quote:

Vaping, #Science and Public Health

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio plans to make things easier for cancer by making things more difficult for vapers.

As John Tierney explained in a recent article for the Wall Street Journal that’s bad news for New Yorkers:

Since the electronic cigarette arrived around 2010, the rate of smoking in America has plummeted. Yet progressive do-gooders are now throwing tobacco a lifeline. Last month New York Mayor Bill de Blasio signed new restrictions on e-cigarettes. A limited number of vendors will need licenses to sell them, and vaping will be banned from many apartment common areas. This will only push smokers away from the most promising method for kicking their deadly habit.

De Blasio’s behavior is, however, just another example of a wider problem in public health, one with implications that extend far beyond Gotham. In a much longer article for August’s City Journal, Tierney took a closer look.

Some extracts:

Less than 15 percent of Americans realize that vaping is much less risky than smoking, while nearly half mistakenly think that vaping is as harmful as, or more harmful than, smoking—meaning that millions of smokers have been dissuaded from making a switch that could prolong their lives. The public-health establishment has become a menace to public health.

Tierney sets out the mission creep that has characterized the public health establishment’s definition of its agenda, a mission creep that has generated plenty of jobs for those who have signed up for it and, of course, plenty of opportunities to proclaim one’s own virtue by bossing other people around.

A quote:

“We believe in the freedom of the individual in the matter of cigarette smoking,” the American Cancer Society president told Congress in 1964, explaining his group’s opposition to legislation that banned smoking. “To achieve our goal we rely on persuasion and public and professional education.”

Yes, Virginia, there is a slippery slope.

There’s plenty in the piece to consider, including a welcome de-demonization of nicotine and a discussion of the beneficial effects of Swedes’ fondness for snus (a form of smokeless tobacco treated in such a way that it appears to eliminate or avoid carcinogens).

Swedish men have the highest rate of smokeless tobacco use in Europe—and, not coincidentally, the lowest rates of smoking and smoking-related diseases. It’s estimated that 350,000 lives would be saved annually if the rest of Europe followed Sweden’s example. But instead of encouraging this trend, the European Union has banned snus everywhere except Sweden, preferring the same prohibitionist approach as America.

#EUValues

And then there’s this:

Faced with a much more popular new competitor, pharmaceutical companies have responded by supporting restrictions and taxes on vaping devices (just as they have long lobbied for restrictions on the sale of smokeless tobacco). As Monica Showalter reported in the Observer, the firms have contributed substantially to Democrats leading the anti-vaping efforts in Congress, including Senators Ed Markey, Sherrod Brown, and Richard Blumenthal.

Oh.

And:

The prohibitionists have persuaded localities to extend smoking bans in public and private places to include vaping, even though e-cigarettes emit vapor that causes none of the irritations or the dangers claimed for secondhand smoke. They’ve promoted heavy new taxes on e-cigarettes, a policy that harms public health by reducing the incentive for smokers to switch, but it’s been welcomed by state officials (like New York governor Andrew Cuomo) eager to replace the cigarette-tax revenue they’re losing as smoking declines.

Follow the money.

But out of this mess may come political opportunity

Now that Republicans control the White House and Congress, they have a chance to combine sound science with smart politics on vaping. Grover Norquist, the influential Republican strategist who runs Americans for Tax Reform, has discovered that vapers are much different from smokers, whom he found impossible to mobilize against cigarette taxes. Vapers don’t feel guilty about their habit. They show up at rallies and volunteer in campaigns that have helped block e-cigarette taxes and defeat anti-vaping Democrats in local and state elections. “The Democrats have made an unforced error,” Norquist says. “They’ve poked a hornets’ nest. There are 10 million vapers in America, and that demographic will easily double in the next decade.”

Norquist wants the Republicans to use vaping as a wedge issue against Democrats, particularly among younger voters. Vapers are part of what he calls the Leave Us Alone Coalition, which includes gun owners, users of Uber and Airbnb, homeschoolers, and others with firsthand exposure to Democrats’ big-government policies. Vape shops, like gun shows, have become an informal network for spreading the word. “Vapers look in the mirror and feel virtuous,” Norquist says. “They’ve quit smoking, or at least cut back. They’re doing the right thing for themselves and their families, and now these contemptuous nanny-state jerks want to take away the products that are saving their lives. Believe me, this is a vote-moving issue.”

Wisconsin senator Ron Johnson was expected to lose his reelection bid last November, but he pulled off an upset with the help of vaper-led rallies, volunteer work, and donations…

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner

quote:

I used an e-cig set up to quit about six years ago, used it for about a year. It made it very easy to do so.

quote:

Bill de Blasio

quote:

Originally posted by Flashlightboy:
...but he also said he couldn't imagine there not being negative effects from propylene glycol that's been heated to turn it into a transport medium.

Propylene glycol is found in many things including antifreeze but Iu don't think any of the other uses involve heating it up to 500F before inhaling it.

quote:

Originally posted by gloucestermen:
They have I have NO IDEA WTF it is they are inhaling.

quote:

Originally posted by sigcrazy7:

quote:

Originally posted by Flashlightboy:
...but he also said he couldn't imagine there not being negative effects from propylene glycol that's been heated to turn it into a transport medium.

Propylene glycol is found in many things including antifreeze but Iu don't think any of the other uses involve heating it up to 500F before inhaling it.

Propylene glycol is used in cosmetics and on some foodstuff, I believe. It has been studied and has been deemed to be non-toxic. Either way, it is not a carcinogen like tobacco smoke, so I see no reason to disincitivise e-cig if it is reducing smoking.

Perhaps the Doc is coming from the idea that all chemicals must be harmful somehow, a common, pervasive, but incorrect, belief.

quote:

Originally posted by Flashlightboy:

quote:

Originally posted by sigcrazy7:

quote:

Originally posted by Flashlightboy:
...but he also said he couldn't imagine there not being negative effects from propylene glycol that's been heated to turn it into a transport medium.

Propylene glycol is found in many things including antifreeze but Iu don't think any of the other uses involve heating it up to 500F before inhaling it.

Propylene glycol is used in cosmetics and on some foodstuff, I believe. It has been studied and has been deemed to be non-toxic. Either way, it is not a carcinogen like tobacco smoke, so I see no reason to disincitivise e-cig if it is reducing smoking.

Perhaps the Doc is coming from the idea that all chemicals must be harmful somehow, a common, pervasive, but incorrect, belief.

His point acknowledged that the chemical has many uses that are safe and non-toxic but instead opined that there are no long term studies where the chemical is vaporized and breathed in the vaping environment.

If you have some studies showing long term heated vapor exposure into the lungs I'm sure he'd be interested.