Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18
  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Melbourne VIC
    Posts
    1,992

    ECCA UK warns who is trying to get ecigs banned, and why.

    I contacted the ECCA UK last night to let them know about SMOKESCREEN, and to ask if they had any suggestions on how we should proceed. The following is the response I received, and it reminds me that one side of this battle has a lot of time, money and lawyers. We're the otherside, and we need to get ourselves organised if we have any chance of getting ecigs made completely available to Australians as a valid smoking alternative.

    ----

    It seems that unless the community and trade stand together against the power of the pharmaceutical industry then the prospects are not good. It looks as if countries where pharma makes a lot of money and where there was no combined community / trade defence against their attack have already gone down. Bans are in place that will be very hard to overturn. Canada has just been shut down for example.

    The resistance to e-cigarettes is probably 90% orchestrated by the pharma industry, for two reasons:
    1. The more people who switch to e-cigs, the less sales of NRTs there will be.
    2. If smoking is relatively harmless, there is no point in trying to quit anyway.

    Editor's note: if this is unclear, it was explained to me that the meaning of this point is that if you have switched to an alternative form of smoking that has a low risk profile, then there is no need to try and quit (totally).

    Pharma will lose billions in global NRT sales if e-cigs take off, so they have shelled out a small fortune to buy anti e-cig moves by government medical agencies, and by their sham cancer associations, which are simply front organisations for pharma money.

    As yet it doesn't look as if government treasury departments have woken up to the fact that their tobacco tax revenue is going to fall by 25% in the foreseeable future (e-cigs will own 25% of the smoking market by about 2020, we think, as the uptake is about 500% per year at the moment), so 'pure' government resistance to e-cigs is not really a factor as yet. Government action is centred around the pharmaceutical licensing agencies as these have all been suborned and simply work for for the industry (the USA, UK and Canada ones at any rate).

    We saw some initial resistance from the tobacco industry but that started to fall away when they realised that (a) tobacco is going to be squeezed till the pips squeak, and (b) they can just move in to smokeless tobacco and e-cigs in order to keep the money rolling in. A Marlboro e-cig will sell just as well as the tobacco version - brands win every which which way in marketing wars. Marlboro Snus will also do well. If you look at the tobacco trade journals it's clear to see the direction they are moving in now. The only tobacco firm we can think of that is still stuck 20 years back is Imperial Tobacco.

    The e-cig consumer groups tend to think of smokers as friends because we were all smokers or still are, and smokers are another group having their rights brutally taken away at present. So it makes sense to combine some resources if it does not conflict with either of our agendas.

    In order for e-cigarette users to continue to enjoy a freely available source of supply they have to form national consumer groups, and work with national trade associations. The combined effort is needed in order to stand up to the attackers. If they don't do that, they will be crushed and kicked aside by pharma and government. It is our intention to combine with other consumer groups in Europe to form an EU e-cig consumer association, and work with other countries to form a world e-cigarette consumer association. Pharma organises on a global scale so that's what we need to do in order to compete.

    If e-cig users in Aus want to survive, they need to form a consumer association. If they don't, pharma will have them squeezed by their government pawns until there is no point in using an e-cig as it's too restricted and too expensive.
    Last edited by soundasleep; 03-05-11 at 04:05 PM.

  2. #2
    AVF Regular
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brisbane-GoldCoast
    Posts
    1,186
    This is an obvious and logical conclusion as its the health agencies doing all the screeming, not the tobacco industry. But the ECCA are right we need to be organized before the shit hits the proverbial fan if we hope to stand a chance.

    It is our natural tendency to do nothing until it effects us personally that these agencies are relying on, but by the time they do effect us personally, the Big Pharma/Health agencies will have reams of documentation to support their views and have changes in legislation in actvie review or in place and our apathy will leave us without a leg to stand on. At the end of they day they have bucket loads of money, the respect of our law makers, more than enough staff and legal advisors and are a very organised well oiled machine. We on the other hand have very limited finances, our only power is our vote and we are currently viewed as druggies(in QLD at least), we have no centralized agency or task force, we are spread far and wide, we are a disorganised rabble who only know whats happining through forums and chat, and we are totally unprepared and are therefore sitting ducks.

    While individual attempts to fight or get to the bottom of issues are commendable they lack the power and impact of a well informed organization who is mobilised to fight for our rights and make counter claims on our behalf.
    Last edited by GirlyPantz; 02-05-11 at 05:23 PM.

  3. #3
    Sik
    Sik is offline
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    melbtarctica
    Posts
    1,671
    Of course its big pharma kicking and screaming... They are the ones losing $$ cuz we arent using their "products"

    QLD Health for example... Need a kick in the arse. But who's gonna do it ? We are behind the states in more ways than just their battle with the FDA. We dont have any industry or consumer groups in this country, in fact this forum is about as organised as we have gotten.

    One of the issues we have is that the broadly organised and recognised "do-gooder" organisations such as QUIT aren't interested in promoting something that is not "proven" and the "health" authorities feel no compunction towards actually proving the product, its easier for them at present to simply sweep e-cigs under the carpet.

    You seem to be suitibally politically militant and have had the plums to stick a website together, but if its actually gonna go anywhere a legitimate body that represents users and vendors with one voice is probably required. One that draws on various aspects of the community to put together a coherent voice on the intertwined issues of Personal Vapourisers and Liquid Nicotine, which is less likely to be ignored than an individual contacting an authority or organisation and more likely to be responded to with some thought. Something that can actually voice coherent and consistent opinion to media would probably not go astray either.

    I've trawled through some political.... um groups.... discussions and lurked in threads on other forums looking at things such as the NVC or the CASAA, the issue a lot of these organisations have is that the advocates seem to get a bit too big for their boots and become part of the bullshit political machine of lobbyists that get lost in their own self importance.

    On the one hand the simplest solution would be a loosely tied vendor organisation, as they profit from the industry and it would make sense that they want to protect their livelihoods. But on the flip side of that industry associations are usually regarded with some scepticism due to their own self interest in pushing an agenda. (it should also be taken into account that not all vendors like each other or would be capable of co-operation)

    If we were to put something together here IMO, the best structure is probably a for want of a better word "User Group" or "Consumer Advocacy Group" that is Supported and Participated in by the Vendors.

    That said its a lot of words, time and effort for a storm which may or may not brew inside of our tea cups.
    Current Vape: Variable Wattage mod, EPM Boge tanks, Something Fruity

  4. #4
    AVF Regular
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    1,409
    As re the Canadian banI had the impression that the vendors just closed up shop and disappeared into the night and a lot of customers were disappointed that they didnt take Canada Health on and fight -but in all common sense what else could they be espected to do? Its just groups of small family businesses against a powerful group with bottomless pockets.. Unless the legal people want to donate free time it hard to see Australian vapers taking on big pharma in court. The Americans have had some success with taking on the FDA though.

    ECC UK article quote

    "Pharma will lose billions in global NRT sales if e-cigs take off, so they have shelled out a small fortune to buy anti e-cig moves by government medical agencies, and by their sham cancer associations, which are simply front organisations for pharma money"

    Very true.
    The Pharma companies have a vested iterest in illness..no way will they encourage people to quit smoking-
    Funny to hear the complaint against eCigs on the grounds that they havnt been researched and might be harmful -cigarettes have been researched plenty and they know all about them and theyre still legal- How can eCigs be worse?
    Last edited by gert; 02-05-11 at 07:47 PM.

  5. #5
    AVF Regular
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    5,466
    Well now that osama bin laden is dead, we should lobby the government to focus military action towards pharma companies and anti ecig insurgents.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Melbourne VIC
    Posts
    1,992
    Looks like things are getting hot for our English brethen. I've just posted the below on SMOKESCREEN: (warning, text wall)

    "Health Lives - Healthy People"
    "A Tobacco Control Plan for England"
    http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod_consum_dh/.../dh_124960.pdf

    "The MHRA conducted a public consultation in 2010 about the need for regulation of nicotine-containing products, such as electronic cigarettes. in response to the consultation, there was clear support for more effective regulation of such products as medicines from interested groups such as the Royal College of Physicians, Royal College of General Practitioners, Royal Pharmaceutical Society, British Medical Association, British Heart Foundation, Cancer Research UK, Trading Standards Institute, local authority representatives, NHS bodies and the pharmaceutical industry."

    Here we go. Or at least here the UK goes. Tobacco Policy is up for review, and it appears than the medical industry (and doubt supported financially by the pharmaceutil industry) has e-cigarettes in their sights. It's got nothing to do with health, and certainly nothing to do with good science - it's got everything to do with money.

    "Some importers of electronic cigarettes said that they are willing to work with the MHRA towards the development of licensed nicotine-containing products."

    I can understand the need for limited licensing since the handling of high nicotine content liquid can be deadly. But this should only apply to content over either 48 or 60mg/ml. Given the many other toxins we surround ourselves with (go Wiki some of the chemicals in your laundry or under the kitchen sink) there is no need to regulate under these concentration. Vendors should certainly need a license to make sure their product contains only "safe" materials, but again, this needs to be kept cheap as to not kill local retail businesses.

    Only biggest hurdle is the fact that e-cigs are currently dirt cheap, and they don't generate taxation revenue (or at least very little). Since local vendors can't sell nicotine in Australia, we tend to shop overseas. If they COULD sell nic juice locally, then as more people decide to switch from smoking to vaping, the GST revenue will continue to grow.

    In the long term, I have no problem with Nicobate PV's, or Malboro PCCs, as long as it doesn't become big business, sky-rocketing prices, and killing all the local merchant opportunities. In this way, we reduce the health costs associated with smoking, we get the clincial trials needed to discover exactly what vaping is doing to us, and our government gets it's 10% cut.

    But that's not the way the world works. Is it?

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Clagiraba, Queensland
    Posts
    10,965
    yup, if you don't believe we have been living in a big brother world since WW2, you may be in for some rude shocks soon.

    I honestly don't think any amount of kicking and screaming is going to make one whit of difference.
    they will do what they damn well want to. Not actually suppressing any evidence to the contrary, simply ignore it and produce disinformation.

    You think they care what a very small minority does when they control the rule books, the customs and the press. If they bring down the ban hammer, that will be it.
    In order of useful: Provari V2 and V1, vamo, eGo twist, Katana v3, Hex, Orion v2, LavaTube, eGo x 6, VMAX, 510N, Tick V2, Tick V1, noEgo 18650, noEgo 14650 , Indulgence x 2, 905 6v mod, KR808D



  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Melbourne VIC
    Posts
    1,992
    Quote Originally Posted by Stoney View Post
    If they bring down the ban hammer, that will be it.
    I figure at the very least we can go down kicking and screaming...

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    277
    Quote Originally Posted by soundasleep View Post
    "The MHRA conducted a public consultation in 2010 about the need for regulation of nicotine-containing products, such as electronic cigarettes. in response to the consultation, there was clear support for more effective regulation of such products as medicines from interested groups such as the Royal College of Physicians, Royal College of General Practitioners, Royal Pharmaceutical Society, British Medical Association, British Heart Foundation, Cancer Research UK, Trading Standards Institute, local authority representatives, NHS bodies and the pharmaceutical industry."

    Here we go. Or at least here the UK goes. Tobacco Policy is up for review, and it appears than the medical industry (and doubt supported financially by the pharmaceutil industry) has e-cigarettes in their sights. It's got nothing to do with health, and certainly nothing to do with good science - it's got everything to do with money.
    I don't believe this is a bad thing - the vaping community would get a great amount of benefit from regulation of electronic cigarettes, as it would most likely come with an end result of tobacconists selling juice. Even if it ends up being highly overpriced, the benefit of having convenient access to juice would boost the uptake of eCigs exponentially. The only reason things are bad for us at the moment is because the government hasn't fully evaluated it yet - once they do we can expect support, as long as they get the correct facts.

  10. #10
    AVF Regular
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brisbane-GoldCoast
    Posts
    1,186
    problem is the only facts they get are from agencies/organizations/reasearch bodies and individuals(doctors & chemists etc...) whose pockets are constantly lined by big pharma and the last thing they want is to lose the funding and charitable donations made by big pharma.

    If you take the time to read some of the reviews/mentions that ecigs get from such organizations when in committee meetings you will find they simply scoff at the e-cig industry and use any claims of health benifits made by the e-cig industry to bolster their arguments to have them removed from the market. Therefore making health claims only proves the committee's argument. What we need to do is PROVE that there is a valid place in the market for e-cigs that is not already covered by any other device availabe whether NRT or otherwise.

    so this is my argument......

    While PVs are not a cessation tool as such, they do afford the commited smoker the luxury of side stepping tobacco and many of the associated risks until they are ready to quit. The beauty of this device is that even after quitting the nicotine they can still use the device without nicotine in times of need without returning to cigarettes or addictive substances and as such I feel this tool has a very important and unique place in the market and to deny its use would be morally bankrupt.
    Last edited by GirlyPantz; 03-05-11 at 07:51 PM.

 

 
Page 1 of 2 12 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 © 2020 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0
All times are GMT +11. The time now is 12:24 AM.