Hosts of YouTube channels have had the "reply" facilities removed from comments on their channel. What to do? I hope Google will deal with this CHOP CHOP! It puts me off Google, which I have loved and promoted since they began, but Google+ is really a mess and now YouTube too. Come on - wake up Google - you cannot FORCE everyone to have a Google+ account. YouTube is a complete mess - I now have TWO Google+ accounts and my followers are on the one that is NOT linked to my YouTube vapingpoint page! How daft is that?
I am now on Google+ as vapingpointLiz with 300+ in my circles AND vapingpoint with 0 everything 0 posts, 0 followers - and a vapingpoint YouTube channel with 700+ followers with whom I can't communicate!
Am I mad? You bet!
Friday, 8 November 2013
Wednesday, 6 November 2013
Let me depress you today - battery safety video
I seem to be going through a really negative phase in my vaping career. I think my original ecstasy has been replaced by a fear that this delightful hobby of mine, that has given me such hours of pleasure, will be attacked from without. I feel vaping is being threatened by the accumulating anti tobacco efforts lining up ammunition against us. I have a negative presentiment of our future and I am watching carefully.
I have written regularly just lately of how, whether we like it or not, we are intertwined with smoking and smokers. The first blog I ever wrote about that idea worried me, in case I offended my vaping friends. But I have to get it out. I am not optimistic of our future. My blogs are not designed to pull you down and my intention is not to depress. My intention is to WARN. We can't sit back in our vaping heaven.
We need a battle plan - but what? What more than writing to our local MP's? Should we also request a review of the smoking bans? Vaping is being banned everywhere as it is perceived as normalising smoking. Perhaps smoking is what needs defending then? The Press don't help. Just like smokers are only represented negatively, we might not avoid that happening to us too. Explosions make good headlines and good excuses for banning electronic cigarettes. Cigarettes don't explode.
I read e cigarette explosion and watch videos like this I think "Oh no! More stuff they can hold against us!
So today I made a video on charging batteries safely. I hope I look cheerful. Please share your own safety tips in comments in the name of education so we can share them on. Thanks for reading my blog!
I have written regularly just lately of how, whether we like it or not, we are intertwined with smoking and smokers. The first blog I ever wrote about that idea worried me, in case I offended my vaping friends. But I have to get it out. I am not optimistic of our future. My blogs are not designed to pull you down and my intention is not to depress. My intention is to WARN. We can't sit back in our vaping heaven.
We need a battle plan - but what? What more than writing to our local MP's? Should we also request a review of the smoking bans? Vaping is being banned everywhere as it is perceived as normalising smoking. Perhaps smoking is what needs defending then? The Press don't help. Just like smokers are only represented negatively, we might not avoid that happening to us too. Explosions make good headlines and good excuses for banning electronic cigarettes. Cigarettes don't explode.
I read e cigarette explosion and watch videos like this I think "Oh no! More stuff they can hold against us!
So today I made a video on charging batteries safely. I hope I look cheerful. Please share your own safety tips in comments in the name of education so we can share them on. Thanks for reading my blog!
Tuesday, 5 November 2013
Invisible, discounted and politically disembowled.
I just read Rise of the fake brands and shortly after Cancer Council slams big tobacco on report -
Quote "THE Cancer Council has slammed a report backed by big tobacco showing that illegal trade in the addictive substance has increased since plain packaging laws were introduced. The KPMG report, commissioned by British American Tobacco Australia, Philip Morris International and Imperial Tobacco Australia, says tobacco smugglers are costing taxpayers more than $1 billion a year. It says the illegal tobacco market now comprises 13.3 per cent of total domestic tobacco consumption. Australia’s world-first plain packaging laws came into effect in December 2012, removing all logos, colour and design from cigarette packets. Cancer Council Australia says the report is part of big tobacco’s push to unwind those laws. “The tobacco industry would do anything to stop plain packaging, especially after recent Australian research showed the plain packs were a turn-off to smokers,” the council’s director of advocacy, Paul Grogan, says in a statement."
The study was funded by Big Tobacco and therefor CANNOT be true.
Yesterday I wrote a blog Smokers have the right to be heard as a spin off of of Simon Clarke's blog asking for our ideas on smoker's rights HERE.
Some responders felt Tobacco Companies should have done more to support smokers as their persecution has unfolded.
It seems to me that both smokers and tobacco companies have the right to be heard. But both have been so completely muzzled that anything they say is simply discounted as having no worth, no weight and no truth.
Vapers are sitting on the fence, dangling their toes on the side of anti-tobacco. We really need to wake up to the truth of their world drive to eradicate smoking in every way possible, by any means. If we are not aware of their nefariousness in doing so, we will be taken by surprise/are taken by surprise when vapers are simply considered smokers. In that capacity we will be invisible, discounted and politically disemboweled.
I'm not holding my breath that we will be considered any differently than smokers and vaping will become simply NRT.
Quote "THE Cancer Council has slammed a report backed by big tobacco showing that illegal trade in the addictive substance has increased since plain packaging laws were introduced. The KPMG report, commissioned by British American Tobacco Australia, Philip Morris International and Imperial Tobacco Australia, says tobacco smugglers are costing taxpayers more than $1 billion a year. It says the illegal tobacco market now comprises 13.3 per cent of total domestic tobacco consumption. Australia’s world-first plain packaging laws came into effect in December 2012, removing all logos, colour and design from cigarette packets. Cancer Council Australia says the report is part of big tobacco’s push to unwind those laws. “The tobacco industry would do anything to stop plain packaging, especially after recent Australian research showed the plain packs were a turn-off to smokers,” the council’s director of advocacy, Paul Grogan, says in a statement."
The study was funded by Big Tobacco and therefor CANNOT be true.
Yesterday I wrote a blog Smokers have the right to be heard as a spin off of of Simon Clarke's blog asking for our ideas on smoker's rights HERE.
Some responders felt Tobacco Companies should have done more to support smokers as their persecution has unfolded.
It seems to me that both smokers and tobacco companies have the right to be heard. But both have been so completely muzzled that anything they say is simply discounted as having no worth, no weight and no truth.
Vapers are sitting on the fence, dangling their toes on the side of anti-tobacco. We really need to wake up to the truth of their world drive to eradicate smoking in every way possible, by any means. If we are not aware of their nefariousness in doing so, we will be taken by surprise/are taken by surprise when vapers are simply considered smokers. In that capacity we will be invisible, discounted and politically disemboweled.
I'm not holding my breath that we will be considered any differently than smokers and vaping will become simply NRT.
Monday, 4 November 2013
Smokers have the right to be heard
Simon Clark is asking for our ideas HERE.
I am not a smoker, I'm a vaper. I'm a smoker at heart. But if ever we are disempowered as smokers have been, we will need the same rights,
This was my (edited) answer to "Do Smokers have Rights?"
I think smokers have as much right to smoke as Bell ringers have a right to ring bells, as Sportspeople have the right to play sport and, Bell ringers and Sportspeople are treated without judgement by the medical profession which they have paid for with their taxes, when they have been (self) injured. I broke a finger Bell ringing. The hospital classified it as a "sports injury" and gave me a surprising statistic of how many people they treat regularly for rope burns and broken digits, JUST from Bell ringing! All sports are expensive to our NHS yet personally inflicted. What society views as a "good" lifestyle costs in hip replacements, knee replacements, and foot trouble in later life. Dancers and musicians suffer equally. Many end up with serious health problems from a self inflicted lifestyle. A good number die. Yet they have rights.
Quote (ASH) - "Prior to the implementation of the smokefree law, it was estimated that exposure to secondhand smoke in the workplace caused around 617 premature deaths in the UK each year.
How they worked out this figure must have been magical rather than scientific! For 617 (guesstimate?) deaths from SHS - itself debatable, a quarter of the entire British population have been excommunicated from society, even in places where their SHS can do no harm.
Smokers use a legal product to perform a legal lifestyle.
They do have rights.
They have the right to protest their excommunication from society that has been orchestrated by self righteous people who have used every means possible and millions of pounds to do it.
They have the right to explain that SHS was an excuse to turn society away from their habit.
They have the right to explain that they are NOT a dying breed (pun intended) but that cancer rates, asthma, allergies and other "smoking related" illnesses are increasing, not falling, despite their excommunication.
They have the right to explain that their habit and self harming has been over exaggerated by the self righteous and that medical porn displayed on their product packs are criminal nocebos performed against them.
The biggest right they have, is the right to free speech. Smokers have a right to be heard. They are never represented fairly in the media They are yelled down on TV, and like the inquisition, they are only allowed to speak when they recant.
Smokers have a right to be heard.
I am not a smoker, I'm a vaper. I'm a smoker at heart. But if ever we are disempowered as smokers have been, we will need the same rights,
This was my (edited) answer to "Do Smokers have Rights?"
I think smokers have as much right to smoke as Bell ringers have a right to ring bells, as Sportspeople have the right to play sport and, Bell ringers and Sportspeople are treated without judgement by the medical profession which they have paid for with their taxes, when they have been (self) injured. I broke a finger Bell ringing. The hospital classified it as a "sports injury" and gave me a surprising statistic of how many people they treat regularly for rope burns and broken digits, JUST from Bell ringing! All sports are expensive to our NHS yet personally inflicted. What society views as a "good" lifestyle costs in hip replacements, knee replacements, and foot trouble in later life. Dancers and musicians suffer equally. Many end up with serious health problems from a self inflicted lifestyle. A good number die. Yet they have rights.
Quote (ASH) - "Prior to the implementation of the smokefree law, it was estimated that exposure to secondhand smoke in the workplace caused around 617 premature deaths in the UK each year.
How they worked out this figure must have been magical rather than scientific! For 617 (guesstimate?) deaths from SHS - itself debatable, a quarter of the entire British population have been excommunicated from society, even in places where their SHS can do no harm.
Smokers use a legal product to perform a legal lifestyle.
They do have rights.
They have the right to protest their excommunication from society that has been orchestrated by self righteous people who have used every means possible and millions of pounds to do it.
They have the right to explain that SHS was an excuse to turn society away from their habit.
They have the right to explain that they are NOT a dying breed (pun intended) but that cancer rates, asthma, allergies and other "smoking related" illnesses are increasing, not falling, despite their excommunication.
They have the right to explain that their habit and self harming has been over exaggerated by the self righteous and that medical porn displayed on their product packs are criminal nocebos performed against them.
The biggest right they have, is the right to free speech. Smokers have a right to be heard. They are never represented fairly in the media They are yelled down on TV, and like the inquisition, they are only allowed to speak when they recant.
Smokers have a right to be heard.
Sunday, 3 November 2013
Smokers' rights and tobacco control on BBC Breakfast - oh yes? - well no actually - smokers got muzzled again - vapers beware
Having been pre-warned by this blog from Christopher Snowdon,
I watched.
All I saw, was some shrieking blonde yelling everyone down with all the old anti smoking drivel we hear over and over again. There was hardly a moment for proper discussion about anything sensible. No time for smokers allowed. The shrieking blonde turns out to be Andrea Crossfield Director of Tobacco Free Futures. I live in the Northwest and I've never heard of her! The interviewer should have put her in place - but of course he didn't.
To me she's one to avoid. I'm sure she'd have loads to say about elecronic cigarettes and nothing good about them either. God help us. We'd have to remember to shout louder, be ruder and more overwhelming than her.
She has to keep her job going though - and she has SO MUCH to do.
As usual smokers got well muzzled! It's not inconceivable that some day, it will happen to us too.
As usual smokers got well muzzled! It's not inconceivable that some day, it will happen to us too.
Saturday, 2 November 2013
The brilliance of science - ah yes - brilliant. “Certainly not” to “Absolutely yes”
I just read this and I wondered to what purpose this study is in anyway useful. Most of the authors have doctorates.
The Predictive Value of Smoking Expectancy and the Heritability of its Accuracy
“Do you think you’ll smoke in a year’s time?”, with answer categories ranging from “Certainly not” to “Absolutely yes” on a 5-point scale. To determine the predictive value of smoking expectancy, analyses were performed in smokers, former smokers, and never-smokers separately. Data of 2,987 adolescents and 4,911 adult twins were analyzed to estimate heritability. A dichotomous variable reflected the ability to predict future smoking status (“correct”/“incorrect”).
Results: Smoking expectancy significantly predicted future smoking status in former smokers and never-smokers.
But smokers are not mentioned? It continues puzzlingly -
"The ability to accurately
predict future smoking status was explained by
additive genetic factors for 59% in adolescents and 27% in adults, with
the
remainder being explained by unique
environmental factors.
Conclusions: A single question on smoking expectancy helps predict future smoking status. Variation in how well subjects predict their future smoking behaviour is influenced by genetic factors, especially during adolescence.
Well, BIG DEAL! I wonder how much this study cost - and what WORTH does it have? Or am I missing the point of it?
If asked “Do you think you’ll
vape in a year’s time?”, with answer categories ranging
from “Certainly not” to “Absolutely yes”, I would answer “Absolutely yes” which would pretty accurately predict my future vaping status - how clever to actually work that out scientifically! But that is NOT what they were working out - they were working out smoking future status in former smokers and never-smokers. And especially adolescents - smoking behaviour is influenced by genetic factors, especially during adolescence. What "genetic factors" might those be? It doesn't say. And Im not subscribing to find out!
Don't you think science is amazing? Answer - “Certainly not” to “Absolutely yes”. What do you think?
Friday, 1 November 2013
Disgusting blackmail - shame on you!
I point out once again, that I am of the generation that smoked everywhere. I grew up in a repressive home where smoking drinking and, ah, sex were considered undesirable - for us it came plain packaged and it was emphasised that smoking, drinking or sex was especially not something that "cultured" folk like us did. So the first thing I did when I left home was to drink, smoke and have sex. So much for plain packaging!
My sister and I turned out to be totally dedicated smokers - yet not a soul anywhere in our family did it. We did not learn it from our family. The fact that I am a smoker that vapes is quite accidental. I am still a smoker - an angry smoker who has watched a travesty occur.
My children were brought up in a smoking house. And as I have told you before, I woke myself up for the night feeds by having a cigarette. Our house was full of smoke and mostly happiness. We had lots of parties through which everyone smoked and the kids would hang through the banisters watching the grown ups smoking drinking and dancing. Grown ups didn't "hide" - except if they were having sex.
Our children are grown up. They are full of gratitude at what a wonderful, rich and loving childhood they had, what fun it was and how we trust/trusted each other. Only one of our children smokes and he is eaten up with guilt about it. The guilt will make him sicker than the smoking. His partner is an anti.
None of our children died of cot death - and no one I know's children did. None of our children - we have five - have allergies, asthma, dull brains or any other crap you supposedly get from second hand smoke. And our friends children are pretty much the same - though I have lost contact with some.
It is MY generation that houses the denialists, and we do fight the antis, because we lived, loved and grew children while smoking. We don't believe what we hear because it is not in our experience.
I am certainly pretty sure that my father-in-law died of lung cancer because he smoked xtra strong plain cigarettes at 50 a day from long before the second world war, drank like a fish and lived in pubs rather than his home. His exercise was walking to the pub and then weaving home nightly. His inability to connect with life was a spin-off from his war time experiences. Even so, he never went to hospital except for the last week (aged 75) which he spent eating custard and jelly and flirting with the nurses. And then he died.
So, for me, this whole anti-smoking malarkey is a grand illusion and it's the younger generations that have been brainwashed to believe what is said about smoking and smokers. Tonight I just read Promises Promises and it blew the top of my head off! What total offensive stuff is this -
My sister and I turned out to be totally dedicated smokers - yet not a soul anywhere in our family did it. We did not learn it from our family. The fact that I am a smoker that vapes is quite accidental. I am still a smoker - an angry smoker who has watched a travesty occur.
My children were brought up in a smoking house. And as I have told you before, I woke myself up for the night feeds by having a cigarette. Our house was full of smoke and mostly happiness. We had lots of parties through which everyone smoked and the kids would hang through the banisters watching the grown ups smoking drinking and dancing. Grown ups didn't "hide" - except if they were having sex.
Our children are grown up. They are full of gratitude at what a wonderful, rich and loving childhood they had, what fun it was and how we trust/trusted each other. Only one of our children smokes and he is eaten up with guilt about it. The guilt will make him sicker than the smoking. His partner is an anti.
None of our children died of cot death - and no one I know's children did. None of our children - we have five - have allergies, asthma, dull brains or any other crap you supposedly get from second hand smoke. And our friends children are pretty much the same - though I have lost contact with some.
It is MY generation that houses the denialists, and we do fight the antis, because we lived, loved and grew children while smoking. We don't believe what we hear because it is not in our experience.
I am certainly pretty sure that my father-in-law died of lung cancer because he smoked xtra strong plain cigarettes at 50 a day from long before the second world war, drank like a fish and lived in pubs rather than his home. His exercise was walking to the pub and then weaving home nightly. His inability to connect with life was a spin-off from his war time experiences. Even so, he never went to hospital except for the last week (aged 75) which he spent eating custard and jelly and flirting with the nurses. And then he died.
So, for me, this whole anti-smoking malarkey is a grand illusion and it's the younger generations that have been brainwashed to believe what is said about smoking and smokers. Tonight I just read Promises Promises and it blew the top of my head off! What total offensive stuff is this -
"The Tayside Smoke Free Homes scheme encourages people to sign up to either a GOLD or SILVER promise to help keep their home smoke free.
The GOLD promise means you agree to no smoking in the house, while signing up to the SILVER status promises that smoking will be confined to one room in the house and never in front of children."And I ask "Why, bloody hell why? How dare you intrude into people's homes like that?" Of course it's the younger generation that would sign up for a Gold or Silver Certificate. And they are the ones that are needing homes. So it's not even an intrusion, it's BLACKMAIL! I would tell them to get stuffed. They are disgusting. But I already have my house and anyone can smoke in it. I would be ashamed of my hospitality to ask my guests to smoke outside.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)