What's up, Britney?Original Post Deleted
What's up, Britney?Original Post Deleted
Health authorities: e-cigarettes contain more tar than ordinary cigarettes : The DONG-A ILBO
Good luck – trust your health to Big Tobacco
https://www.reuters.com/investigates...-iqos-science/
iQos HEETS use RECON
Recon is manipulated to be more addictive than ordinary tobacco by ammonia addition
Jeffrey Wigand : WHO Report
Cigarettes Have to Be Labeled 'Deadly' and 'Addictive' Now | Time
No. I meant flavours.
The EU has banned flavoured cigarettes but everyone probably agrees bans don't work that well and encourage black market activity
Australia tax alcopops (sugary strong) higher as they were seen as a gateway drink.
If vaping can be used to help people get of the more dangerous cigarettes then great but nice flavoured products that entice people who wouldn't normally smoke should be taxed more heavily.
Banning flavoured tobacco makes some sense, because ending all tobacco smoking should be the ultimate objective. Flavouring can make tobacco more attractive to a subset of people.
Vaping is considered at least 95% less harmful than smoking tobacco by independent (i.e. without dodgy corporate ties) medical experts in Europe, although the tobacco lobby is doing their best to pervert that message.
If you kneecap vaping through excessive regulation while tobacco is still widely available you're only giving tobacco "life support" (while actually taking life away from those still smoking)
If already considered safe (GRAS) flavours make vaping more palatable to people who would otherwise be smoking I really don't see the point in punishing over their use. However, if there were to be any attempts at targetting minors specifically I would obviously support selective banning too.
The massive increase in sugar (also addictive substance) use over the last half century has been behind a silent but widespread epidemics of obesity and related health problems. Some sugar is nice, but taxing it at the source helps alleviate that man-made (or corporate-made) problem. Where the sugar taxes take effect, people are being slowly weaned off excess sugar. You could of course try banning sugar altogether (although e.g. tomatoes contain some sugar and nicotine...), but most people would probably side with harm reduction without complete elimination of the pleasure.
Alcopops are being tackled the same way. The healthier, safer alternatives are now also cheaper, thus more attractive.
If you make vaping less appealing and less available while tobacco is still being sold in every shop, well, you don't need to an einstein to know what the smokers will continue doing.
You are completely right. Taxes need to be set to nudge people to do the 'right' thing. Plain vanilla vaping should be cheapest followed flavoured etc etc to apple flavoured slim cigarettes being the most expensive.
There is no perfect answer and there is no one size fits all solution.
Is prevalence of e-cigarette and nicotine replacement therapy use among smokers associated with average cigarette consumption in England? A time-series analysis | BMJ Open
study of almost 200,000 adults
E-cigs were not successful in reducing smoking prevalence when monitored over a long period of time
simply They Do Not Work other than to keep people addicted
Relationship between trying an electronic cigarette and subsequent cigarette experimentation in Scottish adolescents: a cohort study | Tobacco Control
Scottish cohort shows initiation
About BMJ
BMJ Industries is part of the BMJ group of companies, specializing in state of the art tobacco processing plant, and cigarette conversion factory with a production ...