Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 63
Like Tree74Likes

Thread: Electronic Cigarettes Help You Quit Smoking As Well As Nicotine Patches - link

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Canberra, ACT
    Posts
    492

    Electronic Cigarettes Help You Quit Smoking As Well As Nicotine Patches - link

    An article from Huffington Post (most of you have probably seen the study results) covering a study that indicates e-cigs are as successful a cessation device as patches (it is also worth noting that patches contain Tobacco-specific nitrosamines at a higher level than e-cigs (according to current studies). Snus has the lowest amount of TSNA's of all tobacco alternatives containing nicotine examined).

    Electronic Cigarettes Help You Quit Smoking As Well As Nicotine Patches: Study

    If the TSNA's are the only detrimental component of e-cigs then they are safer than patches.
    Last edited by Caffeind; 14-09-13 at 11:26 AM. Reason: stop clubbing, baby seals.... gramma
    mavinry4 and spud like this.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    3,064
    At the same time, [Peter Hajek] acknowledged the concerns that e-cigarettes could actually increase smoking by "renormalizing" the behavior:

    There is an obvious source of evidence as to whether use of e*cigarettes leads to an increase or reduction in tobacco smoking: the trajectories of sales of e*cigarettes and tobacco cigarettes.

    If growing sales of e*cigarettes coincide with increased sales of tobacco cigarettes, tobacco control activists arguing for restriction of e*cigarette availability would be vindicated.

    If traditional cigarette sales decline as e*cigarette sales increase, it would suggest that e*cigarettes are normalising non*smoking and that it is in the interest of public health to promote and support their development rather than try to restrict it.




    That's the major problem with Simon Chimpman's suggestions on e-cig regulation. He doesn't know whether ecigs will increase or decrease smoking rates, but he still wants to restrict them as though they will increase smoking rates. Not even willing to give it a try. We'll never know if they work properly in Australia until nicotine e-cigs are legalised.


  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Esperance Western Australia
    Posts
    3,627
    Quote Originally Posted by mavinry4 View Post
    At the same time, [Peter Hajek] acknowledged the concerns that e-cigarettes could actually increase smoking by "renormalizing" the behavior:

    There is an obvious source of evidence as to whether use of e*cigarettes leads to an increase or reduction in tobacco smoking: the trajectories of sales of e*cigarettes and tobacco cigarettes.

    If growing sales of e*cigarettes coincide with increased sales of tobacco cigarettes, tobacco control activists arguing for restriction of e*cigarette availability would be vindicated.

    If traditional cigarette sales decline as e*cigarette sales increase, it would suggest that e*cigarettes are normalising non*smoking and that it is in the interest of public health to promote and support their development rather than try to restrict it.




    That's the major problem with Simon Chimpman's suggestions on e-cig regulation. He doesn't know whether ecigs will increase or decrease smoking rates, but he still wants to restrict them as though they will increase smoking rates. Not even willing to give it a try. We'll never know if they work properly in Australia until nicotine e-cigs are legalised.
    Chapman's views point to the fundamental difference in those that want to control totally how others live their lives, and those that want to encourage people to live healthier lives. One is about control the other about helping.

    Why would someone want to make using a product, that is orders of magnitude safer than tobacco cigarettes, harder to do? Why would there be discouragement and disincentives to harm minimization? These are the questions we should be asking people like Chapman. Strip away the flimsy excuses (renormalising, think of the children etc) and you are left with the desire for control, bullying and power over others. Chapman is a bully and a narcissist. He doesn't do this because he wants money, his motivation is far worse than plain old greed.

    Chapman excels in moving the goal posts, when he cannot answer the reasonable questions of reasonable people.
    Old Dog and mavinry4 like this.
    All opinions expressed by me, are my own, I do not represent, or speak for, anyone but myself.






    STOPPED SMOKING 11/08/13 STARTED VAPING 11/08/13

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Canberra, ACT
    Posts
    492
    Introduction of a nicotine license wouldn't change too much would it?

    You would need to produce the license to buy smokes, to buy nicotine gum, to buy patches, to buy lozenges, to buy e-juice with nic.

    It won't discourage people from giving up, or seeking alternatives to tobacco smoke too much in my opinion. And those who are not that dependant on nicotine and/or the chems in tobacco smoke will simply give up.

    While I wouldn't really want the introduction of a license due to the possible hurdles required to obtain one and the question as to where the revenue will go, if it was implemented it wouldn't impact on my life any more than breaking bad finishing up in a few episodes (actually Breaking Bad finishing up would have more of an effect on me, imo).

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Esperance Western Australia
    Posts
    3,627
    Quote Originally Posted by Caffeind View Post
    Introduction of a nicotine license wouldn't change too much would it?

    You would need to produce the license to buy smokes, to buy nicotine gum, to buy patches, to buy lozenges, to buy e-juice with nic.

    It won't discourage people from giving up, or seeking alternatives to tobacco smoke too much in my opinion. And those who are not that dependant on nicotine and/or the chems in tobacco smoke will simply give up.

    While I wouldn't really want the introduction of a license due to the possible hurdles required to obtain one and the question as to where the revenue will go, if it was implemented it wouldn't impact on my life any more than breaking bad finishing up in a few episodes (actually Breaking Bad finishing up would have more of an effect on me, imo).
    A nicotine license would change a great deal, and it wont stop there, that is the problem. We already have a license to buy nicotine products, its called being above 18 years old, and being considered an adult. Why should I have to have more than this, (and pay for more than this), simply to buy a recreational consumer product? I don't need a special license to buy a cup of coffee, or a soft drink, or even alcohol.

    Who is going to give out these licenses? The government, a doctor, the police?

    The complacency of the Australian public is amazing, we are so willing to give up our freedoms, and be controlled by government, in every area of our lives, even down to having to ask permission, (this is essentially what a license is), of the government when we want to use a recreational product, which as in the case of ecigs, is relatively safe. And what reasons are given for this intrusion into our private lives? Are we all so stupid that we cannot make up our own minds about what we consume?
    margyb, Old Dog, Cath Mort and 2 others like this.
    All opinions expressed by me, are my own, I do not represent, or speak for, anyone but myself.






    STOPPED SMOKING 11/08/13 STARTED VAPING 11/08/13

  6. #6
    Retired Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    NE Tasmania
    Posts
    4,375
    I'm cool with a licence, as long as they introduce one for salt, sugar, butter and McDonald's as well.
    Imagine queueing up at Coles and passing over the weight gantry as you move through the checkout, and having half your stuff removed from the checkout because you've gained this week?
    As you swipe your licence at the refrigerated section, only the low fat milk door opens?

    For me, it's a principle thing. Lots of things are bad for us, but we are also adults, and one of the fundamental human rights we should all fight for is the right to take risks.
    In disability circles, it is something we debate and consider constantly, and perhaps it's something we should extend into the realm of public health policy.
    Duty of care balanced with the dignity of risk and choice making.
    If we are informed about the risks of a certain behaviour or decision, and we have the cognitive capacity to make our own decisions, and aren't in the grasp of an active psychotic episode, then even when those decisions include risk to life and health, are they not ours to make for ourselves?

    I mean.. some people choose to spend a great deal of their discretionary spending on white water rafting, racing cars and even jumping out of perfectly good airplanes! You wouldn't find me doing any of those, but I would absolutely fight for your right to participate in those activities if you decided that those risks were worth it for you.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Canberra, ACT
    Posts
    492
    Quote Originally Posted by spud View Post
    Are we all so stupid that we cannot make up our own minds about what we consume?
    No, not ALL of us are that stupid, but the simple fact that, for example, chicken pox has made a massive comeback in recent years shows us that people are definitely stupid enough to believe the anti-vax crap and leave their kids at risk.

    Some people are too stupid to live without regulations.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    QLD
    Posts
    1,723
    Some people are too stupid to live without regulations.
    then let them die, as would happen in any normal animal population, rather than castrate those who have proven themselves capable of intelligent thought, making the entire population less effective...

    we hardly have an under-supply problem.
    Last edited by Cumulonimbus; 14-09-13 at 02:32 PM.
    Old Dog likes this.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Esperance Western Australia
    Posts
    3,627
    Quote Originally Posted by Caffeind View Post
    No, not ALL of us are that stupid, but the simple fact that, for example, chicken pox has made a massive comeback in recent years shows us that people are definitely stupid enough to believe the anti-vax crap and leave their kids at risk.

    Some people are too stupid to live without regulations.
    Really, or is it that they don't live the way you choose to, or make different choices than you, and that makes them stupid in your eyes? I assume by your use of "some people are too stupid", you are not including yourself. I think a lot of things people do are stupid, but I would absolutely fight to my last breath for them to be free to be stupid.

    As my Mum used to say, "its all good until someone decides you are the enemy". Smokers have been the enemy and scapegoat for years, whose next, (read MrsG's post above), how many licenses are we gonna need, how much regulation? Rather than a license why not get smokers, or anyone who has a liking for nicotine, to wear a bright yellow badge, so much easier to identify them huh. Or perhaps we should just use embedded micro chips, like we do with pets, and have every shop, or public space covered in scanners. This would make CC tv, and tracking devices obsolete, so much easier to control people.

    Totalitarianism and fascism have never ended well.
    Old Dog and Cath Mort like this.
    All opinions expressed by me, are my own, I do not represent, or speak for, anyone but myself.






    STOPPED SMOKING 11/08/13 STARTED VAPING 11/08/13

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    QLD
    Posts
    1,723
    Quote Originally Posted by spud
    Or perhaps we should just use embedded micro chips, like we do with pets, and have every shop, or public space covered in scanners. This would make CC tv, and tracking devices obsolete, so much easier to control people.
    that would be your debit/credit card, browser cookies, mobile phone, IP address and license.

    these things already effectively carry out this function, you will notice RFID chips have already made their invasion into your wallet
    Last edited by Cumulonimbus; 14-09-13 at 02:36 PM.
    Old Dog likes this.

 

 
Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4
Copyright © 2019 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0
All times are GMT +11. The time now is 08:06 AM.