UK Gov To Ban Disposables?

[zouzounaki]

I agree to most of that...
Saying that vaping is 95% less harmful than smoking is a double-edged sword - to inform smokers that vaping is a much less harmful alternative, or to give the impression that there's not much harm to never/seldom smokers, which could lure some in.. that's the way it goes...
Essentially it's a revolution; enjoyment of nicotine can now be done in a multitude of ways without all the harm caused by smoking, so it's going to possibly attract non-smokers (who are so far in a tiny minority).

Not according to all the smokers (maybe millions) who quit smoking using disposables.
(Or those that use disposables infrequently, and recycle properly).

bearing in mind that smoking is deadly, 95% less harmful is still potentially harmful. i can see why a clinical professional might have the view that it’s framed in a way that is not good.

as for the smokers you talk of, as i said all the stupid marketing might well have alienated them from regular devices. not everybody is attracted to skulls, volcanoes and people with daft names and trucker hats. many of us on here just chose to ignore it, but i could see how it would be off putting and make people think it’s not for them.

 

[Toby iVapour]

not everybody is attracted to skulls, volcanoes and people with daft names and trucker hats.

I don't know what you mean.. I think you are referring to fringe stuff...

 

[MarylinC37]

I think Dr McKean is attacking the wrong thing. The statement that smoking is 95% less harmful than cigarrettes is the result of lots of research evidence which showed that to be true.

The boom in teenage vaping is not down to that statement at all. It is because of disposables, and particularly the illegal ones that are targeted at kids, many of which contain ridiculous levels of nicotine.

Lets face it, when we were kids which of us took any notice of scientific reports. Kids just want to feel all big and grown up so they go along with the latest fad.

Dr McKean doesn't appear to have brought any new research to the table to justify his attack on the 95% statement. The only thing that could undermine it is these illegal vapes which have 50mg of nicotine and I can see why they would pose a far bigger risk to peoples health.

I still think though that the 95% statement is still valid until any new evidence proves different and it has had a good effect in helping to persuade millions of people away from cigarrettes.

 

[zouzounaki]

I don't know what you mean.. I think you are referring to fringe stuff...

what about all the daft smok mods, they even had one with demon eyes that light up, one shaped like a gun handle, all the stupid names the companies make up, cloud blowing competitions and performance vaping, the reviewer dudes with made up names in dingy studios in their mothers basements and all the bro stuff.

 

[zouzounaki]

I think Dr McKean is attacking the wrong thing. The statement that smoking is 95% less harmful than cigarrettes is the result of lots of research evidence which showed that to be true.

The boom in teenage vaping is not down to that statement at all. It is because of disposables, and particularly the illegal ones that are targeted at kids, many of which contain ridiculous levels of nicotine.

Lets face it, when we were kids which of us took any notice of scientific reports. Kids just want to feel all big and grown up so they go along with the latest fad.

Dr McKean doesn't appear to have brought any new research to the table to justify his attack on the 95% statement. The only thing that could undermine it is these illegal vapes which have 50mg of nicotine and I can see why they would pose a far bigger risk to peoples health.

I still think though that the 95% statement is still valid until any new evidence proves different and it has had a good effect in helping to persuade millions of people away from cigarrettes.

he’s not saying it’s not valid as a statistic. he is saying it was a mistake to frame it in such a way, because companies have used it as a marketing tactic and it has potentially led to teenagers using disposables who would have never tried smoking.

i get the impression from the things i’ve read about it that most of the kids are puffing legal disposables, in much the same way we used to smoke legal fags when we were kids.

 

[Toby iVapour]

what about all the daft smok mods, they even had one with demon eyes that light up, one shaped like a gun handle, all the stupid names the companies make up, cloud blowing competitions and performance vaping, the reviewer dudes with made up names in dingy studios in their mothers basements and all the bro stuff.

Yes, there may have been some peeps put off by that.. but it was more on the fringe that kind of thing.. and wouldn't have affected most who wanted to vape to quit, cos they wouldn't have come across much of it...

 

[Toby iVapour]

It is because of disposables, and particularly the illegal ones that are targeted at kids, many of which contain ridiculous levels of nicotine.

The only thing that could undermine it is these illegal vapes which have 50mg of nicotine and I can see why they would pose a far bigger risk to peoples health.

I agree with all that you say, except for the above...

Most of the illegal vapes are not targeted at kids, they are targeted at anyone who want large capacity disposables, which in itself, is arguably better than the small disposables (excluding the fact that they are illegal, and not tested for toxicity & emissions).

I'm not sure how common the 50mg ones are...
I don't think they are that common because they are too strong for most people. And if they are 50mg, what's wrong with that? How could they pose a far bigger risk to peoples health? People will either puff on them less, or find them too strong, and get 20mg instead.

 

[zouzounaki]

Yes, there may have been some peeps put off by that.. but it was more on the fringe that kind of thing.. and wouldn't have affected most who wanted to vape to quit, cos they wouldn't have come across much of it...

i don’t think that was the fringes, many of the vape shoes in this city were plastered with that kind of stuff until a few years ago, at which point they started to become full of disposables.

 

[MarylinC37]

he’s not saying it’s not valid as a statistic. he is saying it was a mistake to frame it in such a way, because companies have used it as a marketing tactic and it has potentially led to teenagers using disposables who would have never tried smoking.

i get the impression from the things i’ve read about it that most of the kids are puffing legal disposables, in much the same way we used to smoke legal fags when we were kids.

I agree with you that they are abusing it for the purpose of marketing which apart from when it is targeted at kids is perfectly legitimate. When it comes to specific marketing at kids I think it is far more problematic whe they put 'Gummy Bears' or 'Barbie' on the front rather than a statement which is backed up by very good scientific evidence.

As you say, most kids probably are vaping legal safer vapes because they are the most widespread and easy to get hold of.

The only potential area of issue I see with that 95% statement is that the level of safety will be dependant on the level of nicotine and also on what else is contained in whatever juice is being used.

The 95% statement itself though has had a hugely beneficial effect on persuading smokers to turn to vaping instead so they need to think very hard before trying to erase it.

 

[Rickster]

I don't know what they can do though....if they just say vaping is less harmful than smoking, someone will ask by how much.
So that leaves them with only "Vaping is harmful"