cigarettes

Common sense is prevailing in the media war over Electronic Cigarettes. Slate has published a great rundown on the coverage in the mainstream. Talking about the current import ban on electronic cigarettes, Slate asks this (h/t OsborneInk):

Governments seem to be buying this view. The FDA has officially barred importation of e-cigarettes. "These appear to be unapproved drug device products," a spokeswoman tells the Times, "and as unapproved products they can't enter the United States." Australia and Hong Kong have also prohibited the devices.

That's a pretty awkward position. We restricted smoking, tobacco sales, and advertising based on decades of evidence that smoking was harmful to smokers and bystanders. Now we're treating electronic cigarettes the same way based on ... what? That "nobody knows" how bad they might be? The elements of smoking that justified our war on tobacco—carcinogens, combustion, secondhand smoke, even nicotine—have been removed or made optional. Is it really logical to ignore these differences?

The big problem is the lack of common sense in the bureaucracy known as the FDA. People have been kicking the old nasty tobacco habit by switching to the new electronic cigarettes. They have also had their own doctors tell them that they are healthier, but that isn’t good enough for the pencil pushers at the FDA. Instead they only worry about what is being said by people who haven’t even taken the time to look at the device.

Allowing the sale and use of e-cigarettes is not only a healthier alternative for the end user, but also those around them, as second hand smoke becomes a non-issue. Hopefully either the courts or the FDA will come to realize this and allow the continued sale of these products.

There has been talk about this for weeks now, but it looks more and more like the FTC is going to put some regulations in that could effect bloggers:

In the new proposed rules, The Federal Trade Commission also addressed advertising in new media (Web 2.0). Essentially, if an advertiser pays a blogger to write a review endorsing a product or service, the advertiser and the blogger must disclose the financial relationship. In addition, both blogger and advertiser both will be liable for any false or unsubstantiated claims regarding results of products or services.

At first you think this wouldn’t effect our niche of the blogosphere that much, but then you see the ongoing discussion over Greg Sargent’s post yesterday talking about advertising in the blogosphere, and you stop and think again. Basically the whole argument is over liberal (sorry – progressive) organizations and if they should purchase advertising on blogs who help promote their causes. If that becomes the case, then this could very well fall under the new regulations of the FTC.

And for the record, I only really push e-Cigarettes and I in no way get any financial compensation from that, well except the money I save from buying real cigarettes.

For close to a quarter of a century I have been a smoker. I average about a pack and a half a day. During this time I have tried everything. The patches didn’t do a thing. The gum and lozenges never worked. I even tried Chantix, the “stop smoking” pill twice and had no luck.

Then a couple of weeks ago I learned about a product called NJoy, which is an electronic cigarette.

Electronic cigarettes are gaining huge popularity. They turn a liquid form of nicotine into a vapor. You drag on it like a cigarette and get your needed nicotine. On top of that it tastes pretty much like a cigarette and you get the same mechanics of smoking. All that without the tar and harmful ingredients found in regular cigarettes, well except nicotine.

This magical device helped me quit last week and I feel great. I get a minor craving every once in awhile for a real cigarette, especially after meals, but a quick hit of my NJoy and I am back to normal.

So guess what?

The government wants to ban these things. They think that these devices, which have helped thousands quit now, might be a danger to us. Their argument – they don’t know if inhaling nicotine is harmful or not. There for they think these products should be banned until the FDA can study them. Of course that would mean banning them for years and then when they say “well yeah inhaling nicotine is harmful, just like smoking a cigarette, but at least your not inhaling tons of carcinogens with these”, then they will allow them to be sold with a huge tax.

It amazes me that they can even attempt this argument. For years the government turned their back on the dangers of smoking. Sure they said “oh its bad for you”, but did they do anything about it really? Hell they wouldn’t even regulate the cigarette companies. Just now there is legislation going through to do that, and its passage in Senate isn’t certain.

This is change, we need. Actually it isn't as much change as it is undoing the damage of the Bush years:

The Food and Drug Administration, bedeviled by a salmonella outbreak and tainted medicine from China, is likely to monitor imports and fresh produce more closely under an Obama administration.

With President Bush no longer a roadblock, health officials also can expect new powers to control tobacco, from cigarettes to the recently introduced smokeless products called snus.

President-elect Obama, a former smoker struggling to avoid relapse, is a sponsor of legislation giving the FDA authority to control, but not ban, tobacco and nicotine.

I guess to Bush, keeping Americans safe by protecting our food supply was nothing but big government. If we end up going four years without a major food recall, will people thank Obama for protecting them?

Something our nation seems to forget is where it came from. While watching Good Night and Good Luck the other night I was interested in how Edward R. Murrow constantly held his Kent cigarette in his hand while doing his broadcast. Since that occurred 20 years before my time I missed it when it actually happened.

Now thanks to the good folks from RealityBasedNation.com we get a fresh reminder of how else cigarettes helped shape our television viewing.