Clive Bates again lol

[knome]

Eh?...

It's a great read and a great post! I particularly like the 'vapers are not patients' bit.
The only downside to such a superb piece of good old fashioned common sense, is that by reading it I am still not making any positive contributions towards the future of vaping.
Common sense like this needs to be, somehow, rammed down the throats of those that matter, ie those that are shaping the future (positively or negatively).

http://www.planetofthevapes.co.uk/f...-clive-bates-post-of-the-year.html#post553847

 

[cheersm8]

Seriously? Are you confusing Bates, an outstanding and tireless advocate for Vaping, with somebody like Glantz?

No, I'm simply bored shitless with endless, ineffectual, vaping politics. I know that this side of vaping is of immense interest to many many vapers. Maybe I'm too blasé and uncaring about my vaping, who knows? I feel no need, nor desire, for an 'advocate'. If anybody can pinpoint me to any factual achievement that Clive Bates has successfully done to make any changes to vaping, past, present, or future, rather than preaching to the , already, converted, then I may well rethink my bigoted opinions.

I'm no expert on vaping and/or politics, but I do have a 'gut feeling' about the whole impending "shit and fan" scenario, and that my, tainted?, view is that vapers became their own worst enemies, and the 'downfall' (for want of a better word) originated from one small thing "boo hoo boo hoo, you can't stop me, I'm not smoking, I'm vaping, boo hoo boo hoo, you can't make me go to the fag area"
Of course, there is loads more to it than that, but I do feel that it was one catalytic contribution.

ps. exactly blademansw "no positive contributions" by which I meant "changed nowt"

 

[Gonloopy]

You know what cheersm8. I can understand your boredom . I can understand vaping politics is not for you.

You ask what has he achieved? It's more like what has he stopped.

As one of the most well known pro vaping activists we have, and his previous role with stop smoking regulations, when he speaks people listen. I know for a fact his blogs, his challenges to the system are on the desks of senior public health people and are changing hearts and minds.

Without him and people like him we'd all be sat vaping on cigalikes at <4mg juice

 

[cheersm8]

You know what cheersm8. I can understand your boredom . I can understand vaping politics is not for you.

You ask what has he achieved? It's more like what has he stopped.

As one of the most well known pro vaping activists we have, and his previous role with stop smoking regulations, when he speaks people listen. I know for a fact his blogs, his challenges to the system are on the desks of senior public health people and are changing hearts and minds.

Without him and people like him we'd all be sat vaping on cigalikes at <4mg juice

Without wishing to drag this on, because forums are continually moving forward, the 'cigalikes at <4mg' scenario' is not something that causes me any concern.
Even if (and, of course, I hope not!) vaping succumbs to the most stringent and draconian regulation/legislation, the individual components needed for me to continue vaping at whatever mg nic strength, of whatever flavour, in whatever device, I choose,will still remain outside of those regulations. However, changes to the sale and availability, of nicotine, in solution, would be the one thing that would put my happy vaping in severely deep doo-doo. As far as I am aware, the availability of nicotine, in solution, is, already, under legislative control.

I do concede that Clive Bates has a lot of positive things to say, it's just that they are wasted on me, I'm already vaping.

 

[Gonloopy]

@cheersm8 I dont don't want to carry this on either, nor do I want this to turn into a banana throwing contest.


You know what though? You would be fine, -as would I, as would the vast majority of people who access vaping forums.


But there are 2.1 million vapers in the uk alone, the majority of whom do not access forums. They would be up the proverbial without a paddle ( or probably more likely back on the fags), and given that 50% of those will come to harm or worse through smoking. ......


What about them? And all the smokers who have yet to find vaping? Sorry to say it but that sounds like a case of ' I'm alright jack ' if ever I heard one.


As I said before I can understand your lack of interest, all of us that was around when the TPD was on probably went through a phase of that. But to say Clive Bates, as neither a vaper or smoker, likes the sound of his own voice without listening is a bit below the belt IMHO

Sorry

 

[Fleabag]

The fact is, vapers are easy to ignore - and we routinely are. Bates is a known & respected figure in public health, and cannot be ignored. The very fact that someone known to have had a key role in the campaign to reduce smoking rates is standing up in favour of ecigs & harm reduction in general will be taken on board by people who would just take our input as biased, as users who would be directly affected by legislation & restrictions.
I accept some people may not embrace the politics of vaping, but then maybe threads with "Clive Bates" in the title might be ones to avoid

 

[cheersm8]

Sorry for this Gonloopy, but you did 'open a door' with the 'I'm alright jack' so I feel obliged to go through it. I can think of nothing more 'I'm alright Jack' than a bunch of ( now, thankfully, nothing but history) wannabee vaping crusaders making a big banner waving noise about 'freedom to vape' (remember the silly vaping in pubs malarkey?) that achieved nothing other than to bring vaping to the attention of the negative media, promote 'passive vaping' issues, and bring other, unwanted, attention to a pastime that should have been quite content with the small victories that vaping had, already provided.

To provide the ammunition and to also load the guns of the enemy, was, imo, the most selfish act in the history of vaping.

 

[Gonloopy]

Sorry for this @Gonloopy, but you did 'open a door' with the 'I'm alright jack' so I feel obliged to go through it. I can think of nothing more 'I'm alright Jack' than a bunch of ( now, thankfully, nothing but history) wannabee vaping crusaders making a big banner waving noise about 'freedom to vape' (remember the silly vaping in pubs malarkey?) that achieved nothing other than to bring vaping to the attention of the negative media, promote 'passive vaping' issues, and bring other, unwanted, attention to a pastime that should have been quite content with the small victories that vaping had, already provided.

To provide the ammunition and to also load the guns of the enemy, was, imo, the most selfish act in the history of vaping.

But here's the thing the vast majority of clives work is about challenging academia on the poor quality of their research.( and laying open the poor quality of it for all the world to see)

If you think that vaping and our little hobby would've gone by unnoticed without him, - again I disagree. The plain fact is 'they'. were planning to ban it whilst it was still small, when their anti vaping legislation would have slipped in with barely a murmur.

You only need to see the earliest papers about vaping to recognise this. (I've got them somewhere) . They are a simple cut and paste to the arguments that was used to ban swedish snus backin the 90s. They couldn't even be arsed to look into it properly

The fact that Clive Bates, Robert West etc, titans of the anti tobacco industry stood up and were counted, is the only reason we have the relative freedoms we have vaping today. You are being as guilty as the anti vaping brigade yourself in tarring everyone in the same brush.

 

[ZT]

The Bullshit Asymmetry Principle applied « The counterfactual

OMFG! LOOOLLL!!11!!one!!!1hazza11!!

Actually the title does not ‘say it all’. It actually says nothing useful at all, and it is misleading and irrelevant. This experiment did not measure ‘exposure’ but ‘deposition’ on surfaces in a chamber. For there to be ‘exposure’, a pathway between the inanimate surace and the blood or brain needs to be identified. The main risk appears to be to people who lick windows – or ‘window-lickers’ as they are known on the Internet. However, even these people, who have other problems and priorities, would have to lick the deposition from 38 square meters* of glass in this chamber to be exposed to 1mg of nicotine (47/6*1000/205). Obviously, in a full sized room, where the deposition density might be expected to be lower than in a chamber, the area required for window licking would be greater. What is the point of publicising and spinning this sort of research as if it somehow helps to articulate a meaningful risk? If it tells us anything at all, it is that this is irrelevant.

 

[ZT]

Sorry for this @Gonloopy, but you did 'open a door' with the 'I'm alright jack' so I feel obliged to go through it. I can think of nothing more 'I'm alright Jack' than a bunch of ( now, thankfully, nothing but history) wannabee vaping crusaders making a big banner waving noise about 'freedom to vape' (remember the silly vaping in pubs malarkey?) that achieved nothing other than to bring vaping to the attention of the negative media, promote 'passive vaping' issues, and bring other, unwanted, attention to a pastime that should have been quite content with the small victories that vaping had, already provided.

To provide the ammunition and to also load the guns of the enemy, was, imo, the most selfish act in the history of vaping.

vaping politics .. no scratch that, ANY politics bores me ragged dude, but we do need it .. and we need guys like this .. especially Him actually.

aside from anything else his style of writing makes him very NOT boring

it is often my way to skip political threads, on the grounds id rather spend 30 minutes slamming my head against a wall - BUT if its something Clive has written .. ill read it .. largely coz its often hilarious - Ill refer you to the cut and paste from this latest I did