Swap To Stop

[Gitchy]

I saw this article this morning and it gave me hope. With all the negatives you usually see around vaping in the news it's nice to see that the UK government are actually listening to the proper science around it.

 

[andipandi]

 

[Toby iVapour]

I saw this today, and first thing to point out, is it's not the first time e-cigs have been handed out (on the NHS), but generally I found the tone and objective promising...

But, it does raise some questions in my mind...

Firstly, you would have thought most smokers would have tried e-cigs by now (I mean, they've been about for years, and now with disposables for a few quid on every street corner), and so I wonder what 1 million freebies will actually achieve...

And also, tax payers will resent (probably rightfully), free vapes being handed out.
Just look at the comments on the BBC article page -
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65235343

Secondly -

.. but let’s try and see the positives with this it could be a big advancement to help with more positivity towards vaping.

Exactly that.
And it makes me wonder this strange paradox of the vilifying of vaping in respect to the "teenage epidemic" BS.. and yet they want a smoke-free world...
Clive Bates just wrote a great article about it, articulating it better than I ever could -
Beyond Tobacco Harm Reduction
https://tobaccoreporter.com/2023/04/01/beyond-tobacco-harm-reduction/

Harm reduction implies that there must be harm to reduce. It suggests that reducing harm is the underlying justification for allowing the availability of reduced-risk nicotine products. That tends to focus attention on the benefits of the product-switching choices of existing smokers. But also, it classifies the uptake of nicotine products by current nonusers, whether adults or adolescents, as problematic and a basis for justifying restrictions or prohibitions designed to curtail use. The United States Tobacco Control Act embodies this idea through its public health standard: New nicotine products seeking premarket tobacco authorization must be evaluated as “appropriate for the protection of public health”.

Implicit in this view is that no one wants to use nicotine, and new smoke-free products should function as a souped-up smoking cessation aid for which there would be little justification without smoking.

But no one thinks of other common psychoactive substances in this way. At the launch of a new craft beer, does anyone ask, “is this appropriate for the protection of public health?” Of course they don’t—it’s beer! We do not agonize over routine and perhaps compulsive morning caffeine consumption because we are not concerned about dying from coffee-related diseases.

 

[Toby iVapour]

I watched the news on the glorious bbc news app and clicked on what is an "illicit vape" it was a trading standards interview the guy in question said quite plainly "I hate these things" and went on to say he has seized a vape that says 5% nic at 1000 puffs apparently that vape could kill you and you could puff on it and take out your whole family etc etc

Yes I saw that, from some paid do-gooder fuckwit jobsworth trading standards officer -
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-london-64942562

It's just a nasty, nasty, nasty product.

(referring to illegal vapes, I think, rather than legal vapes? Or does he just hate all e-cigs?)

You'd have thought he was talking about methamphetamine laced with fentanyl FFS...

 

[andipandi]

.
tax payers will resent (probably rightfully), free vapes being handed out.

Dunno about these days but stop smoking clinics were all the rage, including free (group) counselling, patches, gum and god knows what else, plus at least vaping works.

 

[andipandi]

I like it, bloody BBC!

 

[vapesmarter]

Yes I saw that, from some paid do-gooder fuckwit jobsworth trading standards officer -
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-london-64942562

(referring to illegal vapes, I think, rather than legal vapes? Or does he just hate all e-cigs?)

You'd have thought he was talking about methamphetamine laced with fentanyl FFS...

It’s good in one way to help people get off but at the moment I give it 7 days until “my child got free vapes off his dad from the government “ in the gutter press

 

[zouzounaki]

I saw this today, and first thing to point out, is it's not the first time e-cigs have been handed out (on the NHS), but generally I found the tone and objective promising...

But, it does raise some questions in my mind...

Firstly, you would have thought most smokers would have tried e-cigs by now (I mean, they've been about for years, and now with disposables for a few quid on every street corner), and so I wonder what 1 million freebies will actually achieve...

And also, tax payers will resent (probably rightfully), free vapes being handed out.
Just look at the comments on the BBC article page -
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65235343

Secondly -

Exactly that.
And it makes me wonder this strange paradox of the vilifying of vaping in respect to the "teenage epidemic" BS.. and yet they want a smoke-free world...
Clive Bates just wrote a great article about it, articulating it better than I ever could -
Beyond Tobacco Harm Reduction
https://tobaccoreporter.com/2023/04/01/beyond-tobacco-harm-reduction/

i agree with your point here but think bates might have lost the plot. unless by “common psychoactive substances” he means only caffeine and alcohol.

 

[zouzounaki]

the NNA newsletter describes some of the measures as “groundbreaking” and summarises as follows:

“
The measures announced include:

• One million smokers will be given a free vaping starter kit to encourage switching.
  
  
• Pregnant women will be offered up to £400 as an incentive to quit smoking.
  
  
• £3 million of funding for a vapes enforcement squad led by trading standards to prevent illicit and underage sales of vaping products.
  
  
• A call for evidence for further ideas on how to encourage quitting and preventing youth vaping.
  
  
• A consultation on introducing mandatory cigarette pack inserts with positive messages and information on quitting smoking”

 

[Genghis Fogs]

We have a nationally funded health service with a logical (but not always evident) inclination toward health promotion and related cost savings for the public purse. Compare this to the States where health care is private and the increasing rate of vaping saw States correspondingly receive less from in tobacco tax and the contributions agreed under the tobacco master settlement. This perversely incentivised individual States to attack vaping for the sake of their financial stability, having grown reliant on tobacco taxation and the agreed kick backs from tobacco companies. This comparison gives me hope, as our system is set up to look at the science and balance it against policy costs. It doesn't work like that in the States for the reasons already mentioned. On a mild tangent - I like Grimm Green, but his political position as a libertarian (e.g. minimal government) is completely at odds with his advocacy for vaping. The lesson from the States is that we actually need government protection / regulation from the monopolistic tendencies of big tobacco / pharma, because their number one motive is profit and they will sweep all competition out of their way. As I like telling right wing Americans, we have a patriotic thing called the NHS. I'm happy to pay taxes so that someone else that I may never meet gets health treatment. And these idiots complaining about spending money to help people to quit smoking? How much do they think it costs us to treat a single case of COPD or lung cancer?