E-cigarettes could be prescribed by the NHS to help smokers quit

[xs2man]

I think it is a bit crazy but if it saves money in the long run I am up for it.

I still think it is a shame more isn't done on the preventative front. I want to wake up one day and read an article on free NHS gym chains!

It wont save money, it will cost money as smoker fund the country to a massive degree (as mentioned later, something like £10bn per year more in the coffers because of smoking. And that doesn't include reduced pension payments because of smokers dying earlier).

I never said they were bad, i was just saying switching to e-cigs isn't solving the addiction. Of course i do agree that some don't have the willpower and that they aren't actually smoking fags any more which i guess is still a step in the right direction.

Nicotine isn't a dangerous drug. It is widely regarded as being no more harmful than caffeine. So changing the delivery method from burning tobacco to vapourising the liquid makes for massive improvements in the health aspect.

Many people are addicted to caffeine. Are you suggesting that this is also an addiction that needs cut out? The difference is that the traditional method of consuming caffeine isn't hazardous to health, unlike the traditional method for nicotine consumption. The change of consumption method means they are both around as hazardous as each other now (granted, more long term testing is required for ecigs, but it mostly looks promising so far at least).

I'm a few steps ahead, because I don't use caffeine, but I have nothing against people who do use it for whatever reason. The public's opinion towards the dangers of nicotine needs to be refreshed. Preferably through proper education. Once more people can understand that the nicotine itself isn't the problem, then the easier it will be to change the general attitude towards ecigs.

 

[CREATIVE!11]

No such thing as a "social smoker", no matter who you are you'll still be addicted to the nicotine. It only takes one fag to get addicted.

I've tried smoking multiple times in my life. (you know being drunk you think it's funny / cool.... cringe)

Never got addicted, this is why I was so confused at that statement.

I've smoked a whole pack of fags then never did it again.

 

[BuffetSlayer]

It is unlikely you will get addicted to cigarettes if ou have just one, or have one on the odd occasion. Many people have smoked a few cigarettes in their younger years and not become addicted.

However, you may have a higher propensity towards tobacco addiction and find yourself attracted to it more so than the next person and so be more inclined to try it more often which eventually will lead to addiction.

 

[arknor]

e-cigs are hardly quitting people are just switching one method of delivery for another.

It's like someone who uses chewing tobacco claiming they quit the habit because they started smoking cigarettes instead,


I don't believe they should be prescribed on the NHS any more than bagels should be to aid fat people in putting down the doughnuts

 

[BuffetSlayer]

e-cigs are hardly quitting people are just switching one method of delivery for another.

Indeed so the question then becomes why should e-cigs be treated any more harshly than any other of the addictions we have as a society if they are, for all intents and purposes, low risk?

The wider point here is addiction, not the form it takes and those with addictive personalities can be addicted to a whole plethora of things, not simply chemicals.

Why should sucking on an e-cig be any more or less socially acceptable than being addicted to anything else if the harm done is negligible?

 

[mrbios]

e-cigs are hardly quitting people are just switching one method of delivery for another.

It's like someone who uses chewing tobacco claiming they quit the habit because they started smoking cigarettes instead,


I don't believe they should be prescribed on the NHS any more than bagels should be to aid fat people in putting down the doughnuts

I disagree with you. To put it into your analogy it would be more like removing all the fat and sugar from a doughnut than exchanging it for a bagel. By removing the tar you're removing one of the most harmful elements smoking brings with it.

EDIT: Infact removing all of these: tar, and carbon monoxide, as well as formaldehyde, ammonia, hydrogen cyanide, arsenic, and DDT.

 

[StriderX]

Indeed so the question then becomes why should e-cigs be treated any more harshly than any other of the addictions we have as a society if they are, for all intents and purposes, low risk?

The wider point here is addiction, not the form it takes and those with addictive personalities can be addicted to a whole plethora of things, not simply chemicals.

Why should sucking on an e-cig be any more or less socially acceptable than being addicted to anything else if the harm done is negligible?

Well for the most part you aren't having a cloud of tar, carcinogens and thousands of other strange materials blown into your face with most reputable vapours...not something that can be said about cigarette smoke.

 

[Rilot]

To me, I see vaping as analogous with drinking coffee. Many people drink coffee because they like it but a lot also drink it because they are addicted to caffeine.
I now vape because I enjoy the array of flavours on offer (it actually stops me from munching on sweets too), but also because I am addicted to nicotine.

Now, is vaping as safe as drinking coffee? Maybe not but it's not that far off. The key distinction is that when I drink coffee I don't spray a haze of it over everyone in the vicinity. Vapers need to remember that people may not like the haze that they create (whether it's harmful or not) and to keep it away from those who don't want to be subjected to it. I don't vape in the office (even though I'm allowed to) for this precise reason.

 

[BuffetSlayer]

Well for the most part you aren't having a could have tar, carcinogens and thousands of other strange materials blown into your face with most reputable vapours...not something that can be said about cigarette smoke.

Yes, so why are e-cigs such a problem? They are treating them like real cigarettes now in most places.

The overarching problem is addiction and the normalisation of it which is something the government is always going to try and avoid, but particularly when it is costing them dearly in lack of tax revenue.

I personally couldn't give two hoots if someone is vaping because it is better than them smoking.

But they don't want people vaping instead of smoking, they want vaping to be a means to an end. That end being completely quitting an addiction and that is why e-cigs are such a conundrum for the government.

They are an addiction that, for the most part, does very little harm. It completely defies the standard conventions for addictive substances (IE drugs are bad, mmmkay?) and all of the negative connotations associated with them. At worst they could perhaps be termed as anti social, but so is loud music, so are out of control kids, poor hygiene etc etc.

In view of the mounting evidence in favour of e-cigs, I think the government is going to struggle with reconciling the benefits of e-cigs over tobacco with the fact it is still, for the most part, an addiction.

 

[Usher]

Perhaps they want the £8.20 prescription charge to boost NHS funds

 

[arknor]

I disagree with you. To put it into your analogy it would be more like removing all the fat and sugar from a doughnut than exchanging it for a bagel. By removing the tar you're removing one of the most harmful elements smoking brings with it.

EDIT: Infact removing all of these: tar, and carbon monoxide, as well as formaldehyde, ammonia, hydrogen cyanide, arsenic, and DDT.

so you think an addictive substance with no real benefits should be handed on the nhs?

who pays for all of this?!?!? why just this addiction? why not buy fizzy drinks for the kids or redbulls on the NHS, maybe alchohol as well.

lets face it this is ridiculous

no doubt the companies who makes the ecigs and some politicians friend whos been lobbying would net a fortune if the nhs has to burden such a ridiculous thing.


I'm a smoker, I did quite before for about 9 years, never smoked near my son whos starting secondary school soon, he has no idea I smoke anytime we ever go for days out I go without it's simple.

get some will power and man up if you don't want to smoke, don't expect the NHS to be prescribing your nicotine and keeping your addicted.

go buy some tomatoes or something they contain nicotine munch on one when you want a smoke

 

[BuffetSlayer]

lets face it this is ridiculous

So ask yourself why they are doing it?

Bottom line will be revenue somewhere along the line. Follow the money and you will almost always find your answers

I envisage this being the first step towards heavy regulation that means that central government can set the price on these things and reap the tax benefits.

I might be barking up the wrong tree, but like you say, it is a completely bonkers move unless they have an ulterior motive.

 

[Rilot]

Regulation is coming. Article 20 of the Tobacco Products Directive lays out a number of new regulations that EU member states must write in to law next year.

Vaping in it's current form will be dead and the market will be owned by the companies that can afford to put their products through the battery of tests required by the directive. This will leave it entirely to big tobacco and big pharma.

 

[BuffetSlayer]

Regulation is coming. Article 20 of the Tobacco Products Directive lays out a number of new regulations that EU member states must write in to law next year.

Vaping in it's current form will be dead and the market will be owned by the companies that can afford to put their products through the battery of tests required by the directive. This will leave it entirely to big tobacco and big pharma.

Bingo!

 

[dowie]

Regulation is coming. Article 20 of the Tobacco Products Directive lays out a number of new regulations that EU member states must write in to law next year.

Vaping in it's current form will be dead and the market will be owned by the companies that can afford to put their products through the battery of tests required by the directive. This will leave it entirely to big tobacco and big pharma.

if the various e-cig companies, that have already had a bit of a head start, haven't established themselves to the point where they can put their products through regulatory tests then they're doing something wrong...

I'm sure some of them will be able to fulfill the requirements

 

[Sliver]

Regulation is coming. Article 20 of the Tobacco Products Directive lays out a number of new regulations that EU member states must write in to law next year.

Vaping in it's current form will be dead and the market will be owned by the companies that can afford to put their products through the battery of tests required by the directive. This will leave it entirely to big tobacco and big pharma.

Yeah right. I'll believe that when I see it. Taxation is the only thing coming.

 

[darkgen]

Regulation is coming. Article 20 of the Tobacco Products Directive lays out a number of new regulations that EU member states must write in to law next year.

Vaping in it's current form will be dead and the market will be owned by the companies that can afford to put their products through the battery of tests required by the directive. This will leave it entirely to big tobacco and big pharma.

This may not necessarily suit the consumer but ultimately isn’t the aim to try and break the addiction? If this means prices for these materials go up then perhaps that’s an additional incentive which encourage vapers to quit also. One assumes the majority of vapers we’re ex-smokers so they’ve already started that road to quitting and perhaps this regulation and the costs which go with using regulated products will be enough of an impetus to break the addiction entirely.

 

[BuffetSlayer]

This may not necessarily suit the consumer but ultimately isn’t the aim to try and break the addiction? If this means prices for these materials go up then perhaps that’s an additional incentive which encourage vapers to quit also. One assumes the majority of vapers we’re ex-smokers so they’ve already started that road to quitting and perhaps this regulation and the costs which go with using regulated products will be enough of an impetus to break the addiction entirely.

But why does the addiction need to be broken if it is, for all intents and purposes, less harmful than binge drinking for example ?

 

[Allnamestaken]

This may not necessarily suit the consumer but ultimately isn’t the aim to try and break the addiction? If this means prices for these materials go up then perhaps that’s an additional incentive which encourage vapers to quit also. One assumes the majority of vapers we’re ex-smokers so they’ve already started that road to quitting and perhaps this regulation and the costs which go with using regulated products will be enough of an impetus to break the addiction entirely.

This sort of method kills the innovation in the community and keep in mind the vast majority of mods/atties in the industry are designed by the little man and the vast majority of wealth is give to these people not some big tobacco/pharma company who are putting out ineffective products that conform to government regulation but do not provide what the majority of the vaping community really wants.

There is already regulation in the industry products when broken down whether it be batteries,cases,juices are all individually regulated and conform to industry standards ( unless its ****** chinese made fakes but this is like any other industry ).

Vaping is a means to an end for smokers yes but a large chunk of the community enjoy vaping and use it as an alternative that is not going to guarentee them the myriad of dieseases that come from smoking... why regulate an industry like that into the ground because strict regulation will kill it completely, if the little guy is no longer able to compete with the big corporations who will be able to afford the battery of tests to get there products licenses you will see less effective products.

The reason there are so many good products out there is because companies are able to create and push new designs with ease and this leads to newer and more effective methods for delivery, mods people enjoy/flavours people like and with regulation smaller companies will not be able to create as freely as the cost will be extremely prohibitive due to required testing/licensing for each individual design/juice.

Sorry if my grammar offends lol rushing this post while at work.

 

[Richdog]

Regulation is coming. Article 20 of the Tobacco Products Directive lays out a number of new regulations that EU member states must write in to law next year.

Vaping in it's current form will be dead and the market will be owned by the companies that can afford to put their products through the battery of tests required by the directive. This will leave it entirely to big tobacco and big pharma.

Hmm, I seriously hope that not "only" major tobacco companies could afford to put through a tested and regulated product... I guess what the larger sized vaping and e-liquids company would need is the necessary investment to get their products tested and approved and then they are free to sell and make profit. It also won't change the many small yet popular companies like Kanger etc that will pump out the hardware to vape with.