FDA Facebook Post

Not really news but...
They posted this image, check the comments
Timeline Photos - U.S. Food and Drug Administration | Facebook

 

Perhaps it's the cynic in me but I wonder if any govt would actually want that many additional people living to a normal old age with all the costs involved in state funded health/geriatric care.

 

I did my good deed today. I can go back being an arse

 

I am fearless...Anyone knows how to edit a Facebook post ? ^^

 

I don't know about the geriatric care, but I know some areas of government would be hurting for money if they lost the tax dollars from smoking. The government has been a bit (very) helpful at times for cigarette companies because they don't want to lose the revenue.
This I think is a huge problem, one that vaping may cause some questions with in regards to taxing nicotine.

That being said the government is pushing anti-smoking, but are they advertising any help for quitting? They always say talk to your medical health care professional, which is going to be a pill because drug companies pay Dr.'s.

 

From info I gathered it seems the taxes on tobacco does not cover the medical needs in countries like France, I totally agree on the doctor thing, it's time governments rule in favor of vaping even if that means taxes on them.

 

The only logical, realistic outcome IMO is taxing juice at the same rate as cigarettes are.

 

But the logic behind a lot of cigarette tax in America is lung cancer. If they can't link vaping to lung cancer then at least it should be a lower tax like alcohol right?
The taxes in some places (London, Australia) are practically economically oppressive for smokers. If that happened to vaping it would be a shame as it should be a safer alternative the government should help push, not dissuade people from. Like the gum or the patches which are expensive but don't seem to be taxed.


I am not sure about the taxes covering healthcare, but I know just the corporate taxes coming from big tobacco is a sizable chunk. Although it's not far fetched that the taxes from cigarettes doesn't cover the medical needs, they usually count all kinds of cancer under smoking causes, if you didn't smoke then you got it from second hand etc., so I have no idea usually since they rarely have accurate numbers.

 

If we think about it, government has very few to nothing to win to promote e-cig. Simply because there is no lobby yet.

They spend millions of Euro or $ in advertising campaign against tobacco, thought out countless media, nicotine substitute etc... On the other hand, they won't support a solution that will cost nothing to them because it is self promoting

Who owns the media ? Who own the pharmaceutical biggest company ? Who own the main e-cig companies ?

When any government start a media campaign, there is a media company going "ka-ching" pretty fast. Add to that the shareholders manage to buy again most of the share to a low price and "double ka-ching". In exchange, they would support the government official.

When the government is helping smokers to quit with substitute, who manufacture the substitute ? Pharmaceutical companies. Who own them ? A web of smaller companies, often link to the government who invested in them (see what's happening for the vaccine in the US). Therefore, the more they sell the product, the more the government (or its officials) make "ka-ching".

Media and Pharmaceutic lobbying, to quote only them, have an strong influence on official's decision. THey are deeply connected through financial investment and political agreement.

The e-cig has no lobby, no connection, no influence. It's not harmful and the government has no reason to be afraid to lose anything from it. But he knows he has nothing to win either. So why promote it ?