1. Thank you to all those who submitted to the Federal Inquiry into E-Cigarettes for making your story count in the fight to legalise nicotine in Australia. Submissions may be viewed HERE.
    Dismiss Notice

Choice article on vaping

Discussion in 'Research, Health and Legal' started by Gabby, Oct 4, 2017.

  1. Gabby

    Gabby Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2016
    Location:
    Adelaide
    Ran into the following in September Choice, but I think it's been around longer on their website. I've only been skimming the issues posted here, but this appears to me to be a bit suss. Quote:

    Big tobacco company Philip Morris Australia is funding a covert campaign intended to sway a parliamentary inquiry into the legalisation of e-cigarettes containing nicotine.

    The campaign comes after Philip Morris was ordered to pay as much as $50 million to cover the Australian government's legal costs as it failed in its case to kill off tobacco plain packaging laws.

    According to a Fairfax Media report, the cigarette giant is using a pro-smoking lobby group it funds, dubbed "I deserve to be heard", together with supporters of a vaping forum to create a skewed view of the number of people in support of legalising e-cigarettes that contain nicotine.

    Emails were sent out to supporters of the lobby group last month encouraging them to "make their voices heard" in a coordinated effort that would help Philip Morris enter a potentially billion-dollar market in Australia.

    An overwhelming number of the submissions – 107 out of the 108 made, at the time of writing – express support for e-cigarettes, although the majority of them have been written to a uniform template and offer a first-person account on how vaping helped them wean off smoking.

    Tobacco expert Simon Chapman, an emeritus professor at the University of Sydney, says the campaign was a tactic previously used by Philip Morris in a move to sway the debate surrounding plain packaging laws.

    "They've been actively recruiting people to put in submissions," he told Fairfax Media. "These are exactly the same tactics they used for plain packaging. They have dusted off the same software, the same template and just changed the content."

    Debate is ongoing when it comes to the health benefits of e-cigarettes. Supporters argue they are a healthier alternative to combustible cigarettes as they contain fewer toxic chemicals; detractors claim they undermine efforts intended to highlight the dangers of smoking and could once again appeal to younger generations.

    Recent court action was taken against e-cigarette manufacturers selling their products online by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC). Testing undertaken by the competition watchdog found they contained carcinogens linked to the growth of cancer, which conflicts with advertising claiming the e-cigarettes being sold are safe.

    The parliamentary committee is examining the use e-cigarettes might have on tobacco smoking rates, and if the rapidly growing category should be regulated as consumer tobacco or a medicinal product.

    Correction, 18 Sept: An earlier version of this article did not clarify which type of e-cigarette was being discussed. It has been updated to reflect it was e-cigarettes containing nicotine.
     
    margyb likes this.
  2. DogMan

    DogMan Yes

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2015
    Location:
    S/E Melbourne
    Just a rehash of the Age article
     
    Gabby and Noe like this.
  3. Noe

    Noe Adorably quirky ... QUIRKY Noe! VCA Approved Post Whore

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2015
    Location:
    Noewhere
    What he said.

    The "update/correction" is about as interesting as discerning what type of mosquito you just sprayed with bug spray. The main thrust of that article was to make submissions that are "pro-ecig", to the Govt inquiry, look like they were solicited by Big Tobacco, when in fact the majority of submissions were from real vapers, that had nothing to do with PMI's email list.
    Of course Big Tobacco doesn't care if vaping is banned, they have legal products available on every street corner store, products that kill 2/3 of their users. So if they can convince their supporters to make submissions to Govt., to them it's a win, even if they lose the battle, they have just found another way to remind people in their database about their products.
    The fact that this action possibly hurt the pro-ecig argument, makes no difference to BT/PMI, to us it was a bit of a slap in the face though & IMO just proves what I have said all along, BT are not our allies in the battle to get vaping nicotine legalised in Australia.
     
    Gabby likes this.
  4. Gabby

    Gabby Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2016
    Location:
    Adelaide
    I presume from what I've read here that many of the submissions were from VCA members. Is this correct? If so, Choice needs to be told so. I'm a subscriber/member and am prepared to do just that.

    How many submissions do you think came from VCA?
     
    Nico and Laughter likes this.
  5. Noe

    Noe Adorably quirky ... QUIRKY Noe! VCA Approved Post Whore

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2015
    Location:
    Noewhere
    I think over 200 submissions from real vapers, with no PMI email ever seen by them but @margyb or possibly @Pippi or @Nico and Laughter would have a better idea of the actual number.
     
  6. Nico and Laughter

    Nico and Laughter Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2015
    Location:
    Wollongong the brave!
    I'm not sure what the breakdown is but the vast majority of submissions came from the social media campaign ran from here. The initial idea came from me, it was just a week after I became a board member of the nna. The majority of the work done on the social media campaign was done by members of the vca. We needed to mobilise vapers from a lot of Facebook pages and on Twitter who may not normally get involved in advocacy.
     
  7. Nico and Laughter

    Nico and Laughter Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2015
    Location:
    Wollongong the brave!
    As far as we can tell only one supporter received an email from pmi. You had to have signed up to their website which had been inactive for several years.
     
    Noe likes this.

Share This Page