2015/08

It must surely come as no surprise at all that there has finally been a response to the Public Health England 2015 review on e-cigarettes from the hard-core anti-vaping opponents. So I wasn’t particularly surprised when the excrement hit the whirling blades of the media, no sir.

There had of course been a gleeful comment from Simone Chumpman that “the answer” (and I know someone said “42” to that) was coming “later this week” regarding the provenance of the “95% less harmful” phrase.

Over the last few years vaping has been placed under an increasingly magnified microscope, every single aspect from safety through to perceptions have been heavily scrutinized. The consumers, that is US, have been deliberately lumped into the same bracket as smokers and subsequently have been treated no different to smokers. We’ve had scare stories about “cancer causing chemicals” and have been told that vaping is a “public health threat”.

Time for a rewind, to 2009 specifically. I was still happily smoking and had no idea that the vaping community and industry existed. I had no idea that the MHRA wanted vapourisers to be placed squarely under medical regulation. Instead, all I saw in relation to smoking was the incessant beat of the anti-smoking organisations, and campaigns on the telly-box. I never had cause to contact my MP or MEP at the time simply because I didn’t care.

Another day, and yet more divisiveness in response to yesterdays PHE Report. You’ll remember that construction companies relied heavily on the advice of the BMA for information about vaping in the workplace, in light of the PHE Report those companies look like they may have to have a bit of a rethink.

Even in a radio interview on BBC Scotland (approximately 20 minutes in) with the BMA and Linda Bauld, the BMA representative admitted that they would “review” their stance on workplace bans in light of the evidence stating that vapourisers are substantially safer than smoking. It was, one of the many wonderful moments of yesterday’s deluge of reports.

Late last night various tweets were being posted by the media with previews of today’s papers front pages from i, Daily Telegraph, Daily Mirror and The Times. All four were based on an impending publication from Public Health England (PHE), but as is the norm for the media, the headlines didn’t actually reflect the contents of the publication.

I’ll admit to being a little wary of today’s news based on those previews alone, despite assurances from Lorien Jollye that the report from PHE was actually a very very good thing. As with anything related to vaping and smoking I’m very cynical and the preview headlines all had a common theme which sadly led me to believe the wrong thing.

After the recent rush of positive news first from RSPH where they are trying to de-stigmatise nicotine and encourage vapouriser use (at the expense of throwing smokers out of pub gardens which I do not agree with), then from ASH that once again shows that vaping isn’t a gateway to smoking which Linda Bauld discusses at great length, all of which is incredibly positive and simply proves what we instinctively know. Electronic cigarettes, vapourisers, vapour products or whatever you want to call them (just not nic-sticks please) are not encouraging the rabid youth of today to start smoking combustible tobacco, at least not in the current regulatory climate at any rate. Who knows, that may all change.

If you weren’t already aware, the FDA are currently accepting commentary on “Nicotine exposure warnings and child-resistant packaging for liquid nicotine, nicotine-containing e-liquids, and other tobacco products” whereby they are looking to, from those that are interested to comment, for information on the regulation of “tobacco products”. They are specifically looking for comments, data, research results and any other information that may inform regulatory actions that the FDA might take. If you haven’t done so yet, the link is here, it’d be worthwhile adding your own comments.

When I woke up this morning I wasn’t expecting a whole host of shenanigans to be floating around the media. I knew that something was coming at some point thanks to some very good friends in the know, all very secret squirrel like. What I didn’t expect was the sheer insanity of it all.

After listening to Simon Clark at Vapefest about the situation with proposed vaping bans coming simply because smoking has already been banned in public, it made perfect sense. The whole “denormalization” of smoking smokers began a long time ago, culminating with the situation we have now, like dominoes smoke-free laws were passed and now it’s “normal” to go into a pub, if you can find one that’s open and have a beer without being “engulfed in a fug”.

When UK Vapefest 2015 was announced around October last year, and having missed out on Vapefest 2014 part of me really wanted to go. I’d never been, so I was the epitome of a Vapefest virgin, so I scrambled to book some time off work on the Friday and Monday so I could take a leisurely stroll to Shrewsbury, settle into a hotel or a tent and be able to be up and about at a reasonable hour for both days, then take a leisurely stroll home on the Monday.

In the absence of any credible news based on, or loosely based on actual science there is a trend for opinion pieces where budding journalistic hacks seize the opportunity to make a name for themselves by cobbling together a mix of information, loosely based on other media stories upon which they base their own “informed opinion”. There was a time when “opinion pieces” were just that, actual opinions from properly informed investigative journalists, whilst now it’s all about driving traffic to a website and the associated click-throughs.

It isn’t often that I post about things that are completely unrelated to vaping, but sometimes things happen that social media just doesn’t give enough space for me to comment with the entirety of my thoughts, hence the blog.

Today, 1st August 2015 is #WorldLungCancerDay and the subject of lung cancer, and cancer in general is one I hold near and dear to my heart simply because I lost both of my parents to forms of cancer. I donate on a regular basis to charities that are active in bringing the varying forms of cancer to the attention of the masses. The work these charities and organisations do is incredibly valuable in raising awareness and much-needed funding for the ongoing research into the varying forms of cancer, both for treatment and detection for the sufferer and for the families.