Monday, 21 August 2017

Lengthy reply Removed by Moderator

One of lifes' little frustrations, is writing what you consider a courteous detailed reply to someone, only for the moderator to jump in and remove the commentary(their prerogative of course!)

This happened today Monday 21/8/17 in reply to  Prof Michael Eriksen in the Conversation here 

my reply was thus :-  .....

'Prof.Eriksen….Michael


Much to admire in your article referring to the recent announcement from the FDA, I wish to make a few points regarding a few of your comments


You stated ‘I can assure you that few smokers derive true pleasure from their addiction. My research team has found that most smokers regret that they ever started, and they desperately want to quit the habit.’




I make the observation that many of those surveys compiled data from smokers who had a clear determination and motivation to quit as they had accessed stop smoking services.

As an ex-smoker myself, it is not quite as cut and dried as you imply,I cannot provide counter-data, but believe a 'love-hate' affair is probably nearer the truth for many smokers,unrecorded by researchers.


Additionally the notion of smoking pleasure was dismissed, however these  items(many others are available) present a different picture.


I have no desire to labour the point further, but a substantial number of smokers derive pleasure from their smoking and have zero desire to quit.

However, even though now a non-smoker for well over four years, I read some of the claims from tobacco control with ever increasing scepticism. Truth and facts should not require embellishment, 'the end must not justify the means' in what has become an ever more acrimonious pro-anti nicotine 'debate', with the consumer as the casualty in this war.

********


The notion and appeal of Very Low Nicotine Content Cigarettes(VLNC) to Smokers having no desire to Quit is either very low or zero. These gentlemen put across the arguments against VLNC,far more succinctly than I could hope to achieve



Prof. Kozlowski


Clive Bates


Prof. West


Regarding the possible size of the black market you said ‘Of course, regulators would have to figure out how to prevent black market sales of high-nicotine cigarettes.’

I honestly believe that you,the FDA and all who are advancing VLNC have grossly underestimated the scale of this market, and the unintended consequence of empowering and emboldening the criminal element who would willingly supply and satisfy the demand. 1920’s-30’s alcohol prohibition was not a glorious chapter in US History, it will be repeated if this VLNC folly continues.

Nothing rude,maybe some items are contentious,but that is debate?

Saturday, 19 August 2017

Challenges for Vendors and Desirability of Compulsory Membership of a Trade Association

Firstly,
I am not a vendor and so claim zero expertise or deep knowledge on the details of running a successful business, but as a consumer directly influenced by their current and future viability these thoughts are directed towards them.

I do not propose to rake over the sad history of how and why TPD2  evolved as it did, or bleat about how the MHRA is implementing such as this, despite Lord Prior stating
But rather concentrate upon what was said in these tweets via ECF 


'It's obvious that without consistent, professional and unified industry representation vaping will face continual challenges.''

More to the point, how to convince this disparate industry that without a well-funded professional body the future is not good?''



The disturbing reality is that out of 2000 vendors,equipment manufacturers,juice makers....etc there exists only a tiny number who are involved or members of a trade association

see ECITA , IBVTA and yes even the infamous TVECA ,UKVIA

whilst some of the big players are contained here,there are vast numbers who are not involved whatsoever. Again, I don't want to now start a long script extolling the virtues of belonging to a trade association other than saying 'strength in numbers, helps to protect your business', 'helps to guarantee the quality of the ''product'' and to avoid rogue traders'................. 

It is inexplicable that vendors have not joined up, and a false economy to save upon the membership fees, when the very future of their business is in the balance.

Maybe controversially, I shall advance a thought that all vendors should  belong to a trade association (of their choice ), on a compulsory basis. I am a libertarian by nature, but something along these lines has to be at least considered, before regulators decide that for you. 

Licensing(of e-cig outlets) appeared in recent Welsh and Scottish proposed legislation,inevitably this will be passed eventually.This is but one example of where a meaningful 'lobby' that a strong trade association could represent, may help favourably frame the debate with legislators.

The same circumstances exist in the US(and elsewhere), with the same unwanted outcome expected so fgs. Get yourselves organised NOW!  

Join one of the 3 UK based Associations asap or if you are from a European country without a Trade Association consider ECIV 




** I regularly listen to Dimitris  on here  bemoaning the lack of vendor involvement in the various state trade associations ** so the problem is far from unique to the UK


Tuesday, 24 January 2017

Action Required to Halt Plummeting Public Perception

Despite weighty reports from Public Health England, Royal College of Physicians, from Eire the Health Information and Quality Authority, from the US Truth Initiative and recently from Canada University of Victoria and News articles such as this in the Guardian  it is my contention that the battle for hearts and minds(of the general public) is losing ground quickly.

ASH UK estimated the following in 2016 here with the disturbing analysis of only 15% of the adult population believing that e-cigarettes are a lot less harmful than smoking


Other jurisdictions had similar dismal results Germany recorded 20.7% In the US ''According to the survey, 35 percent of adult smokers perceived e-cigarettes to be equally or more harmful than combustible cigarettes in 2015''. What will these figures be like in 2017? if comments sections in various media outlets are any guideline,there is little cause for optimism.

Without some immediate action from the likes of Public Health England,ASH UK,CRUK, this situation will be irreversible. 

Over the last 3 weeks we have witnessed the most concerted negative media campaign against e-cigarettes that I can recall over the last few years, whether it be reduced male potency(sperm),additional violence and burglaries,maladjusted children, philandering adults associated with e-cigarette use amongst the most bizarre claims.......endless baseless junk, BUT syndicated around the World, and as Brad Rodu recently indicated is only the tip of the iceberg of what is in the pipeline for the coming year. 

Undoubtedly Duncan Selbie, Kevin Fenton and Martin Dockrell at Public Health England are very well aware of all of these 'facts', but when are they going to counter it? 

I could waffle on about Public Health Campaigns,TV + Newspaper advertisments......... but if they wish to preserve their groundbreaking, immensely brave decision from 2015 status (to be supportive of e-cigarettes), vigorous action is required asap.