Bad report on e-ciggs....

[sagedil]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32088790...th-addictions/

[BuLLitz]

So cancer causing chemicals were found....
They didn't say that it was more than what is found in regular smoking.
Had they discovered that it was more than cigarrettes, THEN I could see the cause for concern.

What is wrong with reduced harm?

My goodness...
Dorks

[firemarth]

Everything causes cancer nowadays.
I can swear that I heard a news report once that GRAPES were linked to cancer.

[CM]

Seems FDA is the cancer in USA, not the products. :lol:

[sheilalynn]

FDA scientists did the study...that explains it all! ;-) And the so-called "antifreeze" ingredient isn't an antifreeze ingredient, they're talking about propylene glycol, which isn't in antifreeze.

Part of the reason they want to ban them, is because Philip Morris wants them banned. They now have the FDA in their back pocket with the passing of that idiotic Family Tobacco Act. Think about it...a tobacco company wanting the FDA to oversee their product...not exactly what they had in mind at all. They wanted to own the market, and they're on their way to doing just that.

The other reason is that with the e-cigs out there now, the FDA is also losing money because people aren't buying as many of the "proper smoking cessation aids" which are jokingly weak and overpriced. $40 for 100 pieces of low-nicotine gum is insane...know how many portions of snus or grams of snuff you can get for $40? Probably enough to get you off of the butts much easier than that junk will.

As far as people thinking that they'd be a "gateway to smoking", I really don't think so. What 14 year old kid is going to want to spend $60 for a starter kit when they can just get someone to go to the corner store and get them a pack of cigarettes for a fraction of that. Kids want to look "cool" and appear to be "flirting with danger" to their friends. An e-cig just isn't going to cut it with them.

People who use e-cigs (including myself), are ex-smokers who couldn't kick the habit any other way (again, including myself). So blame Philip Morris for starting this whole thing about the e-cigs. Someone came up with a safer product than they have, and they don't want people knowing about them because they lose money when someone does start using them.

[cyrax777]

they find water in cancer to ban water.

[sundog]

Everything causes cancer nowadays.

After much research and money spent, they've finally found the real cause of cancer
.
.
.
white mice.
:lol:

[shikitohno]

Just to point out, nicotine is a carcinogen. There's no two ways around it. So acting surprised that they found a carcinogen in a product with nicotine in it is like them reporting that hot dogs have just been shown to contain meat.

Aside from Philip Morris sleeping with the FDA, there's the issue of taxes. How many times have you walked into a tobacconist and browsed their selection of e-ciggs? Now how many people have bought them off the internet? I know "everyone" declares all their imported tobacco products and pays the appropriate taxes here, but the FDA doesn't think we do. And that makes them want to ban it, if they can't profit from it.

[bonked]

This is why I don't like the AP... talk about a biased report:

including a key ingredient in antifreeze.

H2O is a key ingredient - what's wrong AP you can't be bothered to tell us?

[bonked]

Just to point out, nicotine is a carcinogen. There's no two ways around it.

Hate to be the wikipedian here but... citation needed. There has never been a conclusive medical study that determined that nicotine was a carcinogen - it's the stuff along with it in delivery systems.

I'll defer to the WHO on this one:

The currently available literature indicates that nicotine, on its own, does not promote the development of cancer in healthy tissue and has no mutagenic properties.

[zmanzero]

Part of the reason they want to ban them, is because Philip Morris wants them banned.

bingo. you hit the nail on the head sheila.

[lxskllr]

FDA scientists did the study...that explains it all! ;-) And the so-called "antifreeze" ingredient isn't an antifreeze ingredient, they're talking about propylene glycol, which isn't in antifreeze.

I think the article has a purposeful negative slant, but I don't trust ecigs. Propylene glycol is used in the "enviro" antifreeze, so that's not inaccurate, but it is disingenuous. Propylene glycol's used in food also, as we all know.

I don't trust the Chinese to make a safe product. Their track record's abysmal, and as soon as a manufacturer finds a money saving shortcut, they'll take it, safety be damned. Even if the products were analyzed as being absolutely safe now, will they be next week, next month, next year?

I'll take my nicotine the old fashioned way. I'm not into patches, gums, or magic mist. I'll put chopped and ground leaves in my nose, and mouth. If I want to inhale it, I'll burn the leaves like we've been doing for centuries :^)

[Jason]

I don't trust the Chinese to make a safe product. Their track record's abysmal, and as soon as a manufacturer finds a money saving shortcut, they'll take it, safety be damned. Even if the products were analyzed as being absolutely safe now, will they be next week, next month, next year?

Yup, primary reason why I have never bothered to buy one.

[zmanzero]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540...08796#32091534

broadcast news report on this.

[MasterGuns]

It's already been said, but I DO love to hear my fingers smash keys while I type-rant.
OH NOES! Cancer causing agents??? WHO KNEW????? What were the agents anyways? I mean, of COURSE there will be trace amounts, I would have assumed as much.
Next, yes, it's made in China, I buy shit made in China all the friggin time, but do I trust any of it? Hell no, I plan for it to break in the next year or so, which is sometimes the case. You buy a happy meal, you get a POS toy from China that breaks in a day and your kid cries about it for a week. So no, I wouldn't trust a Bible made in China. Sorry to e-cig users, but I don't think I could get over that part. Regardless, reduced harm is reduced harm.
And the great Phillip Morris. Are our congressmen really as stupid as I think they are, or are they as corrupt as I think they are? It's gotta be one of the other for them to be down with Phillip Morris helping write bills that regulate tobacco. It's obvious they're trying to systematically knock down anything out there that can be considered reduced harm that THEY don't own and tamper with. I would say snus is next, but Phillip Morris just got bought off by Swedish Match.
They can have South Africa, just don't lie about snus to Americans!