To want the advertising of e-cigs banned

[Singsongsungagain]

I'll set my stall out from the off here. I have no time for smoking. I find it smelly, disgusting and of no benefit to anyone other than the fat cat tobacco company directors. I was delighted with the smoking ban and all of the limits that have been imposed on advertising and packaging etc, feeling that the world will be a healthier place for my children with the least amount of smoking possible. I'm all for a complete ban- although I appreciate the complexities of that.
But now it seems we have this new wave of e-cig promotion and personally I've been disappointed to see the TV adverts- which include the word "cigarettes". Surely this is a backward step in the promotion of a healthy nation?
I've just been reading an article from The Independent in which various well educated scientists, doctors etc have stated that there is now evidence that e-cigs damage cells. They are NOT a healthy alternative to smoking, and yet they are being promoted on our TVs in the same way that conventional cigarettes once were.

AIBU to think that e-cigs should be subject to the same regulations as conventional cigarettes?

"Further question: if tobacco revenues to the UK govt ceased tomorrow at midnight, what services would you like to see cut to make up that shortfall? And don't say it would immediately be made good in less demand on health services, because it wouldn't"
Actually, according to ASH, the revenue from tobacco is less than the cost to society (including loss of work etc due to ill health).

www.theguardian.com/science/sifting-the-evidence/2015/dec/31/no-theres-still-no-evidence-e-cigarettes-are-as-harmful-as-smoking?CMP=share_btn_tw

I think this has already been posted, but just in case not, it's (Prof) Linda Bauld's take-down of the recent cell study of e-cigs.

In the study, they had to abandon looking at cell lines bathed in cigarette (Marlboro Red) liquid as it killed everything within 24 hours.

The e-cig liquid showed some limited cell damage over 8 weeks of bathing, even the non-nicotine liquid did, in comparison to neutral liquid.

So- not comparable at all, then.

Beezer- thanks for that link which I have read closely.

I still stand by my support of the ban on promotional advertising beyond the "medicinal" type of advertising which, in my view, is more suitable. I do totally support anything that encourages people to stop smoking and thank the very knowledgeable folk on this thread for enlightening me about the article I posted.

People who want to restrict the products or the advertising of them are ideologically vindictive to the degree that they would prefer more people to die of smoking related illnesses than confront their prejudice.

Sad.

I've seen lots of teens/young people vaping, which suggests they've just taken it up rather than trying to quit smoking. I don't see how they encourage people to give up smoking, it seems they are just a replacement for cigarettes.They might be ' better' than ciggies, but you're still taking in nicotine, and still taking stuff into your lungs, which can't be good,surely?

Singogsungagain appreciate you taking the time to read links etc.. Unfortunately that research you linked to has been spread far and wide, front page news in some cases, fb and Twitter festering with it. No amount of debunking can counter the enormous harm done by it especially at a time when many smokers make a resolution to quit.

jamdonut Yes, they were invented as a less harmful replacement for tobacco cigarettes, not a cessation aid. Just so happens 1.3 million UK smokers have quit thanks to them. Nicotine on its own not an issue and as above debate has shown no evidence of harm so far. Also no evidence never smokers start because of ecigs and no evidence ecigs are addictive.
Harm reduction is what it's all about.

I still stand by my support of the ban on promotional advertising beyond the "medicinal" type of advertising which, in my view, is more suitable.

Given that:

a) advertisers cannot make 'medicinal' claims unless their product has a medicinal licence
b) no vaping product has a medicinal licence

How will smokers find out about ecigs?

well my dp has finally given up practically CHAINSMOKING after more than 20 years and now vapes, has lost his half-an-hour-cough every morning, has saved a fortune, doesnt stink and has improved his own wellbeing and that of everyone around him, so I think vaping is bloody wonderful.

Noones advertising it as a health tonic, but a fucksight better than smoking tobacco. The more smokers that quit the better, and if they do it by vaping, then thats absolutely fine.
Theres no evidence that nicotine patches or gum are healthy either. Theyre a nicotine replacement. Why do so many people have the rage against vaping in particular.