Forest Unfiltered






40 Years of Hurt

Prejudice and Prohibition

Road To Ruin?

Search This Site
The Pleasure of Smoking

Forest Polling Report

Outdoor Smoking Bans

Plain Packaging

Share This Page
Powered by Squarespace
« Tangerine and Blu | Main | Sleepwalking to prohibition »

Smokers thrown under the bus by ‘vaping specialists’

In conversation with Mark Littlewood at the IEA last week I had a pop at vapers and vaping advocates who “throw smokers under the bus”.

In particular I raged about vapers who claim it’s unfair to ban vaping in the workplace because that will force them to stand outside with the smokers, breathing in all that terrible secondhand smoke (sic).

Anyway, H/T to Rob Lyons who was sent a press release today that includes the following claims plus a quote by Charles Bloom, owner of ‘vaping specialists’ Vapourcore:

The loss of productivity due to smoking, costs local businesses in England £8.4bn a year.

On top of this, smoking breaks cost businesses in local economies an extra annual £3.6bn.

The county whose businesses lose the most money from a lack of productivity due to smoking is Greater Manchester - £450m has been lost.

The county in which local businesses lose the least amount of money due to smoking-related issues is Dorset – the annual loss is £45m.

How did Vapourcore calculate the ‘annual potential wealth’ lost due to smoking? Why, they used ASH’s ‘Ready Reckoner’ tool. (Of course they did!)

According to Bloom:

“The risks of smoking have always been highlighted from a health point of view, but rarely from the perspective of business and opportunity.

“The numbers revealed in this study prove that smoking remains a countrywide issue. However, instead of redistributing wealth into the local economy and improving the experiences of consumers, companies are having to spend their excess on facilitating employees’ smoking habits.”

Laughably the poorly written press release ends with the following plea:

If you use this press release, please credit with a clickable link.

How embarrassing. This isn’t a news story, it’s a marketing ploy. And a pathetic one at that.

More fool any journalist who falls for it.

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (6)

As one who only smokes during designated breaks, and I am not alone, this sort of hate campaigning and slanderous accusation is totally unacceptable and one of the main reasons why I would never vape.

I have never and will never support the smokerphobic anti smoker industry in any form.

Ecigs don't save lives. They save the sanctimonious souls of a bunch of bigots who want to force big tobacco profits to big vape. Hypocrites.

Tuesday, May 21, 2019 at 14:32 | Unregistered Commenterpat nurse

This is a prime example of antismoker propaganda leveraged to further a business interest. It exploits both smokers and vapers.

Once again second hand the second hand smoke ruse is being used to promote an agenda. The actual data comes to different conclusions than the cherry picked tobacco control talking points masquerading as studies.

It's time to actively expose these lies and end the persecution of smokers.

Wednesday, May 22, 2019 at 7:27 | Unregistered CommenterVinny Gracchus

vaping should be allowed in the workplace wherever possible even if it is only in an indoor vaping room.
reason's being it would be a good incentive for smokers to switch to vaping (even if only partially) which would be a good thing as vaping is much safer then smoking (at least 95% & probably a lot more safer) and it also send's the correct message to those who have been confused by scare stories from the media regarding the safety of vaping (be they smokers or non-smokers) by confirming that vaping is indeed the safer option for smokers and is not harmful to bystanders.

Wednesday, May 22, 2019 at 22:37 | Unregistered CommenterRobert Harvey

Smokers do not want to be forced to Vaping. Why can't vapers see that. Certainly they do not want to be forced to switch because they are being bullied by vapers and anti smokers at work. Slandering them as skivers is not the way to convince them of switching.

Like Brexit, vapers think we are not capable of thinking for ourselves hence the rubbish that that we are being put off vaping by scare stories. Some of us are put off vapng by vapers.

Vaping does not save lives. That's what they call a trope. No one knows the long term implications so why should smokers be forced to it?

Smoking moderately saves lives, or quitting or, as my doctor told me, as a lifelong smoker from childhood to grannyhood, I am better off smoking moderately than quitting completely which could be more harmful for me personally.

And what else should a marketing ploy press release which is designed to bully or shame smokers into switching be other than some business looking to make profit by taking customers from the tobacco industry and making them dependent on vaping? That is not a trope. It is a fact. If these vaping businesses were giving ecigs away free for the good of their heart then fair enough but they are not. They want to make money. They claim to be in for health but like all business, they're in for the profit same as any other business and smokers are cash cows.

Thursday, May 23, 2019 at 11:11 | Unregistered Commenterpat nurse

Oh, and perhaps we have to make it clear - smoking does not harm bystanders. Do your research, stop listening to the bigots in ASH, and stop lying about smokers harming others. We don't and there is certainly no evidence not even from the bullies in public health that smoking outdoors harms anyone.

Using the scam of shs to push your argument is about as low as a vaper can get.

Thursday, May 23, 2019 at 11:15 | Unregistered Commenterpat nurse

The majority of studies—over 70 studies including the two most robust studies (Boffetta and Enstrom & Kabet showed no adverse effects from second hand smoke under normal exposure conditions). The second hand smoke ruse was developed to stigmatize and denormalize smoking and smokers.

Thursday, May 23, 2019 at 22:37 | Unregistered CommenterVinny Gracchus

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>