And in tomorrows news...

[Gonloopy]

I can't see that the NHS would ever indefinitely fund vaping on prescription ( even if a particular device is approved) .

They would probably just give some form of starter kit and a course of eliquid, -say 12 weeks. (This is general custom and practice for NRT).

It took NICE years to get agreement to supply NRT to specific individuals for the long term but this even though it's in NICE guidance is still is not practiced widely across the country.

Just leave vaping alone, -iif it ain't broke, don't fix it

 

[Jefftow]

im going to be un popular lol

yes E-cigs are much safer than cigarettes
we've known this so long and didn't have to pay millions to various groups to find out.
but and it is a big but, why give them out on prescription !. a ptk of cigarettes cost £7 t0 £9 you can get a basic starter kit with that. juice from £5. use your ciggie money to buy starter kit and if it works for you and your saving upto £9 a day you can improve your equipment as you go along.

our NHS needs to use its money in a much better way than supplying Ecigs.

 

[Tubbyengineer]

I'm pretty sick of hearing all this guff about prescribing e-cigs, since when has anyone here believed anything in the newspapers about e-cigs?

Yep that's right, it was the newspapers who said it - I give you the following extracts from the executive summary of the report "E-cigarettes: an evidence update: [FONT=Arial,Arial][FONT=Arial,Arial]A report commissioned by Public Health England "[/FONT][/FONT]

"Much of England’s strategy of tobacco harm reduction is predicated on the availability of medicinally licensed products that smokers want to use. Licensed ECs are yet to appear. A review of the MHRA EC licensing process therefore seems appropriate, including manufacturers’ costs, and potential impact. This could include a requirement for MHRA to adapt the processes and their costs to enable smaller manufacturers to apply, and to speed up the licensing process. The review could also assess potential demand for the EC prescription market and what types of products would be most appropriate to meet that demand."


"Smokers who have tried other methods of quitting without success could be encouraged to try EC to stop smoking and stop smoking services should support smokers using EC to quit by offering them behavioural support."

Nowhere in the report have I been able to find any phrase along the lines of "EC Should be provided on prescription", in fact the first extract states "Licensed EC are yet to appear", this means they cannot be prescribed. What they are advising, and what the papers have turned into their headlines, is that Smokers should be encouraged to use EC to give up smoking, or in other words, that Doctors and other health professionals stop screaming that they don't know what's in them, or whether they are safe and start to focus on the truths of the matter which are that they help people reduce or quit smoking and that they are 95% (Their figure) safer than smoking.

I'm seeing far too much negative grumbling about "I'm not ill - I don't need a prescription" when in fact we should be grumbling that "Newspapers are sensationalist arseholes"


Here endeth the rant, and now I'm going to lie down in a darkened room and allow my blood pressure to return to normal...

<strike></strike>

 

[AllAtSea]

Here endeth the rant, and now I'm going to lie down in a darkened room and allow my blood pressure to return to normal...

I find turning my pressure fed tanks upside down often helps to equalize the pressure within them - perhaps if you stand on your head for half an hour?

I'm always here to help ... just drop me pm

 

[scrumpox]

I'm pretty sick of hearing all this guff about prescribing e-cigs, since when has anyone here believed anything in the newspapers about e-cigs? Yep that's right, it was the newspapers who said it - I give you the following extracts from the executive summary of the report "E-cigarettes: an evidence update: [FONT=Arial,Arial][FONT=Arial,Arial]A report commissioned by Public Health England "[/FONT][/FONT] "Much of England’s strategy of tobacco harm reduction is predicated on the availability of medicinally licensed products that smokers want to use. Licensed ECs are yet to appear. A review of the MHRA EC licensing process therefore seems appropriate, including manufacturers’ costs, and potential impact. This could include a requirement for MHRA to adapt the processes and their costs to enable smaller manufacturers to apply, and to speed up the licensing process. The review could also assess potential demand for the EC prescription market and what types of products would be most appropriate to meet that demand." "Smokers who have tried other methods of quitting without success could be encouraged to try EC to stop smoking and stop smoking services should support smokers using EC to quit by offering them behavioural support." Nowhere in the report have I been able to find any phrase along the lines of "EC Should be provided on prescription", in fact the first extract states "Licensed EC are yet to appear", this means they cannot be prescribed. What they are advising, and what the papers have turned into their headlines, is that Smokers should be encouraged to use EC to give up smoking, or in other words, that Doctors and other health professionals stop screaming that they don't know what's in them, or whether they are safe and start to focus on the truths of the matter which are that they help people reduce or quit smoking and that they are 95% (Their figure) safer than smoking. I'm seeing far too much negative grumbling about "I'm not ill - I don't need a prescription" when in fact we should be grumbling that "Newspapers are sensationalist arseholes" Here endeth the rant, and now I'm going to lie down in a darkened room and allow my blood pressure to return to normal... <strike></strike>

I think that first extract is explicit enough. When the medicinally licensed products are available - and they're recommending that MHRA revise the process to expedite this - the authors are recommending that ECs are added to the existing strategy ... which is prescribing gums, patches etc Seems odd to me that vapers are hoping to get such a prescription though, but I suppose we should not underestimate the "I want something for nothing" attitude that is prevalent in society today. A prescription will help the more financially challenged which is where smoking is most prevalent.

 

[jsixtysix]

Apologies if this has already been posted, but Anti-smoking zealots are censoring reality | Health | Smoking | spiked was interesting reading; also the comments, depending on boredom threshold...

 

[Tubbyengineer]

I think that first extract is explicit enough. When the medicinally licensed products are available - and they're recommending that MHRA revise the process to expedite this - the authors are recommending that ECs are added to the existing strategy ... which is prescribing gums, patches etc Seems odd to me that vapers are hoping to get such a prescription though, but I suppose we should not underestimate the "I want something for nothing" attitude that is prevalent in society today. A prescription will help the more financially challenged which is where smoking is most prevalent.

Quite possible but my reading of it seems to indicate that they want to add ALL EC's to the strategy - prescribed or not, I think the aim is to make EC's recognised as a valid route to smoking harm reduction / quitting rather than a just recreational product. They may not be able to prescribe them but the report seems to me to be saying that doctors should say that they are a valid option for people quitting rather than avoiding the subject or decrying them as unproven or unsafe...

 

[scrumpox]

I see where you're coming from. I read it thus ...
Approval is necessary for prescribing ... however, EC can be suggested as part of behavioural support.

 

[Gonloopy]

I read it as twin track, that doctors should validate people's choice to use ecigs to help quit smoking, and people should be able to access so smoking cessation services for additional psychological support if they so wish. If and when a medically licensed ecig comes to market then it could be prescribed (as already happens with varencline NRT etc).

My overall take on this paper was in general they 'got it', and additionally recognised the threat that the TPD poses. As you say Tubs , it is the way the press have filled their headlines that is the cause for concern.

That said there probably is a discussion to be had about how the the less well off smoker is supported. If you had say a 30 quid smoking budget and let's say a starter kit would cost you £25.00. The risk to that individual in purchasing a kit, but then finding ivaping wasn't for them, would leave them without their cig money. This, for some, may be enough of a deal breaker to stop people giving vaping a go in the first place.

Personally, I'm not necessarily sure a prescription is the answer, but simply needs thinking through a little more as to how that issue could be handled.

 

[cheersm8]

For those unfortunate enough to be eligible for free prescriptions it may be worth hanging fire, seeing what the quality of the NHS gizmo's are like, and if they're decent, sign up to the local Quit Shop, get 'em for free and flog 'em off on ebay for an easy couple of quid. Rumour has it that there's already 1000's doing the same thing with their free prescription NHS patches and inhalers.