Why I hate (some) e-cigarette retailers
Wednesday, March 7, 2012 at 14:48 I am not a fan of the marketing tactics of some e-cigarette retailers and here's why.
BBC Radio Five Live has just sent me the following press release:
Smokers working in Britain's offices waste up to five weeks per year taking cigarette breaks, according to a new survey.
The research, conducted by electronic cigarette retailer ECigaretteDirect.co.uk, found 30% of those polled spent more than an hour each day getting a nicotine hit.
This equates to more than half a working day per week or a massive 200 hours - or five typical working weeks - per year.
More than half (56%) of those quizzed said they spent between 20 to 60 minutes each day smoking, with just 13% taking less than 20 minutes for their fag breaks.
The poll also found that the actual number of cigarettes consumed during working hours varied widely, with the majority of smokers (41%) puffing away on between 10 and 20 cigs a day.
Just under one fifth of smokers (17%) consumed between 20-30 cigs a day, another fifth puffed away on between five and ten cigs, with just eight per cent working their way through more than 30 fags.
Nearly all of the workers polled (91%) admitted that they would be more productive in their roles if they were able to use smoking alternatives such as an electronic cigarette, which are exempt from the smoking ban and can therefore be used in the workplace.
A spokesman from the site says the figures make grim reading for business bosses around the country.
He said: "The cigarette break, just like the coffee break, has been part of office culture for more than a century and many employers and employees alike take them for granted. However, when you actually look at the amount of working hours wasted as staff make their way outside to smoking areas several times a day, it shows just how much they can effect productivity.
"The most prolific smokers we polled were found to waste around five hours per week on cigarette breaks, which is longer than taking every Friday afternoon off. Add that up throughout a typical employment year and this equates to five weeks or more than a full working month off, which is staggering.
"Another problem the breaks cause is the resentment which can often be harboured by non-smokers who feel they are doing more work than their smoker colleagues, which is never good for team spirit or morale."
He concluded: "There will always be people who crave nicotine and so the solution lies in finding methods which allow users to get their nicotine hit in their workplace - such as using an electronic cigarette or nicotine patches."
I shall be talking about this on Five Live Drive at 5.20pm.
Simon Clark
James from ECigarette Direct has responded to my Five Live interview in the comments. My response to James is:
A survey of 517 people sounds self-selected to me. If it wasn't self-selected can you tell us who you commissioned to conduct the survey?
Either way, the nature of the survey and the spin you put on the results are pretty indefensible, in my book. Existing smokers are going to be your core customers in the future and to stigmatise them like this is pretty short-sighted.
As I said on Five Live, the really objectionable thing about your 'survey' is that if employers take it seriously they may conclude that employing smokers is too much trouble and they will simply refuse to employ smokers at all.
We welcome e-cigarettes as a product and Forest will fight attempts to ban their use, but we will take an equally hard line on e-cigarette companies who vilify smokers and their habit in order to sell their product.
It is very clear to me, based on the response to previous posts about e-cigarettes on this blog, that your biggest market are not smokers who wish to quit but smokers who want to use an e-cigarette as an alternative to cigarettes when they are not allowed to smoke. In other words, you should be working with smokers not alienating them with cheap publicity stunts like this.
Reader Comments (26)
I wish these people would get that it isn't about the nicotine. The reason E-Cigs are the best alternative when quitting is because they actually mimic the culture of smoking.
But as long as they continue to insult those who like smoking natural tobacco with their divide and rule tactics, then I see them in the same class as the anti-smoker industry and I would warn real smokers to be wary of jumping aboard the E-Cig propaganda band waggon.
I'd also ask those vapers who see it the same way as we do to spread the message to those who haven't quite got it yet that smokers are every bit as good as vapers who too frequently look down their nose at us.
We stand together united or we fall separately. They will be coming for vapers once they've finished with us but the divide and rule tactics suit them for now.
Fact - the e fag industry has flourished on the back of the fraudulent denormalisation process, particularly re smoking bans . This suits TC's current agenda, 'current' being the operative word.
I do get irritated when people use this phrase 'nicotine hit'. I've smoked a pipe for over 40 years, and I smoke it because I enjoy it - not because of any 'nicotine hit'. I am not addicted to my pipe either. I can put my pipe down for a day, month, or in the last case 18 months. I just simply enjoy smoking it when I feel like it - full stop.
When I went to Portland college (for people with disabilities) for a year, many people in my class smoked, but simply waited for the tea breaks and lunchtimes to enjoy their smokes. There was virtually nobody who ever went out for a smoke at all between statutory breaks. This is something antis like to crow about - industry losing money and so forth - giving the impression that somehow were're shackled to our cigarettes, cigars or pipes. That is not the case.
Funny isn't it - they talk about 'nicotine hit' but then advise us to use nicotine patches!
I wonder who the main benificiary's of the sale of nicotine patches is then - any guesses?
Well done Simon. You definately won that one and even had Amanda agreeing with you.
The presenter admired you for being so ardent for a non smoker.
Hi Simon
Hope you have calmed down now :) I heard you question whether it was just 5 smokers who took the survey. The actual sample size (which was on the original press release we released) was 517.
Strange how corporatism can have such an influence, or in this case trying to influence policy.
I wonder why that is?
Mutual benefit perhaps?
This is the problem the electorate are not even secondary to these processes.
Simon, any chance of a link to the interview? I just missed it when trying to find the radio station.
Radio Five debate:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01d0rxm/5_live_Drive_07_03_2012/
1.29.40 in
Amanda seemed badly prepared and hesitant. What I think has happened is that we are quite rightly pointing out we are victims and she is beginning to sound like the equivalent of Nick Griffin on immigration.
Simon and Amanda come on at 1.29.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01d0rxm/5_live_Drive_07_03_2012/
I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the poll didn't make it clear that the term 'working day' doesn't include a lunch break. Care to publish the exact questions you asked, James?
Thanks Chas for putting it up.
Anything to promote their product, with clearly greatly exaggerated survey results. Most employers limit their staff to taking the same amount off time in breaks per day and those staff that get away with taking more, are in workplaces that are poorly managed.The results I don't believe show the truth. For Ecigarette Direct to conclude that smokers are less productive in general, they are just adding fuel to the hate campaign.
I don't know why e-cig manufacturers are bothering to even try and persuade smokers to switch to electronic cigs. Do none of them have the vision to see the bigger picture? They're fast coming under the same umbrella as real cigarettes, purely because they look like the real thing and, of course, that doesn't help the "denormalisation" process, does it? We've long been saying that the best thing they could do to protect their own emerging business is to get on board with the smokers and present a united front against the whole "denormalisation" process. They seem to still be under the same delusion as non-smoking drinkers that it's all still "only about smoking." And quite frankly, if they aren't smart enough to see what's staring them in the face, and to come down off their high horses and forgo the temporary sense of moral superiority which vaping gives them over real smokers, then quite frankly I'm happy to leave them to their own demise.
As someone who writes electronic cigarette reviews and uses e-cigs every day, even I have to admit that this study was clearly done as an attempt to push an agenda. After all, I could easily find several reports concluding that nicotine enhances cognition and memory, which could mean that even with breaks, a smoker's time at the desk is more productive than that of a non-smoker.
Also, let's not forget that finding ways to be less productive at work is pretty much a universal thing. If is isn't cigarettes, it's time at the water cooler or coffee machine.
I see no reason why the advancement of the electronic cigarette industry has to take place at the expense of people who don't want to quit smoking. When it comes to regulation and taxation, electronic cigarette users will end up being victimized by the government just as much as smokers have been.
Two points here.
1). If smoking hadn't been banned on spurious evidence in the first place, there would be no need for smokers to take "fag breaks", because they could smoke at their desks while working, just like they always used to. The solution is simple and obvious.
2). As the UK always seems to follow the lead of the more extreme US Tobacco Control diktats, e-cigs will soon be banned in the workplace anyway, so promoting them on the back of the original illiberal legislation is a waste of time and money, and serves only to reinforce the stigmatisation of smokers.
I've just looked at ecigarettedirect's website. It's quite an eye-opener. The tone of it is relentlessly anti smoking. Some of the comments on the company facebook wall could have been written by anti smoking fanatics. People who presumable once smoked referring to smokers as "pathetic" or "smelly". I left a comment suggesting they need all the friends they can get. Probably get taken down.
Does anybody work flat out for their entire working day? Somebody on a production line will find it very difficult to leave the line, but the majority of workers will find times when there is nothing to do. I have never had a job where I have had to work flat out all day.
Well said and spot on Simon in your updated comment.
We are the market for e-cigs so they would be wise not to alienate us.
I am a smoker who uses ecigs for most of the day at work (because I can) BUT likes a 'real'n'' when on a break at work. When I only smoked real fags, I was always thinking about the 'next cig' when I was working. Since using ecigs, I do not, does that make me more productive? - I don't know.
One thing I do know is that smokers (and most e-smokers/vapers) make the best friends and seem to enjoy life more than those that cow tow to the latest health trend :)
Russell
I know one thing for sure if I do ever try out one of these things I wont be buying it from Ecigarettes Direct.
I wouldnt put an e cig to my lips under any circumstances, apart from looking like a right egit it would be like eating that tinned shite they call meat balls.
In my opinion it would be giving in and the first step in compliance with the anti wankers, no thanks they can shove it up their jocksey.
And now the bastards are going one step further with the blank packaging.
How in the name of God am I going to get my special brand when the shop assistant (who most likely doesent speak english in the first place) wont know what button to press as all the packs will look the same.
If a war broke out in the morning I wonder would the Antis hand out e cigs to the troops to protect their health!
I guess they would because they're so up their own ****
He said: "The cigarette break, just like the coffee break, has been part of office culture for more than a century and many employers and employees alike take them for granted. However, when you actually look at the amount of working hours wasted as staff make their way outside to smoking areas several times a day, it shows just how much they can effect productivity.
This completely rewrites history. There was a coffee break or a tea break, but no such thing as a "cigarette break" before the smoking ban. Office work didn't need to be interrupted for any such break. And a great deal of manual labour didn't need to be interrupted either. The "cigarette" break is a consequence of the smoking ban.
And also, if these new cigarette breaks result in a decline in productivity, then what about the long-established coffee and tea breaks. As I recollect, there'd be one in the morning and one in the afternoon, both lasting about 15 minutes (or more). That's 2.5 hours per working week, and 18 working days per year.
And what about the long-established "lunch break"? That's a whole hour per day, and 36 working days per year. Can't food addicts control their desires while at work, and restrict their eating to their leisure time and the privacy of their own homes? Eh? Eh?
Does anyone wish to know where is was proved (more or less) that nicotine, in itself, was not the 'addictive substance' in tobacco? It was in the lawsuit 'McTear v Imperial Tobacco Limited (2005)'. The judgement of Lord Nimmo Smith was very, very long, but I have summarised it at:
http://boltonsmokersclub.wordpress.com/
(I trust that Simon does not mind)
Even the summary is long!
Briefly:
1. Nicotine is used for the relief of certain illnesses - when treatment is ended, those people do not feel any 'craving'.
2. When people have given up smoking using nicotine patches, when they cease to use the patches, they do not 'crave' nicotine.
3. Animal studies showed no significant 'craving' when animals were trained to 'press a bar' to self-administer nicotine (as compared with those which self-administered heroin, which did).
4. In research, a group of smokers, without knowing what was going to happen, took part in an experiment. Each person was given a packet of cigs on going to bed. They were asked to light up next day in their normal way. When asked how they felt after smoking, they reported the usual pleasure and satisfaction. What they didn't know was that some of them had been given cigs from which the nicotine had been extracted!
There was much more in that case than that - worth a read.
I have used an e-cig although it bears no comparison to the real thing. It does, however, have its uses 'in extremis'. The aspects of nicotine concerned with 'the calming effect' are there - that is, a feeling of calmness and relaxation, but not the pleasure of actually smoking.
As regards the marketing of e-cigs, I understand that it is forbidden to claim e-cigs to be a 'quitting aid' - even some notable anti-smokers decry that. But I agree with everyone else that the marketing ploys are a disgrace if they stigmatise smokers.
'Elf and Safety decrees that a lunch break of at least half an hour has to be taken daily.
I would assume that the morning and afternoon 15min lunch/tea break of the good old days has been abolished in most work places since the importation of yellow pack foreign workers who would work 24/7 if allowed, just to keep their job and send the wages back home.
And it suited employers to work in cahoots with the Anti Smoking Brigade by calling it a fag break to get it abolished and to get more bang for their buck.
I use e-cigs, I have cut down considerably on smoking but I still enjoy my roll-ups and I do like the smell of tobacco. E-cigarettes are, in my opinion a great invention: I think they taste very much like the real thing. But I agree with your post here. I don't like the way some of these e-cigarette companies market their product: Technically speaking they can't market it as a smoking cessation product, but they do it in a more subtle way. Some of the comments on their websites sound like they're coming from anti-smoking fanatics, which I find rather off-putting. This is a shame because I really think the e-cigarette is a good product. E-Cigarette retailers should really be working with smokers, not alienating them. I don't think of e-cigarettes as a way to quit smoking, to me they're simply another way to smoke, which produces the same sensation as smoking 'analog' cigarettes
ecig manufacturers are telling lies. "They are safer, cleaner and not affected by the smoking ban." really? "There is no risk to others from passive smoking, no tar and electric cigarettes are not affected by the smoking ban - so you really can take your Zebra anywhere." you don't say!
OK ecig advertiser, try it at the airport, cameras pick you up and security are there in a moment. Try it on a plane, they are banned, it says so in the catalogue. Try it at work, they are already banned in some. Pub? Restaurant? Cafe? not many, the landlord, manager, proprieter will not allow it.