Category Archives: Safety

Vaping In The News – March 25th, 2017

0000

Vaping In The News – March 19th – 25th, 2017

Nicotine Addiction ~ Canada ~ Austrailia ~ Professor Glantz ~ E-cigarette myths should go up in smoke ~ Dr. Farsalinos ~ Common Sense ~ Conspiracy ~ Battery Safety ~ A New Leaf: Vaping, E-Cigs & The Future of Tobacco at SXSW 2017


FUNDRAISER

Nicotine Addiction: An Open 30-Day Public Health Challenge.

This is a fundraiser for ecigarette-research.org for further research by Dr. Farsalinos and his colleagues and a challenge for public health to prove nicotine addiction without tobacco or MAOI’s.

So far the challenge has raised $215.00, and one challenge has been submitted.

While many have been shown the challenge, there have been no submissions from “public health experts“:

Nicotine Addiction: An Open 30-Day Public Health Challenge


canada

Canada:

Tobacco is safe. It’s just formalities.

David Sweanor…has been refused the opportunity to testify on Bill S-5 before the Senate Standing Committee of Social Affairs, Science and Technology (SOCI).

You can show your support here with this ThunderClap:

#LetDavidSpeak:


Aust

Australia:

More formalities. Tobacco is still safe.

I will remind you of Clive Bates:

Do not read this or discuss it and in no circumstances should you comment

Then you can read this.

Scheduling delegate’s final decisions, March 2017.


Africa

They don’t want vaping in Africa. They like tobacco. Good to know.


glantzfunding.JPG

The Emporer has blogged.

Glantz, who isn’t one of the elite royalty mentioned in this report, decided “As one of the 120 “leaders” who responded to the poll used to construct this document”, he strongly objects to the use of the subtitle, and spelled “necessarily” incorrectly as “necessarity” wrong – which leads one to believe he may, might, could  – or it is possible, he’s an idiot.

If you’re unfamiliar with Professor Glantz, he’s covered here from Paul: Rotund Reaver.

I’ve blogged about the mechanical genius here and here.

New report does not necessarity reflect “the views of 120 leaders in tobacco control”


bloody-hands

Tobacco Control Experts

Tobacco control experts have so much blood time on their hands – they have to waste time with a conspiracy session.

Drink the tea, Alice – find yourself a nice mushroom stool.

Control has wasted over 50 years sitting on the floor with crayons – pretending to “fight”.


More of this, please

In their zeal to punish the evil tobacco industry, many have thrown the baby out with the bathwater by ignoring scientific evidence, mislabeling e-cigarettes as dangerous tobacco products and stifling, and restricting access to, a technology that helps tens of thousands of people — perhaps more — safely and effectively quit smoking every year.

E-cigarette myths should go up in smoke


Speaking of Dr. Farsalinos

“He pointed to the example of a conference organised by the tobacco industry in Brussels last year, where scientists were sent letters criticising their participation by a US anti-smoking group – even though they had no links to the tobacco industry.”

Researcher claims ‘academic McCarthyism’ over e-cigarettes

One letter sent was here:

The criticisms Dr. Farsalinios speaks of in the quote with 7 others is here.

The URL was definitely not the title of the article:

www.heraldscotland. com/news /15166477.Scientist_defends_links_between_Big_Tobacco_and_vaping_industry/?ref=rss

Now, this has story has two parts, and Phil called it.

Dr. Farsalinos was misinterpreted in the article:

My job is to defend science and evidence, not any industries. In that respect, and after waiting for 24h for the journalist to revise, I am obliged to denounce an article published in the Sunday Herald Scotland in which I am MISINTERPRETED as defending links between the tobacco and vaping industries and characterizing attacks on research into vaping funded by Big Tobacco were a form of “academic McCarthyism”.

Dr. Farsalinos’ full response is here:

Defending science, NOT industries: denouncing an article in the Sunday Herald Scotland


A bit of common sense:

Berkeley Professor Uses Common Sense To Back Vaping


batteries2

Battery Safety

UL will be testing “tobacco products”:

UL, a leading global safety science organization, is announcing acceptance of product submittals of electronic cigarettes, also known as e-cigarettes, for construction evaluation, testing and North American certification.

E-Cigarette Construction Evaluation Now Provided by UL

Battery safety is also covered here, here & here


What Jason is LINKING to is HERE.


A New Leaf: Vaping, E-Cigs & The Future of Tobacco at SXSW 2017.

It’s an hour well worth spending with Cynthia Cabrera, Dr.Sally Satel, and  David Sweanor, J.D.


NEWS from my friends across the pond: Vapers.org.uk.

You can find me here trying to be cordial on Facebook

You can find me here being a bit more evil on Twitter

You can also find me on LinkedIn

You can follow me on this blog!


Medical, Research, Science Professionals:

Research:


Politics:

E-Cigarette Politics 


Consumers Groups:


A Billion Lives

This isn’t over:


Your comments are NEVER filtered, always encouraged and welcome on this blog.

More to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin

Save

Save

Save

Pounding Sand. I am proudly a guest on @vapemestoopid!

donttalkaboutthat

Pounding Sand – Guest blog by

@Vapingit with Commentary by VMS

Kevin and I got to talking a couple days ago and we came up with this crazy confusing idea because we were both thinking about blogging on pretty much the same things. Instead of us both blogging on our respective sites, I asked Kevin if he’d like to do a dual blog post with me. He writes his initial blog and I respond with my 2 cents. You end up with 2 small time advocates views and opinions on pretty much the same subjects, but it’s a dialogue and not just one sided. My responses will be in purple and bold.

Kevin: A couple weeks ago, there was a vaping meet in New Jersey. If you’re reading this, you probably already know there was no vaping allowed.

VMS: I am still completely baffled as to why anyone would organize an event in a state with a public vaping ban. It makes no sense whatsoever!

Kevin: I’m a non-scientific kind of guy. I had a back & forth on a thought months ago with another person I respect via email –  We, I don’t remember who “thought” of it, but we were discussing what else we could DO to benefit our cause. That conversation turned to me attending a vape meet, and one of us said – what a great place to monitor the air!

A vape meet would be the PERFECT place. Stick some monitors up on booths. Put some on the entry/exit signs. Don’t even tell anyone. Just do it, lets find out what’s in the air, good or bad. By good or bad, I mean GOOD or BAD.

VMS: I too thought this was a great idea and I still do. Just like when Dr. Farsalinos tested e-liquid for diacetyl content the results were largely NOT in our favour as a community or an industry. I still find it upsetting that this information, up until recently, has been ignored by some of our leading e-liquid manufacturers. It took Five Pawns being outed by Cloud 9 for their diacetyl and AP levels to get companies to start making a change. Why the delay when we have had clear NEGATIVE evidence that this problem existed? 

Kevin: Well, with the Jersey thing this weekend, someone on a facebook group said something about the Health Department missing a great opportunity to do just that. I agreed. It went to twitter, I tagged Carl Phillips, Chief Scientific Officer at CASAA
where I was told:

cp
Well, maybe it’s me, but that seemed condescending. Again, I’m not a scientist, more of a lover of vape. I intentionally don’t want to find out it violates OSHA standards, I want to find out that it doesn’t. Come down to my level a moment.

That felt at a first GlANTZ that I was being told to pound sand – aaand I digress. I played stupid, but don’t understand.

cp2

But there’s this, *Carl from you in June *I’m a huge fan!) :
http://antithrlies.com/2015/06/03/notes-from-the-fda-e-cigarette-workshop/

VMS: Carl is a difficult one. The limited communication I have had with him through twitter has always been swift and to the point. At times, it felt harsh. I’m not sure if this is just down to it being social media and an inability to convey emotion through 140 characters or just the way it comes across. No matter, really. Carl is a great asset to the cause.


Back to Farsalinos diacetyl study. I am prepared to accept negative results. Results that can create a positive change. If we find out that the air quality at large events like this is really bad for us, then that only serves for us to improve the way we conduct these events. If we are going to keep claiming that our vaper in small quantity is harmless to bystanders and ourselves, then we should know what it is doing to us and bystanders on a larger scale.


Kevin: On Facebook, it was handled a bit differently.

cp3


Kevin: For better or worse, why HASN’T it been done? Why NOT? I’m still, even after the few paragraphs you’ve read, not a scientist. Let say out in Sunny California, there was, or will be a meet. Someone REALLY wants to do this on the anti-vaping side of our lives. THEY get the information and plaster it all over the news on the worst possible outcomes. Yes… and we’re sitting ducks. Trying to chase the truth down between their propaganda and lies like the old familiar formaldehyde stupidity.

VMS: So maybe an air test at a vape meet isn’t a great idea but a large indoor air study IS. Let’s encourage companies to put money towards a controlled large scale indoor air study then? We see how quick some of them are to support campaigns like #NotBlowingSmoke, so maybe we can get them to support some more research too? My biggest concern is that someone like Glantz who has the money available to him, will get this done before WE do. We all know how people like him would spin the data and the nano-particles. Why can’t we be on the offensive for once in this game?

Kevin: How the valuable resources were attained to debunk the formaldehyde scare are beyond me. Time and money. So, it leads ME to believe we should proactively take any sensible suggestion – *I thought it was a sensible thought* – and go with it to have it in OUR hands. Both for the vaper and anyone else.  Proactively. That’s my thought.

This study found on Vape About It concludes:
“…new study published in the Dec. 2014 issue of Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology found conclusive data that the vapor emitted from e-cigs and personal vapor devices is non-toxic. In other words, vaping is safe.”

They do this at ice rinks.
They do this at indoor motor-cross events.

Among other things, if it is already deemed “safe” and the second/third hand studies were also debunked, why NOT go all out at a vape meet, or at least a good Saturday afternoon at a large scale Brick & Mortar? Why NOT?

VMS: I don’t see a good enough reason why not. “Handing the ANTZ” ammunition isn’t a good enough excuse anymore. If we don’t tackle and combat it before they do, then they surely have all the ammunition they need. “They had the opportunity to test it, but all they care about is getting you addicted to nicotine and not about the safety of the product.” We already have this fight on our hands. It doesn’t matter what move we make as long as we are always on the defensive. I have the utmost respect for Carl and Greg both, but I simply don’t agree with burying our heads in the sand. As a vaper and a consumer that supports AVA and CASAA, I was disappointed by both of their responses, but can also understand where they are coming from. I do think that this is something that needs further discussion by the “heads” of our community though and should not be ignored or passed off as being another silly idea.


Kevin: It probably has been done and there was no conclusive evidence to it being “bad”… or they’d have pounded us with it, or it really hasn’t been done to a “vape meet arena scale”.

SO, why NOT? Well, if arenas are too big why not do it at a weekend full vape shop. Lets put it to the test. Lets FIND out what is in it. Anyone reading this who’s in the environmental field got an idea as to how?

So, what are we hiding? If it hasn’t been done by us, shame on us. If it’s been done by “Glantz” or some other anti, they’d be ALL over it if it were bad. Just like the “aiming at children” packaging, nobody wants to bring THAT up until recently. Sadly, it’s been being brought up for some time. Why not get ahead of it? Why WAIT until we’re sideswiped by a big ANTZ truck full of what they WANT to tell us. If we’re not LEADING this industry in research, we’re all pounding sand.

VMS: Again, I have to agree here. We need to be on the ball and get on the offensive. No data is bad data, bad data is bad data, but GOOD data even if it has BAD results, can be improved upon. Also, to be fair, I don’t think the community is really hiding anything, I think some of us are just more reluctant in wanting to KNOW. Does that make sense?


Kevin: I do “what I can” to support and advocate. Sometimes I’m spot on, sometimes I’m out of line.
I DO what I can. I don’t like waiting, I like action. I don’t like being told to shut up. I don’t like being told “don’t talk about that”. I don’t like being suppressed. This is TOO frigging important.

VMS: I had an entire blog written up and dedicated to this subject. The “little advocates” compared to the big advocates. I haven’t published it yet because it’s mostly me getting really frustrated and angry.

Lately though, I have seen too many “that’s silly” “we can’t do that” “don’t do that” “been there done that it didn’t work” “why didn’t you run this past me first” and the one I hate the most, “let us deal with it”.

I have watched every day people, those working as a cashier or a stay at home mom, who want to get involved in advocacy, who are trying their best with what little they know, get told they’re basically a nuisance, that they’re in the way, and incapable of coming up with any good ideas that support the cause.

This treatment of the “little advocates” is unacceptable in my opinion. Us little people with tiny voices and a lack of experience put a lot of these people on point as our front men & women and those people accepted that responsibility. With that responsibility should come the decency to treat us “little advocates” with patience and respect. If we don’t deserve that at the very least…

Know what I think? Screw them. No one in this industry, any company or another advocate tells me what I can and can’t do and none of you should let them tell you either. Suggestions are great, advice is amazing, but if they shoot you down and make you feel like a fool, fuck them. Find someone/something else to put your support in and don’t let it defeat your purpose!

If your message is STRONG, if it can be backed up by evidence and you are prepared to defend your message, then go for it! Either people will pay attention or they won’t. Do NOT let anyone in this community tell you that your THOUGHTS or IDEAS or EFFORTS to protect this product are ‘not good enough”. 

 


fight

 

Kevin: I will do what Dr. Farsalinos said above, at any cost, including questioning integrity.

VMS: In the last 6 months I have watched many people change their stance on what to fight and what not to fight. 3 months ago, letting companies know that we thought their kid friendly logos were bad, was a GOOD idea and was ENCOURAGED. Now? It’s “who cares?” “this is an adult product being sold to adults in an adult store.” Funny that because 3 months ago that’s not what I was hearing. Reminder, the ANTZ are still attacking child friendly branding, it is still a problem and it is one that our community CAN CHANGE. Put your money where your mouth is. Tell these companies you don’t like their branding, why you don’t approve of it, and then endeavor to buy products from other companies who clearly care about protecting this product.

It’s the same thing with the Diacetyl and AP issues. Here in the UK and Canada, measures were taken to remove products from sale that contained levels that were deemed unsafe, yet the US has kind of just ignored it.  This is another incident where I read that we should just be quiet about it and let other people deal with it in in private and away from the public. Erm. No.

If a company is playing Russian Roulette with my health, I am not going to sit here and let them get away with it while I’m told to shut up and let other more experienced people deal with it…behind closed doors where we (the public) have no idea what’s being done to correct theses issues! Uh uh. Not happening. Same as above, tell a company you don’t like their test results and move to a brand that has results YOU are happy with.


Kevin: I also believe this:

speak

VMS: One voice may be small and quiet, but when we put all our voices together, we become loud and thunderous.


 

On an inspirational tweet, I created this. We’ve got petitions.

E-cigarette & Vaping Petitions Worldwide

Profile photo of GuestBlogger

Guest Blogger Account here on the VMS Website. If you would like to post an opinion piece, please click on the SUBMIT POST link found in the websites navigation menu. We love to hear and share your opinions about vaping, the politics involved, as well as reviews of your new vaporizers!Opinions expressed by guest bloggers may not necessarily be the same held by this websites owner or other authors on this site.


This blog was left intact – I copied/pasted it on this blog above.

******************************

UPDATE November 2015:

VapeCons: E-cigarette user conventions

conclusion

 

Update February 2016:

Look what happened months after this blog:

 

Clive Bates:

Public health snoopers detect vapour aerosol at vape conference and fake a particulates scare

The original is here Pounding sand: Guest blog @vapingit: Commentary by VMS

Please GO see her!!! Vape Me Stoopid!


Science & Research as mentioned above here!

Medical Professionals at M.O.V.E. here!


As always,

Keep On #Vaping On~

Kevin.