Ok so I have been around a while yes I am no dummy to the vaping community and how the community acts towards certain people. There seems to be a trend right now in the vaping community that really gets under my skin. I have been thinking about this for some time and I am sure alot of you have been as well. Think about it we were all smokers at one time or another. We all come from different walks of life. We all dont have the same opinions about certain issues about whats going on in life. There is one thing we all have in common is that we do vape. All of these networks are here for 1 reason or another. If it is just to hang out and have fun or dick around and bullshit with your friends that is fine. Or if it is to give information to the new vaper that might not know where to go to buy new vaping gear or is new and just wants to hang out and chill without drama without bullshit without people antagonizing people and making fun of others I mean that is not what the vaping community is supposed to be about am I wrong? If I came into a room and that kept happening to me day in and day out I would get pretty tired of coming there and move along to the next channel or network. My point being this is a community we should all be able to get along without being bullied without being harrased or antagonized people come here to have fun and meet friends and vape that is all. The next time you see a new vaper or a new name come into a room that needs help just try and welcome them and have the common decency to treat them as a human being and not like someone that doesnt know anything but as an opportunity to help someone.
For the whole Story go to: http://hairballs.webs.com/
My side of the nu-vapor.com saga. Many of you good folks already knew me from another forum and know what type of person I am. I don't take shit and I sure as hell don't lie. I call it like I see it.
I'm a vaper of almost 3 years and only have one agenda, to help other vapers.
I joined nu-vapor.com because someone had asked me to check it out. It seemed like a good forum...a place to let your hair down. It wasn't too long after I joined that I was asked to be a mini moderator. I accepted the job, but to be honest and several of you know this as fact, that I really didn't want it but what the hell...something different. Well, I was then promoted to full moderator....an even bigger joke if you ask me. I'm not moderator material and I knew this. If you were on nu-vapor, you would have noticed that I didn't smack heads like Doggin, Whiskey, Skorne42, Papa Hoyt, and MrEcig did. Not so much as handing out an infraction...I don't believe in that shit.
On November 14th, 2012, I was stripped of moderator status. Why you ask? Because I defended another member in trying to explain to administration exactly why international modders wouldn't join their po-dunk forum. They accused Freddie of trying to pull members away from nu-vapor which was far from the truth. He had posted a mod that is in a group on Facebook to let people know that it was available. Admins wanted him to do the group buy on nu-vapor but what they couldn't seem to understand was that Freddie was only organizing it. The modders were the ones who dictated where these mods could be sold. When I tried to help explain everything, they turned on me. Now they are spreading huge lies to the people of nu-vapor...well lets see how this goes shall we?...my side of the story unedited and unmoderated!
I get rather "wordy". I don't mean to offend anyone so if you are a person who gets offended easily, please stop reading and close this. If you aren't, hold on to your britches because I'm one pissed off bitch. Pissed off because this forum holds back from it's members instead of trying to be of assistance...completely opposite of what they claim and totally against what I believe in. They should be banned from the vaping community!
I also want to make something clear, I'm not mad at all of the modderators there. There are a couple good ones that are very fair. I'm only pointing my finger at Whiskey, Doggin, Skorne42, Papa Hoyt, and MrEcig.
This is what started all of it....a mod.
E-Cig Legislation Update: Pueblo, Colorado/WHO ReportFriday, October 26th, 2012 The latest news in electronic cigarette legislation comes from Pueblo, Colorado. While it might not be ideal, it could be worse, all things considered.
In this case, the Pueblo City Council is considering requiring licensing for all businesses within the city that sell electronic cigarettes. It seems that this proposed legislation is a response to a survey performed in 2008 that indicated a high incidence of tobacco use among young people.
You probably already know what we’re going to say about this, but that doesn’t make it any less true: electronic cigarettes are not tobacco products. When government bodies misunderstand the entire nature of vapor smoking devices, it endangers vapers everywhere.
Still, requiring businesses to obtain licensing isn’t a ban, and vapers tend to agree that these devices aren’t for kids. While we hope the Pueblo City Council does significantly more research before passing any legislation, it’s nice to see a city looking at solutions that don’t involve sweeping bans.
WHO Report – It Might be Time to Write Your Congressman
We were alerted to this report by the blog of Dr. Michael Siegel, a Boston University School of Public Health professor. There’s quite a bit about the report that’s problematic . . . including the idea that vaping should be restricted because the sheer act of using an electronic cigarette constitutes advertising.
It all stems from the same issue we keep seeing in the e-cig industry, and the same thing every new technology has faced. When televisions first hit the market, for example, there were movements to ban them because some believed they would cause blindness. Radio faced similar concerns regarding hearing and even possible brain tumors. Both eventually moved into the mainstream, of course, and we expect that same future for electronic cigarettes.
If you want to speed the process along, though, you can be heard on this issue in the same way you can be heard on any issue important to you: write your congressman. Not sure who that is? You can find out here.
Of course, with election season in full swing you have plenty of time to draft your letter while waiting to find out who will represent you in the next term. To make it easier, though, we are in the process of creating a template you can use to help your government representatives understand what electronic cigarettes are and why it’s important that they remain available as a smoking alternative.
We’ll post that template here for you next week. Until then, happy vaping!
We Are Vapers
We Are Vapers We Are Vapers Promo
We Are Vapers – A Documentary Film from Linc Williams on Vimeo.
We Are Vapers A Documentary Film An Exploration into the World of Harm Reduction WHAT’S THE STORY ABOUT? Smoking tobacco can contribute to major health,problems. In the United States and Canada alone, over 50 million people are spending over $50 billion each year for a product which could eventually kill them. The vast majority of smokers who attempt to quit fail.
Today virtually all efforts in tobacco control are prohibitionist in nature and are aimed at breaking nicotine addiction to prevent the use of all tobacco products, rather than focusing on reducing smoke exposure.
There is a different approach to saving lives – Tobacco Harm Reduction
Tobacco harm reduction describes actions that one can take to lower the health risks associated with smoking tobacco. Tobacco Harm Reduction strategies center around providing sufficient nicotine to maintain normal functioning while eliminating the harmful effects of inhaling smoke. A very important part of tobacco harm reduction is simply educating people about the risks of different sources of nicotine.
Electronic cigarettes are intended as an alternative to smoking tobacco cigarettes. They are not designed to treat nicotine addiction, only provide nicotine in a safer manner. Electronic cigarettes are a simple devices that affords the committed smoker nicotine intake through a battery-operated system.
Recent estimates indicate that there are approximately 2.5 million e-cigarette users in the United States.
This film will explore the concept of Smoking Tobacco Harm Reduction, e-cigarettes role and the community that has risen alongside it.
This documentary will cover:
· History of E-Cigarettes
· Personal Stories of e-cigarette users (also known as Vapers)
· The Concept of Harm Reduction
· The Personalities of the Community
· The Health Implications
A new study published this month shows that environmental e-cigarette vapor does not pose the risk that secondhand smoke does.
Online PR News – 04-October-2012 –An indoor air quality study conducted by CHANGE, LLC at the Center for Air Resources Engineering and Science at Clarkson University in Potsdam, NY was published this month in the peer reviewed journal Inhalation Toxicology. The study compared harmful byproducts commonly found in cigarette smoke versus the levels of those same compounds in several popular brands of vaporized e-cigarette liquid.
Because e-cigarettes vaporize liquid rather than burning tobacco, most of the harmful compounds found in smoke were not present in e-cigarette vapor. Those few compounds that were found were at such minuscule levels that toxicology analysis detected no risk (cancer or non-cancer risk) to public health from environmental e-cigarette vapor.
“This study demonstrates that the risks of secondhand vapor from electronic cigarette use are very small in comparison to those associated with secondhand tobacco smoke. While secondhand smoke must be eliminated in workplaces and public places, the current data provide no justification for eliminating electronic cigarette use in these places.”- Dr. Michael Siegel of Boston University School of Public Health
“While secondhand smoke must be eliminated in workplaces and public places, the current data provide no justification for eliminating electronic cigarette use in these places.” There has been a growing controversy over including e-cigarettes in smoking bans, which were originally passed due to the health risks thought to be caused by environmental tobacco smoke.
“For more than 25 years Smokefree Pennsylvania has been advocating indoor smoking bans. Based on the results of this study I see no reason for e-cigarettes to be included in smoking bans.” - Bill Godshall of Smokefree Pennsylvania.
“Most vapers believe e-cigarette vapor is not harmful to those around them, but it is reassuring to finally have scientific evidence confirming those beliefs.”- Spike Babaian, President of National Vapers Club
This is the first study to cover such a wide range of toxins, however previous studies, which have evaluated a smaller number of toxins, have shown similar results.
“The results of this study confirm the findings of my last 4 years of research. E-cigarettes pose no discernible risk to public health." - Dr. Murray Laugesen - Public Health Medicine Specialist, Health New Zealand
National Vapers Club, a consumer-based e-cigarette organization, sponsored the study.
I have already have had the pleasure of testing the Innokin iTaste pen style mod and I must say I was really impressed. I am not really a fan of China products. However when they try to come up with something new and inventive and not try to knock off anyone then I am all for it. I mean lets face it the form factor of anything cant really be changed that much weather it is round or square. At least Innokin is trying to come up with something different and unique for the beginner vaper in mind. I always worry about quality of the product when it comes to being from any place other than the good old USA. So far the iTaste from Innokin has held up great. I look forward to reviewing the MVP and look forward to my video review to be posted soon!
DAVAO CITY -- The city council has approved a proposal that regulates use of electronic cigarettes and other nicotine-containing products, further strengthening its anti-smoking policy.
The measure, which has yet to be signed by Mayor Sara Z. Duterte-Carpio to become an ordinance, is an expanded version of the 2002 anti-smoking law.
Authored by Councilor Tomas J. Monteverde IV, the proposed ordinance also imposes new requirements on the setting up of designated smoking areas in business establishments.
It seeks to require business operators to secure permits for smoking areas from the local government’s anti-smoking task force.
Such areas must be without walls and roofs and must be 10 meters away from the main establishment. The designated areas must have the sign "Smoking Area" and display graphic representations of the ill-effects of the vice.
Under the current ordinance, businesses are only required to secure the approval of the City Engineers Office in the construction of smoking areas as part of the building plan.
The anti-smoking ordinance carries a penalty of ₱1,000, or a month in jail, or both for the first offense; ₱2,500 and two months in jail for the second offense; and ₱3,000 with four months in jail for the third offense.
The anti-smoking task force, headed by Dr. Domilyn C. Villareiz, is mandated to oversee the ordinance’s implementation.
In an earlier interview, Ms. Villareiz said her group was pushing for the ban on electronic cigarettes in public places, but groups selling the item have opposed the proposal.
Jasper Huang, a distributor of electronic cigarettes, the products supposed harmful effects have not been established.
The city councilors, however, believe it is better to regulate the use of such products as non-smokers are annoyed at the smoke emission.
In strengthening the campaign against smoking, Ms. Villareiz said it is important for "young people not to see their old folks smoking" even if it is only an electronic device.
The Rest of the Story:
Tobacco News Analysis and Commentary
...Providing the whole story behind tobacco news.
Wednesday, September 26, 2012 No IVF for Smokers or Overweight Prospective Parents in Fife According to an article in the Express, the National Health Service in Fife, Scotland is set to impose new rules by which couples will be denied in-vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment if either prospective parent smokes or if the woman has a body mass index of greater than 30.
Fife is apparently the first health board in Scotland to dictate that both partners must be nonsmokers in order to be eligible for IVF, as well as the first to dictate that the woman must be within certain body mass index parameters.
According to the article: "Dr Brian Montgomery, medical director of NHS Fife, said: 'Treatment criteria have been revised to improve the success of the treatment and the outcomes for mothers and babies. Both partners must be non-smokers and the female body mass index should be less than 30kg/m2.'"
The Rest of the Story
Well of course it will improve the success of the treatment and the outcomes if you limit the availability of the treatment to the healthiest couples. So why not also limit IVF to couples where both partners consume less than 150 grams of fat per day? And why just limit the BMI to 30? Why not set an age limit at 30 as well to improve the success and outcomes?
While the Fife National Health Service is at it, why not also limit IVF to persons who have a body mass index of at least 20, as underweight is known to reduce fertility? And why prohibit IVF for women who consume five or more drinks of alcohol per week, since that has been shown to significantly reduce fertility?
Other people who should not be eligible for IVF, in order to improve treatment success, include:
Revising the treatment criteria in that way would drastically "improve the success of the treatment and the outcomes for mothers and babies."
Not only that, but waiting times for treatment would decrease precipitously and lots of money would be saved. Plus, population growth would slow, which itself would yield significant societal benefits. It would truly be a win-win situation for all involved.
September 22, 2012 The EU wants to ban E-cigs
According to a leaked memo highlighted in the tobacco analysis blog, and predicted in the past by this blog, the EU is likely to recommend a ban on electronic cigarettes shortly.
The EU plans to ban the marketing of all nicotine containing products which have not been approved as a medicine. This, of course, includes electronic cigarettes.
This is despite extensive research and scientific opinion that the device is likely to be many, many times safer than cigarettes.
The EU will be well aware of this research after presentations made by the Electronic Cigarette Industry Trade Association (ECITA) in Brussels.
The ban will come as no surprise to those who have followed the smokeless tobacco debate.
Like e-cigarettes, the safest forms of smokeless tobacco is far, far safer than smoking tobacco, and there is decades of evidence to prove the point.
And the EU has disgraced itself in its handling of the debate.
In its effort to ban smokeless debate despite scientific evidence that smokeless tobacco is safe, the EU allegedly rewrote a report on smokeless tobacco removing all positive comments.
When it became apparent that one positive comment had been removed, the agency was said to resort to tippexing (that’s white out for you Americans!) the final positive comment. (Source: Clive Bates,
former director of Action on Smoking and Health)