Jump to content

E-cigarettes - Thailand ban is "appropriate" says leading doctor


webfact

Recommended Posts

I would let the many research papers released on the topic by doctors and scientists speak for themselves. With proper usage it's harmful effects is a fraction of the seemingly benign sesha that is still popular with smokers and non-smokers alike here.

 

  • The health industry does not want a healthier smoking alternative. The loss of revenue from smoking-related diseases, and smoking-cessation products that are the equivalent of the Atkins diet in the dieting world would be massive if everyone under the age of 40 switches, and it will just increase as the years go by.

 

  • The governments who oppose vaping have a problem with control. The liquid can be made with a few ingredients which are widely used for various applications, from cooking to smoke machines. The equipment are relatively small, and are easily smuggled in. And one can't tax what one can't control.

 

  • Tobacco companies may be the smallest factor in the drive to ban vaping in the countries that do. They have already developed disposable e-cigarettes that mimic their brand's taste, and as tobacco companies they have the ability to switch to manufacturing e-liquid with a brand that everyone knows. 

 

All excuses lead back to #1 and #2. The "impressionable kids" issue goes back to the lack of control. The "But it's not been proven" argument is an insult to the many doctors and scientists out there who did their research and published papers about the topic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 154
  • Created
  • Last Reply
12 hours ago, Guitar God said:

Leading doctor or misleading doctor?

 

It's not the nicotine in cigarettes that kills people, it's all the other crap. E-cigs remove all the carcinogenic junk. 

 

E-cigs have nicotine and a carrier. As long as the carrier is safe, they're a hell of a lot safer than burning tobacco leaves. 

 

If the Thailand Tobacco company started making e-juice there wouldn't be any government-controlled doctors telling smokers they're better off just smoking the cigarettes. 

 

This is as bizarre an America's AG Jeff Sessions saying that cannabis is more dangerous than heroin.  

 

George Orwell wasn't wrong, he was just off by a few years. 

To back you up:

 

http://www.ecigalternative.com/smoking-vs-vaping.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, giddyup said:

Bribes never go out of fashion, neither do paid for opinions.

 

Im sure he means well!! and maybe the this article is just zooming in on half an opinion. Maybe he also want's to ban smoking??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, davidstipek said:

What is the difference... If some members on Panel this Doctor Rebutts have a Vested Interest in E-cigarettes? Is it not also a proen fact that 100% of the Thai Cigarette Industry (Big Business, Thai Tobacco Industry)  has "Big" Ties to Thai Government, Hi-So's,? By making it offical to use in Thailand you would be taking money out of all these peoples pockets?

 

To say E-cigarettes are addictive? and bann them because of this fact? Cigarettes are also much more addictive but they are not Banned!!! Why? Oh because you would be taking an income source whether it be offically or by Bown Envelope method from Hi-So Thais!  This is a fact!!

 

You can Bet every dime in Government Couffer's that if just one Senator, Congressman/woman or even the P.M had any Vested interests here... The banning of this product would have never reached the table... This is also a Fact!

 

Another fact that even if it is ever proven Offically that E-cigarettes were in fact addictive or harmfull as their coharts Cigarettes are... It is a fact that there is no secondhand addiction!! This is a fact! Also I beg to differ again as any e-cigarette users getting Cancer from them? Flat... NO!!

Quote:  "Is it not also a proen fact that 100% of the Thai Cigarette Industry (Big Business, Thai Tobacco Industry)  has "Big" Ties to Thai Government, Hi-So's,?"

 

Prove it. Im interested.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, KKr said:

Absolutely.
E-cigarettes are not good for you,
but a hell of a lot better than cigarettes with tar content and other undesirable chemicals that are released, and thus inhaled, due to the high burning temperature..
 

95% Less harmful

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/457102/Ecigarettes_an_evidence_update_A_report_commissioned_by_Public_Health_England_FINAL.pdf

 

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0273230015301549

 

http://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/12/4/3439/htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

All the ban on e cigarettes is about, is protecting the monopoly that the Thai government owns on tobacco. Period. It is about nothing else. This doctor is either a charlatan, or a whore, who is being paid by a very nearly criminal enterprise. Serial killing is a crime, right? That is exactly what big tobacco does.

 

The government should be squirming in shame, for pushing the cancer sticks on it's own population. But, it has no shame, so why would that ever happen?

i'm nearly 70 and have smoked all my life, with no ill effects up to now. Smoking is detrimental to health and I wouldn't want my son to start but I have to my astonishment met many older non smokers and non drinkers who are 5 to 10 years younger than me who one can only describe as absolute wrecks, fat with man boobs, survivors of heart attacks or strokes, diabetes etc. I keep fit, weigh only 70 kg, walk/march 10 km a day, many older farang that I know have trouble bending down to put their shoes on let alone walk 2 km.I have lucky genes I suppose and no doubt smoking will get me in the end, but its always something that will get us. I don't drink alcohol these days, it just doesn't taste any more and I only eat frugally when I am hungry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'm nearly 70 and have smoked all my life, with no ill effects up to now. Smoking is detrimental to health and I wouldn't want my son to start but I have to my astonishment met many older non smokers and non drinkers who are 5 to 10 years younger than me who one can only describe as absolute wrecks, fat with man boobs, survivors of heart attacks or strokes, diabetes etc. I keep fit, weigh only 70 kg, walk/march 10 km a day, many older farang that I know have trouble bending down to put their shoes on let alone walk 2 km.I have lucky genes I suppose and no doubt smoking will get me in the end, but its always something that will get us. I don't drink alcohol these days, it just doesn't taste any more and I only eat frugally when I am hungry.

Ok so you told us how amazing you are but what has that to do with the millions dying globally due to the countless number of associated diseases and their complications due to smoking?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know why he is bothered about E- ciggy's apart from the tax money from the real thing of course, anybody living in Bangkok has already coked up their lungs from traffic exhaust and Chiang Mai is the the most air polluted city in Thailand. One government official in Chiang Mai put the high incidence of lung cancer in that city due to smoking, ( like nobody else in Thailand smokes)not air pollution of course otherwise they would have to do something about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, toughlove said:


Ok so you told us how amazing you are but what has that to do with the millions dying globally due to the countless number of associated diseases and their complications due to smoking?

E Cigs is not smoking is it, but in Thai Cigs are preferred says it all its a mad house and no more

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Banning E-cigs must have a sub-plot, self righteous nonsense or money.

I have tried them when staying in the UK, but I found the experience  unsatisfactory.

The UK has introduced regulations on them now which I think are appropriate as the strength or amount of nicotine was not limited before. The plus of E-cigs is the lack of tar and other noxious chemicals found in real cigarettes.

Also the fact is it has not been proved that the secondary inhalation of the vapour is dangerous.

 

Regulate and allow, and tax no doubt.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/01/2018 at 5:56 PM, soalbundy said:

i'm nearly 70 and have smoked all my life, with no ill effects up to now. Smoking is detrimental to health and I wouldn't want my son to start but I have to my astonishment met many older non smokers and non drinkers who are 5 to 10 years younger than me who one can only describe as absolute wrecks, fat with man boobs, survivors of heart attacks or strokes, diabetes etc. I keep fit, weigh only 70 kg, walk/march 10 km a day, many older farang that I know have trouble bending down to put their shoes on let alone walk 2 km.I have lucky genes I suppose and no doubt smoking will get me in the end, but its always something that will get us. I don't drink alcohol these days, it just doesn't taste any more and I only eat frugally when I am hungry.

There's no doubt in my mind that, while cigs are unhealthy, one can protect oneself by keeping a good weight and exercising.  Yes, something always gets you in the end, and even if you are up together dementia happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/10/2018 at 1:20 PM, toughlove said:


Ok so you told us how amazing you are but what has that to do with the millions dying globally due to the countless number of associated diseases and their complications due to smoking?

You have to realise that those 'millions dying globally' from smoking are just theoretical numbers that are spat out of a computer model. They bear little relationship to reality. The computer model, called SAMMEC was designed by the anti-smoking industry (for industry it is, with huge amounts of money involved), and then the model is fed with data by that same anti-smoking industry (do I detect the potential for bias there?). Garbage In, Garbage Out (GIGO) as they say in computing. It takes no account of age (if you were a smoker and died at 95, you are another number added to the 'smoking related deaths' toll), nor any confounding factors, i.e. if you have a family history of heart disease, and you are a smoker who dies of a heart attack, it's classed as 'smoking related', whether smoking had anything to do with it or not. The numbers of 'smoking related' deaths are massively (and I do mean massively) exaggerated, and deliberately so. They've widened the net by attributing just about every disease known to man to smoking. They haven't got to ingrown toenails yet, but I'm sure they're working on it. We are also told that countless thousands die from exposure to 'second-hand' smoke, but there aren't actually any dead bodies. Use the power of the internet and try to find one, just ONE case in the world where a death has been shown to have been caused by exposure to 'second-hand' smoke. You will find nothing. Nada. Because it hasn't actually killed anyone, except in the fevered imaginations of the rabid anti-smoking lobby.

 

The anti-smoking industry is built on lies and deceit, and nothing they say can be trusted. You just have to look at their press releases screaming about the dangers of smoking; full of weasel words like 'could', 'may', 'might', 'it is thought', 'research suggests', 'is associated with', 'studies indicate' etc etc. Even the phrase 'smoking related disease' is designed to be a catch-all to boost the numbers. Far more non-smokers die of 'smoking-related disease' than smokers do, but you'll never read about that. And all those press releases invariably conclude with 'more research is needed', which is anti-smokerspeak for 'we want more funding so we can keep this gravy train rolling'.

 

I have seen so many examples of egregious interpretation of research emanating from the anti-tobacco industry that I don't believe anything they say any more. They twist and distort everything to support their agenda. Their credo is 'the ends justify the means'. And the anti-alcohol lobby is currently adopting and adapting the anti-smoking template for its own use, so successful has the misleading propaganda been. Expect disgusting pictures of diseased livers etc to appear on your beer bottles in the not too distant future. Welcome to the new age of puritanism, where the self-appointed 'experts' decide what is good for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a mountain of quite convincing evidence.  Some tests carried out are irrefutable.

 

Quote

Second-hand tobacco smoke exposure has immediate and substantial effects on blood and blood vessels in a way that increases the risk of a heart attack, particularly in people already at risk. Exposure to tobacco smoke for 30 minutes significantly reduces coronary flow velocity reserve in healthy nonsmokers. Second-hand smoke is also associated with impaired vasodilation among adult nonsmokers.[115] Second-hand smoke exposure also affects platelet function, vascular endothelium, and myocardial exercise tolerance at levels commonly found in the workplace.[116]

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_smoking#Risk_level

 

This is just one reference but there are a million more.  It can't all be hogwash.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, HHTel said:

There is a mountain of quite convincing evidence.  Some tests carried out are irrefutable.

 

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_smoking#Risk_level

 

This is just one reference but there are a million more.  It can't all be hogwash.

You see this is a classic example of how they work. They tell you that exposure to SHS "... has immediate and substantial effects on blood and blood vessels in a way that increases the risk of a heart attack, particularly in people already at risk ". Which is probably true. However, what they don't mention is that eating a meal has exactly the same effect on your heart and vascular system. It's called 'lying by omission', and they are experts at that. Another one of their favourites is telling you about all the 'toxic chemicals' in cigarette smoke, for instance arsenic. We all know that arsenic is a deadly poison, right? And it's in cigarette smoke! Oh my God! Deadly!

 

What they omit to say is that a glass of drinking water contains eight times more arsenic than the smoke from a carton of cigarettes, and that our bodies need minute amounts of arsenic. They completely ignore the first rule of toxicology, which is "The dose makes the poison". And they do so deliberately. And all those other 'toxic chemicals' which they will tell you are used in battery acid, embalming etc etc are present in such small quantities that many of them are merely theorised, because they can't be measured. And the ones that can be measured are measured in nanograms, picograms or femtograms per cubic metre of air, and a nanogram, which is the largest of those measurements, is one billionth of a gram. (There are 1000 picograms to 1 nanogram and 1000 femtograms to 1 picogram). Which gives you some idea of the 'dangers' of tobacco smoke.

 

I've posted this link here before, but it's a good one, so is worth posting again. It is an article written to demonstrate how easy it is to twist facts to make something harmless appear lethal by using the 'science' so beloved of 'experts'.

 

http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html

 

It is a great illustration of how Tobacco Control operate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/9/2018 at 12:41 PM, ezflip said:

Obviously sponsored by Thailand Tobacco Company.

Do you know who own the biggest share in the Thailand tobacco company? Just make a research and you all will get the answer, that’s the reason and making tons of tons money!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 11 months later...
On 1/12/2018 at 10:33 PM, mommysboy said:

I have just accepted I can't vape and likely never will in Thailand.  It's complete madness but there you go.

There's no need to accept that at all, there's an online store in Thailand where you can buy all the associated devices and liquids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/13/2018 at 4:51 PM, nisakiman said:

You see this is a classic example of how they work. They tell you that exposure to SHS "... has immediate and substantial effects on blood and blood vessels in a way that increases the risk of a heart attack, particularly in people already at risk ". Which is probably true. However, what they don't mention is that eating a meal has exactly the same effect on your heart and vascular system.

Sometimes I run up the stairs in the house, occasionally both floors one after the other. I'm sure that changes my blood pressure and heart rate as well and a lot more than an E-Cig but I don't stop exercising or move to a single storey house due to this.

 

The sad thing is people tend to believe everything these idiot Doctors tell them.

 

I was once sitting in a bar listening to some guy telling me how bad cigarettes are and explaining how they killed his wife. She had smoked about ten a day for a short amount of time (months) decades before and he 100% believed that it was those cigarettes from half a lifetime previously that killed her because they told him so.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/12/2018 at 10:33 PM, mommysboy said:

I have just accepted I can't vape and likely never will in Thailand.  It's complete madness but there you go.

It's as illegal as corruption and prostitution or driving without a helmet...

 

You can buy them everywhere at night anyway...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

I'm not a smoker but I totally agree that Thailand's ban on E-cigs makes no sense from a health perspective.  

 

Dr Wanchai Suphajaturat's remarks are disingenuous and highly suspect considering that the government does nothing to curtail conventional cigarette sales.  They are openly sold everywhere and taxed at such a low rate that they are incredibly cheap which just encourages their use.

 

It doesn't take a genius to realize that the only motive behind the ban is to protect the the government's taxed income from cigarette sales, not the health of the people.  And if I am not mistaken, the government owns the plantations that produce tobacco!

 

What a bunch of BS!  Now if they really had health concerns they would ban ALL  products containing nicotine, not just e-cigarettes which are clearly less dangerous to health than conventional products since they are the ones that contain tars and addictive additives which are the primary carcinogens that end up killing most smokers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please remember the following statement:

 

Dr Wanchai Suphajaturat, a member of an anti-smoking panel, told Thai Rath in a feature about e-cigarettes that in his opinion the Thai government's measures were appropriate.

 

No studies show or mentioned just one man's opinion. In today's World, we must deal with facts and proofs not speculation by uninformed mouthpieces for the tobacco lobby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OP is old/bumped. But it still pisses me off when I see it. 

 

It really is a childish attempt at fear mongering, and deflecting from the actual point using a straw man argument.  They trot out a "Doctor", which the average Thai won't have the temerity to challenge his authority or question his motivation(s).

 

The point isn't whether vaping itself is "safe".  Rather, that it's not as harmful as smoking cigarettes; commercial ones in particular.  They skip right over that elephant in the room intentionally, ignoring 10 years of study confirming the position that vaping is, in fact, less harmful than smoking commercial, tobacco cigarettes.  Have to ask why they would do that.

 

More time will obviously result in more data.  At the moment though, apart from gear malfunctions, including user-error, not aware of anyone who's died as a result of vaping. 

 

And no, it's not the end-all-be-all solution to cigarette smoking.  It's an alternative, and one where the user can select the amount of nicotine, ranging from high % all the way down to Zero % -  where you just like vaping, and the flavors, without the Nicotine.   Does the commercial, state backed cigarette monopoly here offer that?  No. 

 

As far as using vape to quit tobacco cigarettes, there are miles of anecdotal evidence from thousands of people across the world, me included.   The OP meekly offers weak advice that Thais should call the government's 1600 "help line".   Can anyone direct me to blogs/websites with success stories about tapering off/quitting cigarettes using the 1600 method?

 

<Insert the sound of crickets here>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, moonseeker said:

Ban it all. Disgusting habit. If at least the ones who do smoke would follow basic courtesy towards others. How can smelling like a bloody ashtray be a pleasure.....MS>

I happen to agree with you.  However, this is about e-cigs/vaping, not cigarettes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • Create New...