Six US Senate Dems urge FTC to investigate false, deceptive and misleading e-cig marketing practices
- Thread starter Bill Godshall
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Hmmm, I kinda disagree with posters on this thread.
We ought to welcome investigation into marketing of eCigs. If that investigation is biased, and that bias is obvious in what's reported, that'll come out. I think you can count on it.
Yet, if there are people selling eCigs and saying things like, "adds years to your life" or "Quit Smoking with Electronic Cigarettes" then I would like to see that addressed. And if vaping industry can't bring themselves to enacting that sort of change, then well, here we are.
I fully realize (I truly do) that there is a larger propaganda being waged and the linked piece contains a whole bunch of malarkey, but stuff that we've all addressed over and over and that is just a tough sell nowadays, i.e. FDA claim that says "consumers of e-cigarette products currently have no way of knowing: whether e-cigarettes are safe for their intended use." We've shot that down. People (who are anti-vapers) may claim that all they desire, but we have that covered, and I fully believe pro-vapers outnumber anti-vapers. So, this sort of malarkey is easy to overcome in the battle for truth.
But if there are eCig vendors still around who are bucking the ruling of Soterra judgment and claiming some sort of therapeutic benefit from vaping, I'd like to see that reigned in. We vapers can make those claims, all we want, and that knowledge will be shared with those who need that message. A vendor sharing that message sets up the industry with claims that certain vendors, I'm thinking, rather not have to speak to, nor defend.
So sure, let's keep fighting the larger fight against politicians who proudly wear the uniform of anti-vaper and anti-nicotine zealot, but let's not allow vendors who dare to make troublesome claims in their advertisements go unnoticed by us in the community who feel it is 'asking for trouble' when such messages are allowed to stay as part of their marketing efforts.
I will just add that I don't think they'll have much luck in finding these sort of ads. I used to see them myself about 2 years ago, but did a quick search now and have previously researched this in last 6 months, and have seen that type of advertisement seemingly disappear.
I see this as anti-vaping thinking they can win on how they feel the narrative is currently framed among the industry, and while they may score some points, I believe they are opening a can of worms that will not go exactly as planned. Especially if they have to answer to a whole bunch of pro-vapers that will keep their investigation in check based on their stated aims.
If you think about it, they'll draw (more) attention to the good / legitimate forms of marketing that are around. I almost hesitate to say this out loud, but feel it needs to be said as it is how I see this going. They will be promoting vaping while thinking they are doing he exact opposite.
From the press release:
And I'm inclined to say, yes, it would be beneficial. Bring it on!
We ought to welcome investigation into marketing of eCigs. If that investigation is biased, and that bias is obvious in what's reported, that'll come out. I think you can count on it.
Yet, if there are people selling eCigs and saying things like, "adds years to your life" or "Quit Smoking with Electronic Cigarettes" then I would like to see that addressed. And if vaping industry can't bring themselves to enacting that sort of change, then well, here we are.
I fully realize (I truly do) that there is a larger propaganda being waged and the linked piece contains a whole bunch of malarkey, but stuff that we've all addressed over and over and that is just a tough sell nowadays, i.e. FDA claim that says "consumers of e-cigarette products currently have no way of knowing: whether e-cigarettes are safe for their intended use." We've shot that down. People (who are anti-vapers) may claim that all they desire, but we have that covered, and I fully believe pro-vapers outnumber anti-vapers. So, this sort of malarkey is easy to overcome in the battle for truth.
But if there are eCig vendors still around who are bucking the ruling of Soterra judgment and claiming some sort of therapeutic benefit from vaping, I'd like to see that reigned in. We vapers can make those claims, all we want, and that knowledge will be shared with those who need that message. A vendor sharing that message sets up the industry with claims that certain vendors, I'm thinking, rather not have to speak to, nor defend.
So sure, let's keep fighting the larger fight against politicians who proudly wear the uniform of anti-vaper and anti-nicotine zealot, but let's not allow vendors who dare to make troublesome claims in their advertisements go unnoticed by us in the community who feel it is 'asking for trouble' when such messages are allowed to stay as part of their marketing efforts.
I will just add that I don't think they'll have much luck in finding these sort of ads. I used to see them myself about 2 years ago, but did a quick search now and have previously researched this in last 6 months, and have seen that type of advertisement seemingly disappear.
I see this as anti-vaping thinking they can win on how they feel the narrative is currently framed among the industry, and while they may score some points, I believe they are opening a can of worms that will not go exactly as planned. Especially if they have to answer to a whole bunch of pro-vapers that will keep their investigation in check based on their stated aims.
If you think about it, they'll draw (more) attention to the good / legitimate forms of marketing that are around. I almost hesitate to say this out loud, but feel it needs to be said as it is how I see this going. They will be promoting vaping while thinking they are doing he exact opposite.
From the press release:
And I'm inclined to say, yes, it would be beneficial. Bring it on!
Whenever I see this woman's name associated with ANYTHING - I know lies and misinformation will follow. She has only one goal .... "TO GET HER WAY"! The idiots in California repeatedly elect these career political prostitutes and then sit silently and allow them to take one right at a time. BOXER LIES ..... EVERY time she opens her yap. She will do anything to reach a goal.
BOXER, FEINSTEIN, PELOSI ........ three reasons why Americans are slowly losing their rights and the ability to make decisions on their own! They always feel they know "better"! They do not "represent" they "oppress"!
Senile Old Man Don
The states are desperate for money. They're in poverty, thanks to the smoking bans, carbon tax, etc.. the money that used to go to the states now goes to the UN and the states have to do what the UN wants or the UN won't grant them money.
That pretty much holds true for ALL Democrats. They're the party which is always looking for more ways to make government larger and more overbearing and invasive/intrusive on our daily lives. Tax, regulate and control is their holy trinity. Nanny state laws under the guise of "for our own good" is their motto.
And the average brain dead "sheeple" keep believing their bleeding heart lies and voting for them thinking its the right thing for us common folks.
Don't even try to tell me Republicans or conservatives are the same thing. Show me one R that would go along with these nanny state leftist dems and I'll show you a rhino.
My thoughts exactly !
Keeping track of who and what party is standing in the way of e-cig freedom...so far its ALL democrats without exception.
We need an official List keeper watching the states, the legislators, which party votes which way on e cig legislation. Who proposed said legislation, where when why. I'm very sure it will become quite clear its the leftie liberal Dems who will try to take away our e-cig freedom..
Go take a look at the Oklahoma state ban (by executive order) and let me know which party that governor is.
I really don't like when political party stuff gets mentioned in threads, and here I am doing it, but just wanting to set the record straight. I will note that I've never voted Democrat in my entire life, FWIW.
I'm not aware of any such executive order or state ban? can you give me some linkage?
ok but yes "without exception" is a bit of a stretch..I should have said 99% of the legislation using language that would actually "ban" e cigs from use or the market, is language you'll see coming from the usual suspects...nanny state type libs/dems. I suggest we start compiling a list and see how it tallys as time passes. So far its overwhealmingly left sided against e cigs.
I do see one defeated bill in ok you may be talking about though sb802, and yeah that one was introduced by a 'rhino' Rob Johnson (a rhino) who looked like hes working for rj reynolds tobacco co. rather than oklahomans. That bill was defeated earlier this year.
We leftists and Obama supporters are aware that most of the idiot nannies are coming from our side of the aisle. The right is contributing pinch-faced puritans and corporate zombies here and there (see Oklahoma and Utah.) We are also aware that being pro-business and the hell with the people is often an attitude on the other side of the aisle. If Robert Johnson Woods Foundation(1) were not so good at brainwashing shiny-faced kids and sending them to City Councils (chaperoned by the American Lung Association!) to sway them into taking these actions For the Childrennnnn I don't think the ANTZ would have anywhere near the momentum they have.
Nevertheless, I have become close-enough to a single-issue voter to change to the Modern Whig Party over this.
But Obama-bashing and leftist-bashing does nothing but split US VAPERS and nothing would make Johnson & Johnson and other BP and BT firms happier. And no, I don't think Dems are doing this to support Obama, I think they are doing it because he doesn't have time between budget battles to pay attention to what Kathleen the Golden Child is up to.
(1) The Robert Woods Johnson foundation lobbies for health initiatives to punish anybody who doesn't use enough of Johnson & Johnson's Nicorette and Splenda. They founded the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids and I wonder how much of a hand they had in the current fads of demonizing overweight people in addition to "tobacco users."
I've been observing the corrupted rise of the "All mighty Dollar" and the fall of Government for many years now. Politics and common sense have been in decline for many years and the slope of decline seems to be accelerating. I console myself that I probably won't live to see the bottom, but weep for my children as I suspect they will.
The only thing I know for sure is that ALL governments that attempted to be all powerful and all controlling have eventually fallen under their own weight. It all just makes me sad to think about.
The only thing I know for sure is that ALL governments that attempted to be all powerful and all controlling have eventually fallen under their own weight. It all just makes me sad to think about.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
