www.politico.eu
It was in 2007 that it became illegal in the United Kingdom for people to smoke in enclosed public places. Accompanied by campaigns led by the National Health Service and other groups encouraging smokers to “kick the habit”, to avoid smoking with children nearby or in their cars, at 10 million in number, fewer people are smoking in the country than previously. Last month’s Ash statistics claim that the number of ex-smokers exceeds the number of current smokers and that the amount of heavy smokers has decreased since the 1970s.
If you take a stroll through your high-street, you may encounter posters in the windows of doctors’ surgeries or hospitals, promoting breaking the addiction and giving up smoking, for the obvious health benefits of the smoker and others. But there are also several outlets that are offering nicotine alternatives. Nicotine Replacement Therapy is a offers an alternative source of nicotine for a smoker, albeit without the tobacco, the fumes or the tar that can build up around a person’s lungs. There are multiple ways of taking nicotine, including in gum, tablets, lozenges or patches. Anyone who has seen images of a smoker’s lungs in comparison to a non-smoker’s, or heard the rough ‘smoker’s cough’, or seen Nigel Farage smile would think that choosing other sources of nicotine seems like a good idea.
But another alternative to smoking tobacco, e-cigarettes, is not proving to be as helpful to smokers.
The tobacco industry is of course aware that the number of customers is sharply declining as science reveals the extent of smoking’s unhealthiness and is determined to continue making profits. The ingenious new idea is an electronic equivalent of the cigarette. Businesses continue to make money from people’s addictions that they may be hoping to break, by convincing them that the new device is a healthy alternative, or something that will help them in giving up smoking altogether. The BBC reports that the annual amount of people giving up smoking has started to decline. The BBC’s interviewed doctor suggested that some smokers might be smoking e-cigarettes indoors and tobacco outdoors, which is somewhat leapfrogging the law. To top it all, some researchers believe that e-cigarettes are even worse for smokers. If anything, there isn’t the comprehensive evidence to suggest that e-cigarettes are beneficial in the struggle against nicotine addiction. E-cigarettes may be ‘smokeless’ but they are not nicotine-less; their consumption continues to stimulate individuals’ nicotine addictions.
In our society there are vulnerable people, of whom should not be taken advantage by businesses. Don’t be fooled by these ‘alternatives’ that sound pleasant or even helpful to people who are trying to improve their lives. Addiction, whether one considers it a complicated matter of biology or vain self-indulgence, is something that should be cured, but few can accomplish this on their own; but companies that keep people addicted to a nicer version of the problem in order to sustain their industry are making money out of people’s problems.
QUOTE: “But another alternative to smoking tobacco, e-cigarettes, is not proving to be as helpful to smokers.”
I don’t think the one million plus ex-tobacco smokers in the UK who are now full-time vapers would agree with your comment.
QUOTE: “To top it all, some researchers believe that e-cigarettes are even worse for smokers. If anything, there isn’t the comprehensive evidence to suggest that e-cigarettes are beneficial in the struggle against nicotine addiction.”
It’s not the nicotine that kills. It’s the tar in tobacco smoke that contains the deadly carcinogens. There is no tar in e-cigarettes. And the ‘some researchers’ are invariably paid by vested interests to produce junk science to demonise vaping – vested interests include big pharma who are losing millions because smokers think their NRT products are crap…. Furthermore, their NRT products have a 90% failure rate but are still prescribe on the NHS. They are a complete wast of taxpayer’s money. Vapers buy their own products so don’t cost the state a penny.
I’m sure there are ‘some researchers’ who would say that BBQ sauce addiction could be harmful because nobody knows the long term effects of ingesting the chemicals found in most brands of BBQ sauce!
Nice try, Jack, but please be a good undergraduate and do some actual research before writing such drivel!
—-
Fun fact: Vapor products (e-cigarettes) were invented by a pharmacist in China as an alternative to smoking which mimics the activity and delivers nicotine, and big tobacco were not even interested in the product for the first ~7 years they were on the market. A recent report shows that big tobacco vapor product sales are currently declining, while other reports show that the products produced by companies not associated with big tobacco are still growing. Big tobacco companies are supporting the U.S. FDA deeming regulations that would basically hand the entire market to them, as they would be practically the only companies that could afford the requirements in the newly deemed “pay to play” market. They’ve also been directly involved in state legislation in many states in an attempt to classify vapor product as tobacco products for restricting use and taxation, in order to remove the incentive for people to make the switch to the safer alternatives.
So, let’s be very clear: Big tobacco is trying to take over the vapor product market, and they are currently failing. The only way they can win is if people believe the hype thrown about by media articles like this one and support overreaching legislation, taxing, and regulations. Vapor products will be the end of combustible tobacco cigarettes and produce a net public health boon, but only if we don’t allow our leaders to snuff them out.
People that use vapor products don’t need companies or adverts convincing them that they are a healthier alternative, because they (we) already know that. Depending on how much a person smokes, they can feel the same benefits from completely switching to vapor within days or weeks that they would feel by going cold turkey, with the exception of the nicotine withdraw symptoms. It’s been widely accepted for years that the harm from traditional combustible tobacco cigarettes is not the nicotine, but rather the tar and other toxic components produced by combustion. It’s rather telling that when profits and revenues are threatened (big tobacco, big pharma, taxes), the facts are then forgotten and the story is twisted to a different narrative.
If you’re referring to the report I read the other day, then it’s about how fewer people are using the stop smoking services, not about a decline in smoking cessation rates. In fact, every report I’ve read on the subject for the last few years is showing the smoking cessation rates in both the UK and the US are still greatly improved since vapor products have hit the market. Even the most recent youth survey from the US CDC shows that youth uptake for combustible cigarettes is at an all time low, which of course caused much anxiety for those who’s pay check depends on smoking to remain a highly publicised epidemic. At some point, those poor people are actually going to have to accept that they’re no longer needed and find some other career with a high end salary for little or no work on their part.
First, let me correct your statement about “smoking e-cigarettes”. There is no smoke produced by vapor products, full stop. Smoke requires a combustion process, and vapor products use an atomization process to convert the liquid into vapor (or aerosol if you prefer the most technical definition). Combustion alters the chemistry of the substance, while atomization only changes the state. Since there is no smoke produced by vapor products, one cannot be smoking them, again full stop.
Second, there are comprehensive studies available from notable scientists in the field like Dr. Konstantinos Farsalinos, MD; Professor Peter Hajek, PhD; Dr. Igor Burstyn PhD, just to name a few. It’s also worth noting that nearly all reference to the addictiveness of nicotine comes either from outdated studies directly related to cigarettes (which contain other chemicals that reinforce the addiction) or from poorly executed studies where heroin addicts were used in the study in an effort to try to correlate (more like conflate) the addictive qualties of both substances. The studies never mentioned are the independent studies done decades ago when pharma NRTs hit the market which showed that nicotine in isolation was about as addictive as caffeine. But then the headline “E-cigarettes may be as deadly and addictive as your morning coffee!” wouldn’t attract mass numbers of viewers or readers to the media outlets, thereby generating vast amounts of ad revenue, now would it?
Yes, it does perpetuate the addiction to nicotine to which a small percentage of people seem to be susceptible. However, nicotine addiction (like caffeine addiction) does not cause problems or health issues (see above). I’d also like to note that the word addiction is also not totally accurate when used in this context. The term nicotine dependence (as in physical dependence) is much more accurate when talking about the biological effects and withdraw symptoms. The word addiction is much more inclusive of the behavioural aspects, of which vapor products also address, thereby making it easier for users to quit smoking. NRT products do not mimic the behaviour of smoking which is part of the reason why they have such an abysmal failure rate, but then again if they actually worked, the pharma companies would be losing customers and future profits.
Well done! If I could, I’d give you 5 up votes!
Ditto on what Freedom said – great and accurate response. I swear it appears that this article was written by big pharma.
“But another alternative to smoking tobacco, e-cigarettes, is not proving to be as helpful to smokers.”
Really??? I spent decades trying every stop smoking remedy, from hypnosis to Chantix, offered by the medical establishment. They did not work.
A year and a half ago, though, I was able to quit a 40 year three-pack-a-day habit by switching to e-cigarettes and have been smoke free ever since.
The hacking cough is gone along with a host of other maladies associated with smoking.
The only thing likely to drive me back to smoking is if sanctimonious authoritarians like the author make it impossible for me to get the supplies I need to continue vaping.
;…………OSHA also took on the passive smoking fraud and this is what came of it:
Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence: Third Edition
This sorta says it all
These limits generally are based on assessments of health risk and calculations of concentrations that are associated with what the regulators believe to be negligibly small risks. The calculations are made after first identifying the total dose of a chemical that is safe (poses a negligible risk) and then determining the concentration of that chemical in the medium of concern that should not be exceeded if exposed individuals (typically those at the high end of media contact) are not to incur a dose greater than the safe one.
So OSHA standards are what is the guideline for what is acceptable ”SAFE LEVELS”
OSHA SAFE LEVELS
All this is in a small sealed room 9×20 and must occur in ONE HOUR.
For Benzo[a]pyrene, 222,000 cigarettes.
“For Acetone, 118,000 cigarettes.
“Toluene would require 50,000 packs of simultaneously smoldering cigarettes.
Acetaldehyde or Hydrazine, more than 14,000 smokers would need to light up.
“For Hydroquinone, “only” 1250 cigarettes.
For arsenic 2 million 500,000 smokers at one time.
The same number of cigarettes required for the other so called chemicals in shs/ets will have the same outcomes.
So, OSHA finally makes a statement on shs/ets :
Field studies of environmental tobacco smoke indicate that under normal conditions, the components in tobacco smoke are diluted below existing Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS.) as referenced in the Air Contaminant Standard (29 CFR 1910.1000)…It would be very rare to find a workplace with so much smoking that any individual PEL would be exceeded.” -Letter From Greg Watchman, Acting Sec’y, OSHA.
Why are their any smoking bans at all they have absolutely no validity to the courts or to science!
…..Study says smokers are not addicted to nicotine
Craving for cigarettes is more to do with the mind than the addictive influence of nicotine. In other words, it is the psychological element of smoking that makes one addicted to cigarettes, a new study conducted by Israeli scientists has revealed.
The psychological element of smoking is the key factor deciding the intensity of craving for cigarettes in a smoker compared to the physiological effects of nicotine as an addictive chemical, says Dr. Reuven Dar of Tel Aviv University’s Department of Psychology.
“These findings might not be popular with advocates of the nicotine addiction theory, because they undermine the physiological role of nicotine and emphasize mind over matter when it comes to smoking,” says Dr. Dar, in his new study published in the Journal of Abnormal Psychology.
…………..Not 1 Death or Sickness Etiologically Assigned to Tobacco. All the diseases attributed to smoking are also present in non smokers. It means, in other words, that they are multifactorial, that is, the result of the interaction of tens, hundreds, sometimes thousands of factors, either known or suspected contributors – of which smoking can be one.
Here’s my all-time favorite “scientific” study of the the anti-smoking campaign: “Lies, Damned Lies, & 400,000 Smoking-Related Deaths,” Robert A. Levy and Rosalind B. Marimont, Journal of Regulation, Vol. 21 (4), 1998.
You can access the article for free on the Cato Institute’s wesbite, This article neither defends nor promotes smoking. Rather it condemns the abuse of statistics to misinform and scare the public. Levy, by the way taught Statistics for Lawyers at Georgetown University Law School. There is also a popular law school class called How to Lie With Statistics.
Comment and Politics Editor 2015/2016. History and Philosophy Undergraduate. Can be bribed with calzone or anything with plenty of meat and BBQ sauce all over it.
……………….Congratulations cookout fans you’ve just survived being around second hand smoke for 120,000 years of equivalent exposure!
Barbecues poison the air with toxins and could cause cancer, research suggests. A study by the French environmental campaigning group Robin des Bois found that a typical two-hour barbecue can release the same level of dioxins as up to 220,000 cigarettes.
Dioxins are a group of chemicals known to increase the likelihood of cancer. The figures were based on grilling four large steaks, four turkey cuts and eight large sausages.”
Even the CANCER SOCIETY has benefit cookouts yet they push for smoking bans! Talk about being Hipocrits! Heres a real sweety pie of a special hype The Dumbest Fundraising Event Ever? American Cancer Society Joins BBQ Meat “Cook Off” to Raise Money for Cancer Research NaturalNews)
Texans living in Navarro County are about to win a collective award for being the dumbest people in the world when it comes to diet and nutrition: They are hosting a BBQ meat cook-off to raise money for — get this — cancer research!
Even the Governor of Kentucky and all the Anti-smoking Activists were at Fancy Farm for the big Political Cook Off Cook Out yet they too survived Inhaling 10S OF BILLIONS worth of equal cigarette smoke.
Even there own Human exhaled Breath creates hundreds of the same chemicals found in tobacco smoke yet we arent outlawing HUMANS FROM INDOOR SPACES………
Human Exhaled Air Analytics…” Buszewski et al, Biomed. Chromatogr. 21: 553–566 (2007)
……….The Chemistry of Secondary Smoke About 94% of secondary smoke is composed of water vapor and ordinary air with a slight excess of carbon dioxide. Another 3 % is carbon monoxide. The last 3 % contains the rest of the 4,000 or so chemicals supposedly to be found in smoke… but found, obviously, in very small quantities if at all.This is because most of the assumed chemicals have never actually been found in secondhand smoke. (1989 Report of the Surgeon General p. 80). Most of these chemicals can only be found in quantities measured in nanograms, picograms and femtograms. Many cannot even be detected in these amounts: their presence is simply theorized rather than measured. To bring those quantities into a real world perspective, take a saltshaker and shake out a few grains of salt. A single grain of that salt will weigh in the ballpark of 100 million picograms! (Allen Blackman. Chemistry Magazine 10/08/01). – (Excerpted from “Dissecting Antismokers’ Brains” with permission of the author.)
If Big T thought vaporizers would not be a threat to conventional cigarettes they would not have started marketing them. They would have laughed at the whole Chinese invention like they are probably doing with useless pharmaceutical nicotine. Because they saw how many people are quitting conventional cigarettes they wisely figured that they should go in that business to try to get a share of the pie. Little did they know however that their cigalikes just wouldn’t do the trick. They might learn still and improve their vaping technology with 2nd and 3rd generation vaporizers.
The only ones losing out with the monkey wrench that was thrown at their brilliant plan of smoking bans to get people to replace their smoking anywhere they can’t smoke with patches, gum, inhalers etc. is Big Pharma. They are the big losers thanks to e-cigs and they are going ballistic over it. Who do you think is behind the aggressive and ruthless war against e-cigarettes with absurd studies galore being produced as fast as they can find scientists willing to prostitute themselves to them through the front or back door? Well Big Pharma of course. Look no further.