similar mention of banning tobacco cigarettes as well.
FDA and e-cigarettes: Nicotine addiction must not be the norm
In taking any action, the FDA must assume people do not want to become addicts to nicotine. Government already takes that approach inherently with increasing restrictions on the sale and use of tobacco products. The result has been a welcome decline in public smoking and smoking in general. People tempted to take up smoking now face difficult choices – in costs, inconvenience, and social stigma.
The opposite approach of tolerance toward e-cigarettes would be similar to the way states, once faced with criminal activities associated with illegal gambling, decided that people everywhere want to gamble and government might as well join in by offering lotteries. Now millions of mainly poor people can’t get enough of this daily gambling fix. And states are addicted to the revenues.
Only one slight problem with their brilliant idea. As a tobacco product, the FDA can’t ban it. They’re forbidden from banning smoking as part of the deal that handed them cigarette regulation. They can, of course, nerf e-cigarettes out of existence, and still may. Somehow it doesn’t seem like that would be enough for these folks since some people still might get enjoyment out of even crappy e-cigarettes.
In Prohibition Land Vaping Moms Entice Kids to Smoke
A blog article on the Boston Globe’s site that’s sort of a medical twist on a mommy blog took on the idea of e-cigarettes and, of course, kids. Naturally the article goes to the old stand by of flavored e-cigarettes being some kind of plot to lure kids into vaping. But, this article adds a new wrinkle – Jenny McCarthy. The complaint here is that the new ad has McCarthy making vaping look glamorous and sexy.
There’s no such thing as safe tobacco–even the fake kind
I’m okay with someone using an e-cigarette as part of a quitting strategy. But that’s not the only way they are being marketed. Jenny McCarthy is marketing one in a video that is all about being sexy and glamorous as you “smoke” (first she’s anti-vaccine, now she wants people to smoke?). Between that and the fact that those vapor flavors include things like bubble gum and chocolate….this is not good for our youth. Making “smoking” seem glamorous and safe is just dumb. At some point, the battery runs out, and teens may reach for the real thing. Or they may reach for the real thing in the first place, because they want to be glamorous and they can’t afford the e-cigarette.
Ok, first of all, e-cigarettes can’t be marketed anywhere near the idea of quitting thanks to the FDA. Second, the lady on the show kids’ moms watch will entice them to using e-cigarettes? Really? Isn’t smoking about rebelling and therefore not being into things your mom likes? Of course this is probably the first of many prohibitionist stories where the choice o McCarthy will be used against the e-cigarette industry.
The High Cost of Vaping in Jail
Last week I mentioned an enterprising Sheriff in Tennessee was planning on selling disposable e-cigarettes to prisoners for $13.50 a pop. Turns out, that price is relatively cheap compared to e-cigarettes that recently went on sale at a correctional facility in Georgia. The Russell County Jail is now offering presumably the same disposable e-cigarettes for 18 bucks each.
Only On 3: E-cigarettes now sold in Russell Co. Jail
“Everyone comes to jail and they can’t smoke, so stress levels up there. So it seems to help so far, it’s been 3 to 4 days but there’s a lot of them in there and guys seem to like them,” says inmate Tony Brown.
Sheriff Taylor says there is no expense to the county, the jail or the taxpayers to supply the e-cigs. The jail makes a $4-$5 profit on each one sold.
With only a $5 profit on an $18 e-cigarette, I’m not sure who’s getting fleeced more, the inmates or the jail for paying such a high wholesale cost on the devices.
Prohibitionists Jump to Youth Conclusions without Parachute
Anyone even remotely familiar with the current climate around e-cigarettes know that prohibitionists have been screaming gateway to smoking for ages. Well at least after everyone clued into what utter bull the antifreeze thing was. It seems that prohibitionists finally found their smoking gun, in the form of a study that finds most youth users of smokeless products are smokers. Holy leapin’ logic Batman, how’s that work exactly?
Most youth using e-cigarettes are smokers
Overall, the researchers found, 5.6 percent of young people reported using any type of smokeless tobacco. Five percent used chewing tobacco, snuff or dip, just under two percent used snus and 0.3 percent used dissolvable products.
Among young people who were current smokeless tobacco users, about 72 percent reported smoking cigarettes too, while almost 81 percent of young people who used only snus or dissolvables were also smoking cigarettes.
Somehow, that points to the fact that e-cigarettes (which aren’t mentioned in the article after the headline) and other smokeless tobacco are making kids take up cigarettes. I don’t suppose anyone bothered to ask the kids which one they did first. See for a gateway theory to work, you have to set up a timeline.
Oh, and those numbers, 19000 kids, 5.6% tobacco users equates to 1064 kids. Of those, 5% used chewing tobacco, or about 53 kids. Of those, 72% or about 38 kids smoked to0. 38 kids out of 19,000 is an epidemic apparently. Oh and snus users, about 18 kids are also smokers. Dissolvables are the worst gateway ever with just 2.5 kids smoking as well.
Tobacco Addiction Prof Says Slow Down to Prohibitionists
The Director of Tobacco Dependence Research at Queen Mary College in London called on regulators to think about what they are doing with e-cigarettes. The professor notes that medicalizing e-cigarettes based on imagined risks makes no sense when compared to the very real risks of cigarettes. The piece further calls on regulators to think about what they are doing before they hand a potentially beneficial tool to the tobacco industry.
Plans to regulate electronic cigarettes as medical devices could jeopardise enormous potential benefits to public health, warns a leading smoking cessation specialist from Queen Mary, University of London.
He adds: “Since e-cigarettes are a recreational consumer product that are competing with much more dangerous cigarettes, which are not regulated as medicines, mandatory medicinal regulation is not required for public safety and can harm public health by restricting the ability of e-cigarettes to compete with cigarettes in the marketplace. Excessive regulation of e-cigarettes would protect the market monopoly of cigarettes and have the potential consequences of disease in and death of millions of smokers who were prevented from moving on to the next generation of e-cigarettes.
“For the first time in the history of the tobacco control movement, a realistic possibility is emerging that the tobacco problem might get resolved, and that this could happen with minimal or no government involvement or expenditure. Regulators of medicines should hold their fire.”
Obviously there’s a lot of things going on that forced Europe to lose its mind and follow the grand scheme of an allegedly corrupt EU official who left office in disgrace. While lobbying is the prime culprit, sometimes I think the desire to regulate e-cigarettes comes from sheer impotence. Bureaucrats are powerless to do anything about actual cigarettes, so they pick on the weakest member of the herd instead, e-cigarettes. It’s sort of like kicking your dog when you get home because of a bad day at the office.
NYC: Bloomberg Tries to Increase Smoking
With a proposed ordinance to raise cigarette prices to $10.50 per pack and eliminate things like advertising, you’d think New York City is taking this smoking thing seriously. Yet, it’s snuck a provision into the recent round of legislation that would likely increase the number of smokers despite the other efforts. e-Cigarette flavors would be disallowed, apparently based on the deranged notion e-cigarette companies forgot how to capitalism.
Bloomberg Is Trying To Snuff Out Your E-Cigs
The bill also makes the claim that, “Electronic cigarette marketing is often designed to deter smokers from quitting and to attract youth.”
“It’s an inane statement and there’s no support for it. It just doesn’t make any sense. It’s crazy,” Dr. Siegel says. “What e-cig companies want you to do is use their products as much as possible, otherwise they don’t make as much money.”
I suppose the more conspiracy adverse among us could say this was a plan to force people to keep buying (and paying taxes on) those $10.50 cigarette packs. This likely is probably a case of simple shooting oneself in the foot because thinking is hard. It’s much easier to believe whatever the nice lobbyist from the tobacco control industry tells you to believe.
Deal of the Moment
Mystery Bags Are Back at Panda!
Panda eCigs has brought it’s mystery bag promotion back for one last go ’round. I’m not sure if they’re coming back or not, the e-mail didn’t say. Last time they did this the bags sold out in around a day I think. Here’s the deal if you didn’t see this last time. You buy a mystery bag which guarantees a certain amount of products you know what type not specifics like colors or flavors. They also throw in a mystery prize. It could be an extra clearomizer, or last time someone got themselves a SmokTech Sid. See below for the scoop, and good luck
Go grab your bag before they run out.
Mystery Bags are Back One Last Time!
Good for our adventurous customers only, this is a great way to get a lot for a little money.
$30 Mystery Bags Include:
4 – 10ml bottle surprise flavor and strength of e-liquid
2 – 30ml bottle surprise flavor and strength of e-liquid
1 – Joy eGo battery in surprise color
1 – Clearomizer
1 – Mystery Prize
This is a limited time offer, good only while supplies last. Hurry up and claim your Mystery Bag today!
Older Entries »
Originally posted: e-Cigarette News Update August 16 – Weeds
Steve K's Vaping World - The Electronic Cigarette Supersite