Category Archives: Smoking Cessation

Vaping In The News – December 30th, 2017

News

Vaping In The News.

Vaping In The News covers media stories on smoking, vaping, e-cigarettes, snus, tobacco control, public health, government regulations and more.

This week in the news:

Clive Bates: Regulating e-liquid flavors ~ Global calls to switch to smoke-free tobacco products gaining ground ~ Missouri Law Separates Vapor Products From Tobacco ~ Colorado is using pot tax money to save programs funded by big tobacco settlement ~ Will the FDA’s New Tobacco Strategy Be a Game Changer? ~ PureCircle partners with U.S. tobacco farmers ~ Tobacco truth top ten ~ Science Lesson: New Year’s Resolutions And Ways To Quit Smoking ~ Can e-cigarettes help smokers quit? ~ 1st Annual “Please Keep Smoking” Poll

This is Vaping In The News – December 30th, 2017




Clive Bates: Regulating e-liquid flavors

The Food and Drug Administration are imposing regulations on things they do not understand. Good thing they’re being regulated.

Regulating e-liquid flavors – is the U.S. regulator more likely to do harm than good and how would it know?


Global calls to switch to smoke-free tobacco products gaining ground

Slowly boiling the frog for regulations, restrictions, taxes and bans

Global calls to switch to smoke-free tobacco products gaining ground


Missouri Law Separates Vapor Products From Tobacco

NICOTINE is not TOBACCO.

Missouri Law Separates Vapor Products From Tobacco

Related from Carl V. Phillips: Science Lesson:

The Optimal Tax Rate For Vapor Products Is Zero

Related from Broony Saint, the “Thunder From Down Under”:

Nicotine is not tobacco

Related from me: The FDA can’t prove…


Speaking of tobacco money…

Funding and greed… it’s why I’m here.

Colorado is using pot tax money to save programs funded by big tobacco settlement

Ummm related again…think this isn’t about more smokers? More money? Please

Up In Smoke: What Happened to the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement Money?


Will the FDA’s New Tobacco Strategy Be a Game Changer?

I’ve covered this here, and where more smoking is promoted here.

Another in favor of the growing popularity in the “please keep smoking” campaign from Dr. Gottlieb.

“Looking at ways to reduce nicotine levels in cigarettes (….) is a cornerstone of our new and more comprehensive approach to effective tobacco regulation,” Gottlieb said in a speech to announce his plan.

Here’s where his, and others like Robin Koval, Stanton Glantz, Matt Myers and the other apes like Mitch Zeller walk around with their knuckles dragging the ground:

Will the FDA’s New Tobacco Strategy Be a Game Changer?


Advertise with YOUR text link or banner!


PureCircle partners with U.S. tobacco farmers

Let it grow, let it grow… let it grow…

PureCircle partners with U.S. tobacco farmers


Tobacco truth top ten

Brad Rodu. He’s got a top ten.

Tobacco truth top ten


Science Lesson: New Year’s Resolutions And Ways To Quit Smoking

Carl V. Phillips, again…

Science Lesson: New Year’s Resolutions And Ways To Quit Smoking


Can e-cigarettes help smokers quit?

Of course, they can.

Can e-cigarettes help smokers quit?


Please vote for the nominee who deserves it most!marlboro nominees.jpg

I’d like to present the top four nominees for the coveted

1st Annual “Please Keep Smoking” Award for 2017!

They’ve all worked hard in their respective fields.


Nominees are in order of no particular importance:

Bill de Blasio:

(Mayor, New York City)

It’s Official: A Pack Of Cigarettes Now Costs $13 In NYC

Scott Gottlieb, M.D.

(23rd Commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration)

Will the FDA’s New Tobacco Strategy Be a Game Changer?

Mary Jo Daley:

(Pennsylvania House of Representatives, 148th Legislative District)

Honored to have earned the Distinguished Advocacy Award from @ACSCANPA for working to minimize use of e-cigarettes…

Daley earns ‘Distinguished Advocacy Award’ from American Cancer Society

Malia Cohen:

(Member, San Francisco Board of Supervisors.)

SAN FRANCISCO SUPERVISOR MALIA COHEN INTRODUCES LANDMARK FLAVORED TOBACCO RESTRICTION ORDINANCE

Please choose the candidate you believe deserves the 1st official “Please Keep Smoking” award for 2017!


Poll closes Jan. 1st at 4P.M. – once you vote, you’ll see current results. Please vote and share this now!




Have you met my OUR friends at vapers.org.uk? 

vapersukgraphic.JPG


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


Tobacco Harm Reduction For Life

GONZO GIVES




Medical, Research, Science Professionals:

Research:


Politics:

E-Cigarette Politics 

A Billion Lives

A Billion Lives


think

Your comments are NEVER filtered, always encouraged and welcome on this blog. There is definitely more to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin

Ethical Standards in Tobacco Control are “Height of Hypocrisy”

Ethical money to burn

Ethical Standards in Tobacco Control

The height of hypocrisy. It’s like they have money to burn.

Powerful public health officials do not want money directly from tobacco giant Philip Morris International (PMI) due to fears it may compromise their ethical standards. The ethics they insist, in fact, scream for tobacco companies to adhere to, do not apply to them. Grants offered by Foundation for a Smoke-Free World (Funded by PMI) were met with the “height of hypocrisy” and denounced as if the devil himself had taken out the middleman; smokers.

It can’t look as if anti-tobacco would belly up to the funding bar accepting money from a tobacco company. Harvard School of Public Health was considering it and concluded they would deny the offer. On Twitter, Kent made an excellent observation: “Says a lot if a university can’t guarantee impartiality no matter the funding.”

I ask, does it really matter where the money comes from if the research is done with the highest ethical standards? What are they afraid of?


Unethical Funding Standards

Money filtered through smokers is acceptable. Did you know taxes from smoking finances what these professionals call “ethical” research? They rely on smokers for the tax from sales of tobacco to create grants – to fund research the old-fashioned way. What it boils down to is more smoking. Hypocrisy is thriving. Funding relies on smokers. Their livelihood depends on tobacco taxes. In fact, to try to “help” smokers, they’ve adhered to less than ethical standard advice for years.

No conflict of interest there.


Money And Ethics

“Ukraine has a positive experience in the past years of increasing tobacco taxes. In the period between 2008 and 2017, the average rate of excise duty on a packet of cigarettes increased by 20 times and the state budget revenues increased from 3.5 billion UAH to the projected 40 billion UAH in 2017. The number of smokers declined from 10 million to 6.5 million, according to the State Statistics Service. The GATS 2017 showTo ed a 20% reduction in smoking prevalence among adults over the past 7 years in Ukraine.”

Robert Innes explains:

“That is WHO FCTC talking the talk but look at the accompanying graph and ask yourself – what is the REAL reason for Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) suggesting that governments raise taxes on smoking (Keeping in mind that the WHO FCTC is controlled by the very same governments)”


Ethics Under The microscope

To shift the focus from themselves, the tobacco control, anti-tobacco and public health experts are refusing to grasp the concept of less harm. The blueprint is the elimination of tobacco. Always displaying a distrustful and combative tone, their war has been met with common sense, screaming because their financial ball livelihood is being deflated. Matt Myers, President of Tobacco Free Kids explained a 1.8 Billion dollar loss in tax revenue for the United States here:

(I colored the red as loss, green as gain)

You can click the graphic to enlarge

Ethics


DrMA explains a perplexing position for tobacco control:


Investors aren’t happy about it either.

What this means

This means, for the tobacco companies, it is business as usual. They are in business to sell a product. They are in business and expect to survive.  By doing so, they are looking directly at the trend of smokers looking for safer alternatives that work and openly inviting any and all to participate in research.

This means tobacco control and anti-tobacco groups, by default, have a vested interest in continuing a war” on nicotine to control tobacco taxes funded by smoking. This means they want to spend money on useless things like this – and this. This means they will also continue to promote the sales of dangerous and essentially useless products while also being funded by their silent pharmaceutical partners. This also means they will support more smoking by any means necessary.

Ethical Integrity

This means you question the illusion integrity of experts, of those who claim to have the public’s best interest at heart. This means you should question the motives, the fiscal goals, and hypocrisy of most of those in charge. This means those having an effort of eliminating smoking would have a final goal of eliminating themselves. That, my friends, means fighting smoking by those funded by the source, is in itself, an interest that will conflict with ethical standards. It’s a smokescreen. By default or design, that means smoking can never go away. It’s like they have money to burn.

I covered this over at The Daily Vaper in August:

Tobacco Control ‘Experts’ Fight AGAINST A Smoke-Free World


Interesting points from the BMJ Opinion from Richard Smith:

A public health witch hunt—bad for everybody

Here’s what happened last year:

from Neil McKeganey Ph.D. Christopher Russell Ph.D. themselves:

Why Academics Should Resist Pressure to Disengage with the Tobacco Industry




Have you met my OUR friends at vapers.org.uk? 

vapersukgraphic


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


Tobacco Harm Reduction For Life

GONZO GIVES




Medical, Research, Science Professionals:

Research:


Politics:

E-Cigarette Politics 

A Billion Lives

A Billion Lives


There is definitely more to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin


News


Sharing is caring. Tell me what you think!

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

What We Know About E-Cigarettes: Data and Science Is Available

Are E-cigarettes Harmful

What We Know About E-Cigarettes

What We Know About E-cigarettes is clear. Data is easily found. Science is piling up. The Food and Drug Administration released their “Every Try Counts” campaign. I looked for the e-cigarette section on the link provided ~ because I’m a curious soul, and found the section “What We Know About E-Cigarettes”.

I’ve completed my meta-analysis and the data shows here that “Every Try Counts” only eludes to every try counting. The propaganda found on the website does not support e-cigarettes as a “try”. In fact, It looks like I may have found the “what we know about e-cigarettes” master draft journalists are using as a coloring contest fill in the blank exercise. By adding sentences, sprinkled opinions, various lies and fodder between the text and adding an ever catchy title with scary words for a click-bait title , ~voila~ they have a full article of “we just don’t know” here.


What should you know about e-cigarettes

If you are are a journalist. If you are a professional. If you are in any capacity in the medical field, feel free to reference my sentiments on the challenges of e-cigarettes public health experts face daily, here.
If you are a person with a prestigious title similar to “politician, front group liason, expert, media contact”, etc.) and have an uncontrollable urge to look stupid, please, consider not doing that.
Science and data show e-cigs are a safer option and cessation rates are high according to available government research.

Below are my edits in bold, italics, etc, and with links below each paragraph to data and science.


Paragraph one:

E-cigarettes are officially known as electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS). They are more commonly called e-cigarettes, e-cigs, e-hookah, or vapes. You may have seen ads or stories on the internet that say e-cigarettes are a safe safER choice to help smokers quit choose to switch from smoking. There isn’t enough is plenty of scientific evidence to say if this is true or not. Opinion alert: Here’s what doctors and researchers do know right now.


What we know about e-cigarette research

Research: Here, here and here. Oh, here, here, here and here. That should get you started.

Paragraph two:

We already know this: E-cigs work by heating a liquid that may or may not has have nicotine and other chemicals in it. Heating the liquid turns it into a vapor. That’s what the user inhales and exhales. Some research shows that this vapor includes chemicals that are known to be less harmful. Scientists are studying the health effects of using e-cigarettes. New information is coming in, but they don’t have the answers yet. but is being all but ignored.


What we know about withholding information:

There’s Withholding differential risk information. Information is available here, and “Lower Carcinogen Levels” here, scary science here, and “Harm reduction in COPD smokers who switch” here.

Paragraph three:
Although FDA is working to regulateregulating e-cigarettes to restrict, tax and ban these devices,no more innovation can be achieved,currently they are not regulated. That means the makers of e-cigs don’t have to say what is in them. There are ways to know is no way to know exactly what chemicals are in e-cigarettes, it’s called science or how much are in these products.

What we know about regulations

National Tobacco Day is covered here.


Paragraph four:

We do know that some, not all e-cigs contain nicotine. Nicotine is by proof of assertion, what you believe is addictive what makes tobacco addictive. Nicotine can (may, could, might) also affect how the brain develops. Because childhood and teen years are times of important brain development, the nicotine in tobacco and e-cigs is believed to be especially bad for children and teens.


What we know about nicotine

Nicotine is covered here, and here with “approved” methods, proof by assertion (the addiction to saying it is addictive) is covered here, and more nicotine is here, nicotine propaganda is covered in-depth here, and by me here.

Think of the children™ is covered in-depth, where there is no such thing as a gateway here, 10 years of smoking rates are plummeting for children here, described as weak here and covered here, and very interesting points of restrictions here… my fingers are tired, but I’ll press on because it’s important.

I’ve covered gateways and nicotine addiction, here.


Paragraph five:

It’s also not very clear if e-cigs do help people quit smoking or or if  and the government, public health, tobacco control experts purposely get in the way of people quitting. Researchers are working hard to find the answers to these important questions. For now, we do not know if using e-cigs is a safER and helpful way to quit smoking, so using e-cigs is not recommended. There are other proven, safe, and effective methods for quitting smoking.

Explore the options to find a quit method that’s right for you.

What we know about helpful

There’s that pesky National Institutes of Health (NIH) and National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) showing 79% success rate here.

Clarity on research misconduct happens to be here.

I can show you 7,238 answers to helpful here.

Science and data show e-cigs are a safer option and cessation rates are high according to available government research.




I typed slow, but you can bookmark this page and refer to it anytime, share it with your professional friends, and while you’re here, may I suggest if you’re writing an article or op-ed on e-cigarettes, try harder for information. Look to the left and right of this blog.

Repeat after me:

Science and data show e-cigs are a safer option and cessation rates are high according to available government research.


Advertise with YOUR text link or banner!




Have you met my OUR friends at vapers.org.uk? 

vapersukgraphic.JPG


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


Tobacco Harm Reduction For Life

GONZO GIVES




Medical, Research, Science Professionals:

Research:


Politics:

E-Cigarette Politics 

A Billion Lives

A Billion Lives


There is definitely more to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin

FDA launches “Every Try Counts” campaign to manipulate smokers

 

EveryTryCounts.jpg

FDA launches “Every Try Counts” campaign

Attention, smokers. The FDA launched their latest campaign to help smokers with an “adult smoking cessation education” campaign aimed at encouraging cigarette smokers to quit through messages of support called “Every Try Counts”. While the challenge will remain the same, their “tough love” approach of demonizing and shaming and nicotine guilt trips has turned into – well, a softer, kinder “positive” type of manipulation to say the same thing. Keep trying.

There seemed to be buzzwords like “stakeholders“, “medicinal” products, and “health” coupled with “technology” and “smoke-free society”. In the latest battle cry of “Every Try Counts“, there certainly seemed to be more grab-assery in the almost 2 1/2 hour Glantzian propaganda video than there was “effort” put forth by the FDA.


 

I did find e-cigarettes. The “e-cigarette” section of this campaign claiming “for now, we do not know” is difficult to find and treated like a red-headed stepchild on the naughty step (hat tip to Agent Ania who I adored and miss dearly), here.

What I know they know is in their possession all over this blog here, and here and so on.


“Every Try Counts”

In the latest smokescreen release:

“The FDA is committed to reducing tobacco-related disease and death by helping people quit combustible cigarettes and implementing comprehensive policies to reduce addiction to nicotine. Our aim is to render cigarettes minimally or non-addictive”


Stop. Do you know what a 10 Million+ Dollar commitment of comprehensive policies from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) return on investment might look like? I do.



*If any of you know of 10 million dollars being spent in a similar fashion for e-cigarettes, snus, etc., PLEASE link them in the comments.



fda conflict of interest.JPG

I couldn’t tell if this was a slip, or a tactically designed ploy by using the words “spectrum of risk” at 1:03:40 and 1:04:07 in the video….

According to “22nd Century” – “Spectrum” is the name of their product at this time)

bold is my emphasis within below:

MRTP designation

Perhaps the most immediate upside comes from the possibility of its very low nicotine cigarettes Brand A (containing 95% less nicotine compared to conventional cigarettes) to get the Modified Risk Tobacco Product (MRTP) designation.

The company would then be able to market Brand A as such, a very low nicotine cigarette which has less health risk as it reduces addiction.

An official application was made to the FDA in December last year, and a rather substantial meeting (involving no less than 22 FDA staff members and another 20 by telephone) took place within two weeks, suggesting substantial FDA interest.

This interest was already evident from the ($10M) financing by the FDA and NIDA of a landmark study using 22nd Century’s Spectrum research cigarettes that appeared in October 2015 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine.

This double blind, parallel, randomized clinical trials involving 840 smokers, found that smokers of Spectrum very low nicotine cigarettes consumed far fewer cigarettes per day and doubled their quit attempts versus smokers of cigarettes with conventional nicotine content.


“Every Try Counts”

Here’s the “landmark study”:

Randomized Trial of Reduced-Nicotine Standards for Cigarettes

How will the FDA get a return on investment with this campaign? They’re in the tobacco business. They’ll sell more cigarettes and collect the tax. I predicted it in advance here, and where “expert” personalities and political front groups are on board, I covered it here.


“while encouraging the development of potentially less harmful tobacco products for adults who still want or need access to nicotine.”

Well, thanks very much.


Continued babbling

The announcement rambles on, stating:

“At the same time, we’re also taking new steps to improve access and use of FDA-approved medicinal nicotine products to help smokers quit.”

The government and experts claim “government approved methods work to help smokers” but no one brags of 93% failure rates. No one mentions false hopes choosing those options. No one mentions the methods approved by the government, fanatically promoted and shoved into smokers faces, are designed to fail.


Imagine my surprise to see political front groups such as the Heart, Lung, Truth Initiative along with CVS “pledging” resources manipulation with the FDA.

The last campaign was a $200 million dollar flop.


Every Try Counts, right before your eyes

There’s a hashtag “#MedNicotine ” entangled in the manipulation.

What Duke-Margolis is quoting from Fred Saunders of Glaxo-Smith Kline (GSK) to smokers is:

Give us a call because you’re too stupid to understand we’re not going to make a product to help you, so call us: we’ll explain how you’ll fail. These products are useless without counseling. Give us money. Do as you’re told. Use them anyway.

Fundamentally.

Fund Us Mentality.


Added 12/14/17:

The day after this blog, this comes across my eyes:

“preclinical research conducted at Duke University”

Seems “#MedNicotine” was pretty serious….

Seems “Every Try  Counts” includes “medical nicotine”.

Axsom Therapeutics Collaborates with World-Leading Nicotine Addiction Research Center for Phase 2 Trial of AXS-05 in Smoking Cessation


The FDA can’t prove nicotine addiction or gateways exist.

Without tobacco/maio’s, Nicotine is not addictive.

When will the class action law suits begin?

One more thing. I primarily tweet and blog about e-cigs, but that does not mean I am against Heat not burn, snus, and so on. In my opinion, if you’re trying, it all counts.

I saw “dip” but Swedish Snus isn’t talked about enough, either.

From Bengt Wiberg




I urge you to read what Brian Fojtik has to say:

We Don’t Need The Government To Solve Smoking Problem


Advertise with YOUR text link or banner!




Keller and Heckman is pleased to announce its 2nd annual E-Vapor and Tobacco Law Symposium. If you’re interested in attending, please click on the graphic below!Symposium.JPG 2018 E-Vapor and Tobacco Law Symposium





Have you met my OUR friends at vapers.org.uk? 

vapersukgraphic.JPG


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


Tobacco Harm Reduction For Life

GONZO GIVES




Medical, Research, Science Professionals:

Research:


Politics:

E-Cigarette Politics 

A Billion Lives

A Billion Lives


There is definitely more to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin


think

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

Lowering nicotine in cigarettes is a gateway to smoking

ash tray.JPG

Lowering nicotine levels in cigarettes is the idea. That’s the idea. That’s going to get people to “quit smoking”. This is insane. Instead of the US Government taking tobacco use by the balls by focusing on less harmful alternatives – they are playing a slow and never-ending game of badminton with tobacco.

This is beyond a hot mess, as their claim of “480,000” lives or whatever the made up number is, is supposed to be the focus:

Less tobacco use. Less harm.

It seems, for them, that number isn’t high enough. They want more. Don’t get me started on “the children™.

What the FDA is saying to the public is – cigarettes will be “less addictive”:

FOCUS.

Instead of taking people away from tobacco or directing them to other viable alternatives like snus or e-cigarettes that work, there’s a flashy neon sign pointing directly at tobacco over government and tobacco-funded & sponsored heads.

It makes complete fiscal sense, business as usual.


Lowering nicotine in cigarettes is a gateway to smoking funding.

Out in California the wild, wild west, pompous ass Stanton “Puff-N-Stuff” Glantz is digging a hole by pretending experts were blindsided and stunned of tobacco companies knowing nicotine replacement therapies snake oil didn’t work without counseling, and boldly claims all nicotine reduction therapies (NRT) should be regulated:

“Our study shows that by not regulating nicotine in all tobacco products, including NRT, the FDA could be walking into a trap.”


gif-stunned

Meanwhile, the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) is on a mesmerising path propaganda campaign convincing the public that “lower nicotine cigarettes” that the FDA, in part, financed, is being hailed by many as a “game changer”.

No, it isn’t. Keep smoking. Same game.


You don’t see signs like this any more.

designated smoking area

Target? More smokers.

If the goal of the federal government is to lower tobacco use, wouldn’t tobacco be taken out of the equation?

Well, no. Get that silly thought out of your head. They can’t do that anyway.

No need to stock up, there’ll be plenty of tobacco to smoke in the future.


Government Approved

This effort will be another of those “governmnent approved” (and financed) methods that will fail miserably, while smokers, who are not yet being told the truth, will smoke.

In this Rstreet article, Carrie Wade & Clive Bates explain there are all sorts of problems with this debaucle.

Reducing nicotine in cigarettes raises all sorts of problems

If you use “government approved” methods, you’ll have around a 93%+ chance of returning to tobacco. While I’m not an “expert”, I’ll assume in advance the failure rate will remain the same with cigarettes having “low levels” of nicotine.


train.JPG

Lets Make It Happen!

Matt Myers certainly is no stranger to creating back room deals.

Much to my surprise expectations, Matt Myers and The Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids “a leading force in the fight to reduce tobacco use” is publicly on board with tobacco use.

I’m waiting for the Lung, Heart, Cancer and other political front groups to hop on board the “please keep smoking” train while Mr. Myers and his front group already have a seat in the dining car, exclaiming “Let’s make it happen“.


Badminton.JPG

Not surprisingly, Myers friends over at Philip Morris are very excited.

They’re at a boring badminton game and no one’s keeping score… but there is definitely cheering.

Think of the children™.

 

Added 8/23/17:

Brad Rodu:

Negligible Evidence of Radical Nicotine Reduction Benefit

 


Think it’s about the children?

Related:

“most e-cigarette experimentation does not turn into regular use, and levels of regular use in young people who have never smoked remain very low.”

Cumulatively these surveys collected data from over 60,000 young people.

Young People’s Use of E-Cigarettes across the United Kingdom: Findings from Five Surveys 2015–2017

“Nicotine dependence is not a significant mechanism for e-cigarettes’ purported effect on heavier future conventional smoking among young adults.”

Evaluating the Mutual Pathways among Electronic Cigarette Use, Conventional Smoking, and Nicotine Dependence.


Advertise with YOUR text link or banner!


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



Have you met my friends at vapers.org.uk?

vapersukgraphic.JPG


Medical, Research, Science Professionals:

Research:


Politics:

E-Cigarette Politics 

A Billion Lives

A Billion Lives


think

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


 

There is definitely more to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin

 

Save

Save

Trying to quit smoking? Patches, gums and “experts” are useless – without counseling you.

patch 2.JPG

Are you trying to quit smoking? Have you tried the patch or gum? Did you ask about the success rates when you did? Of course you didn’t. Did you have great expectations? Excellent. That’s what I experts want to hear.

If you’re afraid of trying e-cigarettes, I’m even more enthused. If you didn’t plan correctly, you’re up ten points over the others!

Let us move on quickly before you realize this is futile.


Are patches and gums useless?

Well…. of course not, unless you use them without “counseling“!

That’s also what tobacco companies wanted to hear as they welcomed you back. Also, there’s the public health “expert” sector trying to guilt and shame you, and they miss you as well.

Hang on. Steady yourself. The pharmaceutical companies – you forgot about them, didn’t you? I’ll keep the government out of this blog for time & space.


Did you plan for success?

Of course not. They know better than that.

Feeling a bit dizzy? Outstanding. It’s not your nicotine, you know –  or lack of nicotine intake making you feel that way. It’s them. Public health and organizations make you feel like insinuate you could succeed in your journey to not smoking. Then, of course, you fail.

Yep. Shame on you, too. You didn’t try hard enough! You didn’t plan!!!

Your failure? That’s what they’re counting on. It’s just around the corner.

Knock, knock.

So are your favorite cigarettes.



 

nicotine in print.JPG


Still didn’t plan for success?

Go on, now… make a commitment, set a date, get your choice of snake oil patches, gums or prescription medication – and once you didn’t, couldn’t or… well – failure is just a part of the process.

Don’t give up. PLAN!!!! Try again! Keep trying! Sure, the patch & gum have about a 7 % success rate, but – what do you care?

Why plan ahead? That would be silly. Half the time they give these ineffective methods away for free!!!


You will be held accountable.

cdc keep trying.JPG


Ready?

You get ready, (nowadays, don’t forget your quit app so your friends can get in on the guilt giving sessons as well!)

Your favorite cigarette brand is waiting, your ash trays want to be dirty again.


Folks, this is 2017. Don’t you think by now there’d be a better way?

Smoke. Try to quit. Get “quit smoking aids”. Try. Fall short. Feel guilty and let them pretend to console you, but smoke again. Keep spending your money.

Nice businesses if you find the work in tobacco, public health or the pharmaceutical sectors, eh? Lack of success is their success.

Quit Attempts:

Attempts is what public health and the pharmaceuticals like. The more the merrier. Repeat business is key.

Lets take a quick peek at quit attempts:

quit attempts the vaper

 

Thank you to The Vaper for the above graphic!


What about side effects?

Public health says “ask your doctor if it’s right for you”. They never mention success rates, and you never ask.

I’ll let you ponder the side effects of the different “government approved” methods here:

Choose your method at the top here: FDA approved method.

Stunned?


What ABOUT nicotine?

Now, consider nicotine. A startling thing, nicotine. A scapegoat for all things tobacco.

Without tobacco and the MAOI’s, it is not addictive.



So, with all the fuss from some pie-filled mouth in California, (Puff-N-Stuff I affectionately call him) there’s this that inspired this impromptu blog….

Before I go stop trying to help you, I’d like to thank Gregory Conley of the American Vaping Association for this screenshot:

Glantz behind.JPG

 


This is why you’re here.

The Shady Link Between Big Tobacco and Nicotine Gum

Related:

Tobacco Industry Research on Nicotine Replacement Therapy: “If Anyone Is Going to Take Away Our Business It Should Be Us”

Oh… yeah, the counseling – like my title said…. Staying in business is hard.

The tobacco companies want to stay in business, and who can blame them. The pharmaceutical companies want to stay in business, and who could blame them?

I’ll blame tobacco control experts. Screw ’em. They know better.

Like my title said…. “experts”…are useless without patches & gum to offer. Don’t get me wrong – they mean well – they’ve got good intentions.

Don’t get me started on the Government tonight, they just want you to smoke.

Staying in business with any sense of relevance or truth, is hard.


 

Advertise with YOUR text link or banner!

 


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



Have you met my friends at vapers.org.uk?

vapersukgraphic.JPG


Medical, Research, Science Professionals:

Research:


Politics:

E-Cigarette Politics 

A Billion Lives

A Billion Lives


think

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


 

There is definitely more to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin

Save

Save

Save

Vaping In The News – August 19, 2017

news vaping

 

Vaping In The News – August 19th, 2017


The FDA shouldn’t give into irrational e-cigarette fears ~ Nicotine Usage Survey for UK & USA ~ Government Waste ~ Treatment & Beyond ~ E-cig risk campaign for youths draws praise, criticism to FDA ~ Rehash worth rehashing ~ Gateway effects and electronic cigarettes ~ There is no safe level of research ~ Cruel But Sadly Not Unusual ~ “Smoking Fee” ruled out ~ The Burning Truth About Tobacco Bonds ~ Challenges for Vendors and Desirability of Compulsory Membership of Trade Association ~ A Nicotine-Focused Framework for Public Health ~ Professor Glantz ~ A Billion Lives

August 13th-19th, 2017


FDA & Fear

Fear is the business they’re in.

“The Food and Drug Administration is now on the wrong side of a new anti-vaping campaign. Instead of helping teens reject using tobacco or e-cigarettes, the new FDA plan would end up discouraging people from quitting cigarette smoking — an outcome no one wants.”

The FDA shouldn’t give into irrational e-cigarette fears


Nicotine Usage Survey for US & UK Users

From personal experience, I know there is always skepticism when surveys are made, formed and posted.

This survey is a from a reliable and known source.

Nicotine Useage Survey for US & UK users


Do you know about THR4LIFE?

bod1


Government Waste

Citizens Against Government Waste released a statement “supporting the approval of efforts for tobacco harm reduction through e-cigarettes and similar non-combustible products.”

CAGW Submits Public Comments to FDA Supporting Tobacco Harm Reduction


Treatment & Beyond

Treatment & Beyond. A tobacco control prevention training tool for health care providers around the globe


Do you know about NNA?

nna.JPG


Risks Campaign

As I stated above, the FDA is in the fear business:

E-cig risk campaign for youths draws praise, criticism to FDA


Rehash worth rehashing

Covered before by me here, another look at the NIH study buried by the US Government.

Prevalence of population smoking cessation by electronic cigarette use status in a national sample of recent smokers


Gateways

A long standing political PLOY to garner the publics affection, I present to you:

Gateway effects and electronic cigarettes.


There is no safe level of research

GrandDad… Head Rambles.. keep an eye on this crotchety old man.

Love it.

There is no safe level of research


Are you familiar with INNCO?


Dick Puddlecoat:

Cruel But Sadly Not Unusual

Sadly:

Anna Raccoon


“Smoking Fee” ruled out

The ponzi scheme is crumbling in Oklahoma…

“just $1 million of the $225 million in revenue would have been used to discourage tobacco usage”

“to generate new revenue streams to help meet the constitutional mandate to balance the state budget”

‘Smoking fee’ ruled out


The Burning Truth About Tobacco Bonds

The Master Settlement Agreement, paid for by smokers – consumers – not tobacco companies, has been around a long time. Propublica did an awesome job here of explaining the mess, here’s yet another look at the crumbling ponzi scheme:

The Burning Truth About Tobacco Bonds


Challenges for Vendors and Desirability of Compulsory Membership of Trade Association

Like me, Alan is a friend (& consumer) who has a knack of getting to the point.

“Get yourselves organised NOW!”

Challenges for Vendors and Desirability of Compulsory Membership of Trade Association


A Nicotine-Focused Framework for Public Health

The FDA’s Mitch Zeller & Dr. Scott Gottlieb have been published in the New England Journal of Medicine. It’s not a medical study, it’s a letter.

Gippy & Zippy are claiming nicotine is the center of “addiction” & the contrived FDA funded reduction of nicotine as the possible answer to reduce tobacco use…

(Why are other “chemicals” in tobacco not considered addictive or “tobacco”? *“Nicotine constitutes approximately 0.6–3.0% of the dry weight of tobacco”.)

*Reference: Wikipedia

Here’s the “letter” in full:

A Nicotine-Focused Framework for Public Health

Here’s my take – if you’re interested:

A Nicotine-Focused FDA Framework.



Professor Glantz

Here lies Professor Glantz (Puff-N-Stuff) babbling about the tobacco industry knowing things like the patch & gum don’t work – unless there’s the obligatory counseling… or some drivel like that.

I don’t ever recall Nicorette saying you’d need counseling with your patch… but I could be wrong.

If nicotine were “addictive” to begin with… ahhhh, I digress.

What the tobacco companies know about NRT: Without counselling, it keeps people smoking


A Billion Lives

There is no excuse. You can rent or buy the film A Billion Lives here, and now you can own the Collector’s Edition here:

A Billion Lives Buy Blu Ray


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



Have you met my friends at vapers.org.uk?

vapersukgraphic.JPG


Medical, Research, Science Professionals:

Research:


Politics:

E-Cigarette Politics 

A Billion Lives

A Billion Lives


think

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


 

There is definitely more to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin

A Nicotine-Focused FDA Framework

faces

The FDA’s Mitch Zeller & Dr. Scott Gottlieb have been published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

“A Nicotine-Focused Framework for Public Health”


While claiming nicotine is the center of “addiction” and the reduction of nicotine as the answer to reduce tobacco use… their seemingly contrived objective is in part below:

“The agency’s new tobacco strategy has two primary parts: reducing the addictiveness of combustible cigarettes while recognizing and clarifying the role that potentially less harmful tobacco products could play in improving public health. We must also work toward a greater role for medicinal nicotine and other therapeutic products in helping smokers to quit and remain nonsmokers.”


While I am completely opposed to the framing of the nicotine addiction theory without tobacco, there were two other parts I’m not convinced quite yet that we’re on the right path; bold is my emphasis:

  1. reducing the addictiveness of combustible cigarettes”
  2. “We must also work toward a greater role for medicinal nicotine and other therapeutic products in helping smokers to quit and remain nonsmokers.”
  1. The focus on “nicotine” is, in my eyes, a subliminal way to keep the definition of e-liquid as tobacco, manipulate e-cigarette products as tobacco, and collect unjust & undue tax – on a product that is not addictive without tobacco, and not tobacco.
  2. The teetering on medicinal nicotine & other therapeutic products gives a direct odor of pharmaceutical product and control, something they’ve already had and failed miserably with.

I predicted this In March of 2016:

Keep smoking, we’ll just help you lower your nicotine.

This from UCSF in 2015

Low-Nicotine Cigarettes Fail to Sway Smokers


Issues:

Clive Bates & Carrie Wade:

Reducing nicotine in cigarettes raises all sorts of problems


That article is here:

The Myth of ‘Light’ Cigarettes


Brad Rodu on Nicotine reduction:

Negligible Evidence of Radical Nicotine Reduction Benefit

Brad Rodu on tar, not nicotine:

Low-Tar Cigarettes Had Merit, Said American Cancer Society; So Do E-Cigarettes


Paul Barnes

Always a great read:

Very Low Intelligence

Harm Reduction, Removing the Least Harmful Component



On a positive note

The publication states:

Nicotine, though not benign, is not directly responsible for the tobacco-caused cancer, lung disease, and heart disease that kill hundreds of thousands of Americans each year.

Excellent….and goes on to add

…within a landscape including other, noncombustible products such as e-cigarettes, represents a promising foundation for a comprehensive approach to tobacco harm reduction. In working toward this vision, the FDA is committed to striking an appropriate balance between protecting the public and fostering innovation in less harmful nicotine delivery.

That’s the first positive thing I’ve heard in some time from the government:

Tobacco Harm Reduction.

Are there other chemicals that cause addiction in tobacco?
MAIO’s?

Are There Other Chemicals That May Contribute to Tobacco Addiction?


eye

In the meantime, I’ll tweet (and blog) with one eye open.

Here’s the article in full:

A Nicotine-Focused Framework for Public Health


Added 12/30/17:

A rehash of the same rhetoric in the JAMA:

Will the FDA’s New Tobacco Strategy Be a Game Changer?


Advertise with YOUR text link or banner!



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



Have you met my friends at vapers.org.uk?

vapersukgraphic.JPG


Medical, Research, Science Professionals:

Research:


Politics:

E-Cigarette Politics 

A Billion Lives

A Billion Lives


think

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


There is definitely more to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Health aspects of e-cigarettes – Short information for physicians

dr

E-cigarettes are a choice. Dr. Mayer has released this statement informing physicians about the health aspects of e-cigarettes.


“Plasma levels of toxic substances…substantially decrease” and are “identical to the levels of non-smokers…”

“From a medical point of view, individuals who switched from smoking to the consumption of e-cigarettes have to be classified as non-smokers.”


 

berndmayer


Dr. Mayer’s document is found here:

Health aspects of e-cigarettes – short information for physicians

 

Added 6/25/17:

Information for consumers: Switching from smoking to vaping

Dr. Mayer’s website is here: bernd-mayer.com


To reduce the risks of smoking, physicians need proper information to rely on and relay to their patients. E-cigarettes are another way to reduce or eliminate smoking.

The worldwide claim of professionals “not knowing” the risks of e-cigarettes has come to a close.


There’s no reason for physicians to dismiss e-cigarettes or less harm to patients.

Withholding differential risk information on legal consumer nicotine/tobacco products: The public health ethics of health information quarantines


Related:

Public Health England

Ecigarettes: an evidence update

 


Eureka Alert

Of 560 physicians surveyed, over 70% “indicated that e-cigs can help patients reduce or eliminate smoking” and “almost half believe they can reduce risk”:

Majority of US doctors discussing electronic cigarettes with their patients


Dr. Cranfield

Dr. Cranfield explains the health effects of users over three years.

Users showed a 96% reduction in adverse health problems by users of three or more years. Conditions such as heart disease, high blood pressure and asthma improved by 61.8%

Conditions such as heart disease, high blood pressure and asthma improved by 61.8% of those diagnosed with those health issues while they smoked.

Health Effects and Demographics of Electronic E-cigarette Users. A Comparison Health Events in Previous Smokers with Three or More Years of Electronic E-cigarette Experience



Analytical Assessment of e-Cigarettes: From Contents to Chemical and Particle Exposure Profiles (Emerging Issues in Analytical Chemistry)


Do Less Harm: E-Cigarettes a Safer Option Than Smoking

Do Less Harm: E-Cigarettes a Safer Option Than Smoking


Public Health Leaders Call For ‘Correction Of Mistaken Beliefs’ On Vaping

Public Health Leaders Call For ‘Correction Of Mistaken Beliefs’ On Vaping


Annual Review of Public Health Harm Minimization and Tobacco Control: Reframing Societal Views of Nicotine Use to Rapidly Save Lives

Annual Review of Public Health Harm Minimization and Tobacco Control: Reframing Societal Views of Nicotine Use to Rapidly Save Lives


The health impact of e-cigarettes they don’t want you to know




Medical, Research, Science Professionals:

Research:

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!


A Billion Lives

Politics:

E-Cigarette Politics 


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

More to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin

Save

Save

America: Settling for less to reduce smoking.

smoking-image-yahoo-free-to-share-use

If you’re an American looking to reduce smoking, stop settling for less. Quickly step away from the paid advertisements from the pharmaceutical companies to fund the rigorous and glorified “fight” against tobacco by your friendly neighborhood cessation counselors.

Stop settling for less. Stop dialing quit lines, delete your “free” app. Stop paying attention  to a well organized bunch of morons.

Forget everything you’ve heard, learned and been told to ~swallow~ by anyone in authority. Stop feeding into their substandard propaganda.


The general public doesn’t seem to understand the battle waged by the Food & Drug Administration (FDA), various public health organizations and other distinguished experts in anti-tobacco and tobacco control.


“They” evidently, don’t understand it themselves. They LOVE fake news.

They’re playing a game.

With your lives.


Don’t let them fool you, “They” do completely understand. If less tobacco use were the ONLY goal, they’d be pounding vaping products through brick walls to get people to stop smoking.

If they had balls, they’d be standing up and screaming at the idiots who are saying e-cigarettes are the same as smoking. They’re so busy fighting the tobacco companies – they forgot how to interact with real human beings.

They’re busy worrying about funding for their organizations. They’re too busy keeping tobacco in the forefront instead of letting it die a slow sun-baked death in the field by itself. Without a lot of work.

Wait, then they’d be out of work. “They” have become common criminals.

“They” have no incentive (funding, income, research grants etc.) to reduce tobacco, so they lie about things like nicotine. Formaldehyde. Popcorn Lung. They sit idly by and watch, make things up, and refuse to speak. They use fairy tales about children.

All the while, you’re still contemplating your decision to reduce or eliminate tobacco from your life, while they claim expertise.


They only know how to control. Yet, they’re out of control. They want you to believe the ineffective methods are the only way to reduce or eliminate tobacco –  for you, and – if you combine that with counseling, you’re sure to be one of the approximately 3-7% who succeed. If not, you haven’t been trying hard enough.

Why are you settling for less? Because “they” say so?

nicotine in print.JPG

The public does not understand what they may be settling for when it comes to tobacco harm reduction in the United States.




I’ve written President Trump:

Dear President Trump: Stop the F.D.A.




Physicians are advising patients: Physician Advice for e-Cigarette Use

(Mine: Medical Professionals Speak Out on E-Cigarettes.)

I don’t know WHY they wouldn’t.

Withholding differential risk information on legal consumer nicotine/tobacco products: The public health ethics of health information quarantines



I’m not here to see myself type.

They are promoting SMOKING.

Added 02/10/17:

Here’s bias in print:

Research Collaboration Uncovers Biases in UK/US Physician Discussions on E-Cigarettes

Added 02/10/17:

Please, keep smoking.

The FDA’s multi-million dollar campaign attacking smokeless tobacco is almost certainly leading to higher levels of disease by causing Americans to use far-more-hazardous cigarettes,” adds Sweanor.

That’s here:

Smokeless Doesn’t Mean Harmless’ campaign may be doing more harm, researchers argue



The FDA has released a bit of news for the true experts to hash through:

Good news for vape shops (and it’s from the FDA!


But….

FDA Finalizes Tobacco Product Intended Use Rules, Under a Risk of Rescission by Congress

Yet they still want to FIGHT against it….Here’s Mitch Zeller babbling in a relaxed and controlled atmosphereseems he’s confident in his words.


Here’s what you really need to know if you’re struggling with tobacco.

This, courtesy & via The Vaper is another way consumers, without professional ties to industry, are helping each other and smokers thinking of switching to a much less harmful alternative.


E-cig tips for smokers who want to switch

E-cigarettes were invented, & are continuously being improved, by companies that don’t sell cigarettes.

Although big tobacco companies now own or produce several types of basic e-cigarettes, the e-cigarettes sold by non-tobacco companies are far more satisfying and come in many delicious flavors.

Both Public Health England and the Royal College of Physicians have recommended that e-cigarettes be widely promoted to smokers – they estimate that e-cigarettes are at most 5% as dangerous as smoking.

The majority of the health benefits offered by e-cigarettes come down to the fact that e-cigarettes deliver nicotine in a vapor rather than as smoke. It is the smoke that makes smoking most harmful, like heavy smog or smoke from a house fire, tobacco smoke contains at least 60 carcinogenic chemicals. While carcinogens have been detected in some e-cigarette flavorings, it is typically at levels hundreds of times lower than in tobacco smoke.

There is no evidence that nicotine in low doses is dangerous, nor is there evidence that nicotine by itself (when not ingested as part of a combusted product like a cigarette) is carcinogenic. In fact, nicotine has been approved for sale to children 12 & older, over the counter, as nicotine patches and gum. Further, when separated from the complex mix of chemicals in tobacco smoke, nicotine has not proven nearly as addictive as cigarette smoke. Many people who use e-cigarettes gradually lower their nicotine concentration with no noticeable negative effects, and no cigarette craving.

E-cigarettes have already helped millions of smokers to stop smoking. A lot of their success comes down to the fact that they not only replace the nicotine of conventional cigarettes, but also the ‘action’ of smoking, which many ex-smokers using patches & gum miss and which leads to them relapsing to smoking. E-cigarette use by young smokers has caused smoking among youth to fall at an unprecedented rate.

For sensible advice & guidance when looking into buying an e-cigarette, trust mostly the advice from the following sources:

  • Experienced staff at a dedicated e-cigarette shop, or ‘vape’ shop as we call them. These folks are typically ex-smokers/current vapers themselves.
  • Other vapers who have given up smoking. Vapers commonly love helping other smokers to give up, and love sharing their experience to help them get a satisfying flavor & strength of e-liquid, as well a refillable, adjustable ‘vape pen’ or ‘mod’ to transform that e-liquid into the vapor to be inhaled.

Taking up vaping might seem a little daunting, so it’s helpful to use an experienced person to help you find the combination that works best for you. But once a new vaper has found that ‘sweet combination’ that works for them, it is simply the most enjoyable, easy & effective way to cease smoking.

Nothing is safer than breathing fresh mountain air, but if a smoker cannot give up cigarettes using more conventional methods or therapies, e-cigarettes might just be the thing that allows you to break the smoking habit completely, and permanently.

E-cigarettes: Healthier for you, no threat to bystanders at all.


Millions of us, like The Vaper and I, are not allowing you to “settle” for the same tired, drawn out processes the people in “control” would like you to endure. After all, it is mostly a made up game with players from every aspect of tobacco control. Here’s a bit about how your “addiction” came about via Rampant Antismoking:



“The antismoking bandwagon gained considerable momentum in the five years following the EPA report, prior to the Osteen ruling. Also important is that in the early 1990’s the pharmaceutical cartel and pharma-philanthropy (e.g., Robert Woods Johnson Foundation http://www.rwjf.org/pr/product.jsp?ia=143&id=14912) weighed into the circumstance.

The WHO formally partnered with the pharmaceutical cartel in antismoking (http://www.who.int/inf-pr-1999/en/pr99-04.html) Also, “The American Medical Association, Chicago, and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF), Princeton, N.J., planned, organized and conducted the 11th World Conference on Tobacco OR Health, which was held in August 2000.” – http://www.rwjf.org/programareas/resources/product.jsp?id=17719&pid=1141

Seizing the opportunity for the sale of essentially useless ‘nicotine replacement therapy’ (NRT) if smokers are progressively pressured to quit, the pharmaceutical interests provided more and more funding and momentum to the antismoking bandwagon. So, despite the Osteen ruling, by the late-1990’s antismoking had become a frenzy. Antismokers, through long-time corrupt conduct, dictated all proceedings and antismoking was awash with funding. The march continued towards fulfilling the Godber Blueprint.”



lie-goebells



Wikipedia:

Proof by assertion, sometimes informally referred to as proof by repeated assertion, is an informal fallacy in which a proposition is repeatedly restated regardless of contradiction.[1] Sometimes, this may be repeated until challenges dry up, at which point it is asserted as fact due to its not being contradicted (argumentum ad nauseam).[2] In other cases, its repetition may be cited as evidence of its truth, in a variant of the appeal to authority or appeal to belief fallacies.[citation needed]

In its extreme form, it can also be a form of brainwashing.[1]




If the goal is “less harm”, take them to task, ask “them” why this is acceptable to “reduce harm”, yet vaping products are not.


Pie1.JPG

Take this to heart. If vaping products didn’t work, I would NOT tell you they do with a 79% success rate. Question EVERY “authority” placing doubt in your mind, and do not take “because we said so” as an excuse for them to be condescending because of your curiosity,  or allow them to question your integrity.

Question theirs, ask them why they haven’t educated themselves enough to be much more informative, why they would continue to embarrass themselves, and don’t settle for anything less. Hold them to their own “high standards”.

“They”, after all, are a business.


Please visit

A Billion Lives

August8th.org


E-cigarette NEWS you can use… every day ~ Monday thru Friday ~ is here from my friends across the pond at Vapers.org.uk.


If you are a Professional,  go HERE.


You can find me here trying to be cordial on Facebook

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


More to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin