Memo to supporters of the #Ecigrevolution
Wednesday, October 23, 2013 at 7:41 Another e-cig story.
The London Evening Standard yesterday reported that some London restaurateurs want to ban the use of e-cigs on their premises.
Fair enough. It's their property, their business, they can do what they like.
The important point is this: pubs, restaurants, taxis etc should be allowed to decide their own policy on e-cigs, not have it imposed on them by government (ie like the smoking ban).
Responding to the Evening Standard story, Forest campaigns manager Angela Harbutt was featured in this LBC report: London restaurants ban ecigs.
Her comments were so reasonable that even the reporter was surprised. But that's Forest - we represent very reasonable people.
Meanwhile some e-cig campaigners are celebrating after Wolverhampton Wanderers became the latest football club to team up with an e-cigarette company.
As I explained on Monday, Forest opposes any attempt to ban the use of e-cigs in public places; we also oppose excessive restrictions on their promotion.
If you're a smoker as well as a vaper, however, consider carefully which brand to use. In particular I'd temper support for the more aggressively anti-smoking e-cig companies.
Skycig's latest publicity stunt is the Stoptober Amnesty Roadshow. It worked like this:
In support of Stoptober 2013 the Skycig team travelled up the country from London to Glasgow ... encouraging the smokers of the UK to make the switch to Skycig e-cigarettes.
Smokers were invited to throw their cigarettes into a Skycig bin. In return they were given an e-cigarette.
Now, no-one was under any compulsion to switch and if Skycig wish to market their product like that it's up to them.
But did they really have to encourage smokers to chuck their cigarettes in to a bin?
Clearly they don't view e-cigs as a duel use product. It's one or the other. Make your choice.
Meanwhile a prominent e-cig campaigner has tweeted about the "pro-smoking" lobby as if we're the opposition.
'Pro-smoking' is a pejorative phrase adopted by the tobacco control industry to belittle groups like Forest because it implies that we promote smoking.
In reality, of course, we do nothing of the sort, unless you believe that defending the interests of adults who consume a legal product is tantamount to encouraging people to smoke.
We support people's freedom to buy and consume a wide range of cigarettes, cigars, roll your own and smokeless tobacco products without excessive regulation or constant vilification.
We also support people's right to use other nicotine delivery systems such as e-cigarettes - again, without being subjected to hyper regulation or ridicule.
I appreciate there is a public health issue involved but what bugs me is that while Forest is happy to support an adult's right to make an informed decision about smoking and vaping, some e-cig campaigners are interested only in denigrating smokers, tobacco products and the "pro-smokers" who defend them.
To those people I would simply ask: 'Where were you when the media came calling to ask about e-cig tie-ins with football clubs and vaping in restaurants?'.
As ever it fell to Forest to promote freedom of choice and defend your interests. Unfortunately it appears to be a one-way street.
If Forest can defend the right to vape, surely the most prominent e-cig campaigners can defend an adult's right to smoke tobacco, including the right to smoke in some enclosed public places where the habit doesn't 'harm' or bother other people.
Instead, all I hear is silence or pointed and ill-founded digs about "pro-smoking" and "astro turf" groups (meaning Forest).
Well, we're out here fighting in what I consider to be the most difficult arena of all - the mainstream media.
It would be nice to have the support of all e-cig campaigners, not just a token few.
You can register your support for Forest here or follow us on Twitter.
Reader Comments (15)
I started vaping on Saturday and have not had a ciggie since. It was my choice but I am surprised how easy it was to stop smoking.
I have to accept I have only really substituted one habit for another. My calculations suggest I'm consuming vastly more nicotine, which cannot be a good thing. It would appear to me, albeit only an anecdotal experience of one heavy smoker, that vaping can be used to reduce or stop smoking. The other part of my experience is that the device I am using produces a lot of vapour which does look remarkably like smoke and I can see would easily disturb the antismoker. I would see that as a plus but can see that it won't be long before I am subject to persecution and vilification once again. My main concern is that I have suddenly reduced by tax givings to HMG and so the NHS and indeed the country will soon collapse as a direct result.
I can confirm that I remain pro-choice and supportive of smokers rights.
Thanks Simon, for continuing to support those of us who have no wish to switch to e-cigs - and thanks also for encouraging support for those e-cig companies that don't depend on denormalisation of either the product or the consumer to push their nicotine device over an organic product. Some e-cig companies and vapers are more anti than antis.
Those that do abuse us - like E-Lites which push the idea that smokers are lazy "employment liabilities" because of the phantom amount of non time they take in breaks - should be avoided and boycotted at all costs and vapers who reckon they are on our side, should boycott these aggressive ant-smoker e-cig companies too.
And isn't it a shame that those who are vocal against the restaurants, that won't allow them their e-cig, sat back and said and did nothing to support the cause for choice when smoking was on the cards to be banned everywhere. They are the ones that as former smokers let us down and now as born again vapers continue to drag us down as they step on us to rise to social acceptance.
Good luck with rustling up support from that selfish lot. E-smokers don't need our help so they don't need Forest. They have ASH. They simply need to denigrate us, along with ASH, to save themselves and force all of us to be consumers of the E Cig industry.
Frankly, I would rather quit - or smoke tea.
And pluueeaase - don't tell me that E Cigs save lives or I'l be campaigning for them to become medicalised and available free on prescription and there will be plenty of sanctimonious politicians and healthists only too willing to throw cash at me to do it.
It seems to me that hypocritical "vapers" and the E Cig Industry use tobacco control propaganda when it suits them to beat up smokers but then say it's junk science when it affects the thing they like.
All of that said, I support anyone's right to enjoy and use a legal product of personal choice. What a pity they are not as tolerant of others who chose not to use their's.
... and I think tobacco consumers will tell you that smoking is their hobby not their habit and certainly not an "addiction" or they'd be happy to switch to e-cigs when they're not.
Language is everything as you know with the "pro-smoking" slight used against Forest, and what has been used against us for so long that it's time we fought back in our own words and told the antis and their vaper friends to stop misrepresenting what they don't know but choose to be prejudicial about.
What do new vapers want?
Generally they want a cigarette substitute. Something that looks, feels, tastes and e-smokes like a cigarette.
In the early days, there were always some who pushed these characteristics and even used terms like 'quit' in their marketing. These companies almost destroyed the e-cig market by giving cause for TPTB to medicalise the e-cig.
Now we have some bigger players with sophisticated marketing departments to advertise looky-likey e-cigs to the masses. They have seen what got people into vaping and are exploiting it to the max. If they can use Tobacco Control techniques to divert people to vaping they will,
What do longer term vapers want?
They seem to want something other than the looky-likey. They also recognise many who try these mass marketed devices stop vaping because they become dissatisfied. The best e-cigs (IMHO) look nothing like a cigarette.
We are also seeing some anti-smoking campaingners giving support to e-cigs. Some vapers welcome this even though they may ultimately be mistaken in their support for these people.
For example, ASH's support was welcomed for quite some time. Some recognised from the start this was faux support. It can be shown they supported the medicalisation of e-cigs from the outset.
Many longer term vapers recognise the problems associated with these developments for both the vaper and the people who smoke. It is unfortunate that their voices are becoming drowned out.
It seems the current 'divide and conquer' situation is set to continue and is likely to get worse unless more people realise that we are all on the same side.
I am glad FOREST are making an effort and hope they continue to do so, even if subjected to uncalled for derogatory remarks.
"Meanwhile a prominent e-cig campaigner has tweeted about the "pro-smoking" lobby as if we're the opposition."
I'd be interested to know who this is because it's an attitude I've teed off about before many a time. It is a naive and ultimately self-defeating stance to take.
My experience is that the majority of e-cig users are well aware that the tobacco control industry are calculating, mendacious and not to be trusted. The shenanigans surrounding the TPD have shown them that more than anything we could say - e-cig forums routinely express astonishment at what they call "corruption" from anti-smokers.
The majority are also very aware that it is pharma interests driving it and are supportive of smokers who decide that e-cigs are not for them.
I haven't tried 'e-cigs'. Maybe they deliver the nicotine 'fix' but there's something - dare I say it? - of poetry in tobacco smoke, which can be restorative of the spirit.
I have been an exponent of ecigs for a few years as an alternative to smoking in public places - especially the Great British Pub.
Smokers (including myself) LOST out to the anti-tobacco lobby groups a long time ago, resulting in the 2006 Health Act and the subsequent ban in public places..
Electronic cigarettes have the power to expose the 'anti-smoker' discrimination that has been ground into the psyche of the UK public for many years.
Smokers who use ecigs (that are NOT tobacco products or medicines) are NOW being discriminated against again as well. Many larger companies/employers are irrationally banning the use of ecigs citing that it 'looks like smoking, therefore it is indistinguishable from smoking'. Governments are playing upon the 'think of the children' card - there are many, many more examples.
As adult smokers, we need to stand up for our rights - if we back the ecig movement and prevent further restrictions on our enjoyment of 'smoking' THEM, then we have a chance of 'renormalising' REAL cigarette smokers as well.
Pie in the Sky? Perhaps not - working together CAN benefit all adults in the 'Freedom to Choose' what they do with their lives.
Russell
Phil Button said: "My calculations suggest I'm consuming vastly more nicotine..."
Phil, only about half the nicotine in an ecig refill is transferred into the vapour. And if you're using a mini ecig (one that looks like a cigarette), then it's likely that the vapour contains about 10% of the nicotine in cigarette smoke.
Anyway, nicotine consumption isn't really worth worrying over unless you have a genetic predisposition to certain disorders, and your family medical history would ensure you were well aware of that. People tend to vape more when they switch, and gradually taper down; and you can forget about nicotine being a major health hazard - it's the same as drinking too much coffee. Not too good for you, but hardly a major issue. Earlier this month a toxicologist finally demolished the myth of nicotine high toxicity (the LD50 will now have to be re-established at about 12 times higher than the current level); and last month some research showed that coffee, according to that group of researchers, shortened the lifespan far more than we know is the case for nicotine (~4 weeks, for multi-decade high-volume use, according to the mountain of Swedish data).
Vape on, and smoke the occasional cigar. With a brandy of course. I'll join you.
True, Russell, but the Tobacco Control Industry does not want that. It is wealthy and strong, and demands legislation. Legislation is the be all and end all for the Tobacco Control Industry. Nothing else matters. It does not even matter if the legislation is enforced. If the legislation is in place, then the Industry can move on to the next step in the plan.
The horror, of course, is that politicians have no control over the Government.
Research shows that e-cigs, and indeed Snus, are relatively safe. That is not the issue here though.
I's hard enough trying to motivate smokers to resist, but genuinely libertarian vapers who are prepared to defend smokers appear to be a very small minority. And fewer among manufacturers and retailers, who are desperate not to be 'tarred with the same brush'. Beside, I would imagine that Forrest would not be a welcome full blown ally. Have any actually approached you Simon? To be fair to them, they do believe it's about harm reduction, as it is for most vapers. Therein lies a major sticking point. Why would a smokers rights organisation campaign to save an industry that seeks to further denormalise tobacco?
I don't have a problem with saying what is true and that is that e-cigs are brilliant at harm reduction - it's the false claim that they "save lives" that really concerns me because they don't, and to continue with that line is a blow to both smokers and vapers who must see themselves as one and the same - if slightly different about their product of choice and the way they describe themselves. I say we are all consumers whether we smoke smoke or vape vapour.
Anti-smokers will believe that they can force us smokers onto e-cigs - and criminalise possession of tobacco by banning it completely from sale - because, after all, they are so similar to smoking "and they save lives" so why not? So much has been done to us so far in the name of what they think is best for us and wouldn't E Cig companies love some free trade shoved their way stolen from a criminalised tobacco industry?
And vapers ARE storing up problems with the "E Cigs Save Lives" logo for themselves too because the antis will claim e-cigs ARE medicinal - ie they "cure" smoking which will leave vapers on the back foot when they go for the product for big pharma again - and you know they will.
I will come down firmly on their side and in their camp once I see that logo go from twitter and elsewhere. Until then, I'll continue to flip flop on the issue of e-cigs and vapers because I really don't know if, as one entity, they can be trusted.
Perhaps you could report back at what response you got to your call for support for Forest from Vapers which might give us a better idea of whether they are enemy or friend. We really need to know where the battle lines are drawn because then we'll know which are our best weapons to use - and who, exactly, we should be fighting.
Don't forget what Sandford said about Vapors who ASH believe should be inside pubs : She said "Pubs are forcing vapours to go outside and mingle with smokers and that's the last people they should be hanging out with " http://www.morningadvertiser.co.uk/General-News/Pub-operators-urged-to-keep-policies-on-e-cigarettes-under-review
ASH knows full well that rather than "normalise" smoking e-cigs are great at divide and conquer and they will make it impossible for tobacco consumers to continue to choose to smoke in future and so e-cigs actually AID denormalisation, marginalisation and exclusion of tobacco consumers and bring a whole new gang of bullies into the campaign.
I have yet to hear one single vaper condemn Sandford's abusive comment. If she'd said it about any other minority group, then she'd be prosecuted for inciting hatred.
And, just coz I'm here, slightly off topic, I thought smokers might like to know they do have some non smoker friends such as this lady who posted this message (below) yesterday which also gives an idea of the daily harassment we have to put up with thanks to the likes of Sandford's encouragement of abuse:
"So I was standing in Lincoln looking in the window of Cash converters when I became aware of a bit of an argument. The man standing next to me was having a smoke and another man who just happened to be walking past just laid into him - told him he was disgusting and why should he put up with his stink and his filth. Said smoker put his tail between his legs and fled and the other guy left as the self satisfied jerk he happened to be before I could say anything. First man wasn't in any way unsocial, he was next to me and until the ruction I hadn't even noticed him smoking. What he was doing was a perfectly legal activity and if you verbally attacked another person like that in any field you would guarantee some "ism" would regulate against it. I hate the way some people think its ok to condemn other people when really even in the best scenario - IT IS NONE OF THERE WRETCHED BUSINESS"
Pat, there are two kinds of vapers - the ones who, due to their various mysterious "issues", hate smoking; and the ones, like Dick, Chris and me who either still smoke or who support the freedom to smoke and are opposed to the smoking ban. I'd guess this group is the majority. I've never met anyone in the first group because I don't associate with such people, so I don't know what goes on in their heads. I presume they have miserable lives, with crap jobs, repulsive wives/husbands, horrible children and are most likely dependent on prescription drugs for their mental problems. It goes without saying we despise everything about ASH UK and the rest of the anti tobacco industry. The ecig vendors and manufacturers will obviously use any method at their disposal to make money. They are not spokes-people for their customers.
Perhaps this issue would make for an interesting discussion on VTTV with Forest, interested opinion writers and reps from the Vaping community?
The comments here show that there is still a lot of work to be done to unify the people who choose to smoke or 'vape', the people who care about their rights to enjoy perfectly legal adult pastimes, the people who care about personal liberties.
We are ALL singing from the same hymn sheet here, we just need to start and develop a common voice.
Smoking is not bad. Neither is 'Vaping'. The organisations that seek to restrict our freedom are our enemies, NOT the smokers or the 'vapers'.
Smoking does not kill and E-cigs do not save lives - they are both just ways of manipulating (subliminally) those that do not really care ie the non-smokers, or in Political terms, 80% of voters.
WE are not a great team and we will lose everything unless we start working together.