UserWiki:Richardpruen: Difference between revisions

Line 50:

[[File:NSW Consult 30 sept.pdf|thumb|alt=Vaping is a direct substitute for smoking that is able to compete with cigarettes on the open market, it is unbeatable on cost compared to subsidised NRT, and far more effective, the UK NHS find 2/3 (66%) effective with support. With regulated vaping in UK youth: 0.5% use > once weekly and are never smokers (see ASHuk graph attached). Driving the product to illicit markets and criminal gangs seems to have resulted in greater access for Australian youth. While vaping is not entirely risk-free, it is known now that it poses a fraction of the risk of smoking (please see the attached risk map). Waiting for a perfect solution that may never be found is counterproductive, the reduction in risk is known to be large that much is proven (the unknown part is, is it 90% reduction in risk or 99%, to be sure will take time) While youth should not vape or smoke, some will end up doing both. If there is no safer alternative available they will all be smoking. It is also worth remembering dependence on nicotine while not desirable can be reversed, death is final, and it is smoking that kills. Like it or not vaping has a built-in off-ramp. Use an open-system vape, and use the liquid you need to prevent cravings. Then slowly reduce the nicotine strength at your own pace. On reaching zero nicotine, stop. This is also ample evidence it was developed by smokers, to help stop smoking, and then to stop vaping if that is desired. Would a tobacco company ensure a way out was built in? The population has resoundingly refused the prescription model, any of the many reasons pointed out repeatedly or all of them are to blame. They deserve a fair regulated market they can trust, if you cannot provide a better solution than criminal gangs, then that is a failure on your part. |NSW Vaping submission 30 september 2023]]

[[File:Letter Steve Barclay 19th oct.pdf|thumb|alt=Subject: ‘Ton of bricks’ regulation of vaping and flavours Dear Steve Barclay, I am a consumer advocate, with no ties to industry at present (for full details see my previous letter). I await your reply to my last letter on 6th July, with the requested information, including reasoning for not including representatives of consumers in the enquiry. I would also like to know if the MPs where briefed on vaping or the vaping industry, if so by whom? The point itself is brief, two short paragraphs. After your comments on regulations, I would like to draw your attention to the following peer reviewed paper https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/20/6936 this strongly suggests that young people are being diverted from smoking, vaping is at least 95% safer than them smoking, thus while not ideal vaping reduces harm. Dependence to nicotine is also not ideal, but only 0.5% youth regularly use vapes who did not first smoke. Meanwhile you risk stopping millions of adult smokers switching to vapes by eliminating flavours, these are an important thing for adults. Please read this from Clive Bates (ex ASH Director) https://clivebates.com/documents/FlavoursBriefingV1July2022.pdf. You should of course ban candyfloss and sweet flavoured alcohol, as such flavours are aimed only at children? One last point Vaping is already illegal for children, if the existing rules cannot be enforced, then further legislation will presumably not be enforced either, how would that help? Yours sincerely, Richard Pruen|Letter Steve Barclay 19th oct]]

Revision as of 15:35, 30 September 2023 (view source) Richardpruen (talk \| contribs) (Add NSW consultation submitted comment) ← Older edit		Revision as of 11:50, 19 October 2023 (view source) Richardpruen (talk \| contribs) (add letter to health sec Steve Barclay) Newer edit →
Line 50:		Line 50:

	[[File:NSW Consult 30 sept.pdf\|thumb\|alt=Vaping is a direct substitute for smoking that is able to compete with cigarettes on the open market, it is unbeatable on cost compared to subsidised NRT, and far more effective, the UK NHS find 2/3 (66%) effective with support. With regulated vaping in UK youth: 0.5% use > once weekly and are never smokers (see ASHuk graph attached). Driving the product to illicit markets and criminal gangs seems to have resulted in greater access for Australian youth. While vaping is not entirely risk-free, it is known now that it poses a fraction of the risk of smoking (please see the attached risk map). Waiting for a perfect solution that may never be found is counterproductive, the reduction in risk is known to be large that much is proven (the unknown part is, is it 90% reduction in risk or 99%, to be sure will take time) While youth should not vape or smoke, some will end up doing both. If there is no safer alternative available they will all be smoking. It is also worth remembering dependence on nicotine while not desirable can be reversed, death is final, and it is smoking that kills. Like it or not vaping has a built-in off-ramp. Use an open-system vape, and use the liquid you need to prevent cravings. Then slowly reduce the nicotine strength at your own pace. On reaching zero nicotine, stop. This is also ample evidence it was developed by smokers, to help stop smoking, and then to stop vaping if that is desired. Would a tobacco company ensure a way out was built in? The population has resoundingly refused the prescription model, any of the many reasons pointed out repeatedly or all of them are to blame. They deserve a fair regulated market they can trust, if you cannot provide a better solution than criminal gangs, then that is a failure on your part. \|NSW Vaping submission 30 september 2023]]		[[File:NSW Consult 30 sept.pdf\|thumb\|alt=Vaping is a direct substitute for smoking that is able to compete with cigarettes on the open market, it is unbeatable on cost compared to subsidised NRT, and far more effective, the UK NHS find 2/3 (66%) effective with support. With regulated vaping in UK youth: 0.5% use > once weekly and are never smokers (see ASHuk graph attached). Driving the product to illicit markets and criminal gangs seems to have resulted in greater access for Australian youth. While vaping is not entirely risk-free, it is known now that it poses a fraction of the risk of smoking (please see the attached risk map). Waiting for a perfect solution that may never be found is counterproductive, the reduction in risk is known to be large that much is proven (the unknown part is, is it 90% reduction in risk or 99%, to be sure will take time) While youth should not vape or smoke, some will end up doing both. If there is no safer alternative available they will all be smoking. It is also worth remembering dependence on nicotine while not desirable can be reversed, death is final, and it is smoking that kills. Like it or not vaping has a built-in off-ramp. Use an open-system vape, and use the liquid you need to prevent cravings. Then slowly reduce the nicotine strength at your own pace. On reaching zero nicotine, stop. This is also ample evidence it was developed by smokers, to help stop smoking, and then to stop vaping if that is desired. Would a tobacco company ensure a way out was built in? The population has resoundingly refused the prescription model, any of the many reasons pointed out repeatedly or all of them are to blame. They deserve a fair regulated market they can trust, if you cannot provide a better solution than criminal gangs, then that is a failure on your part. \|NSW Vaping submission 30 september 2023]]

			[[File:Letter Steve Barclay 19th oct.pdf\|thumb\|alt=Subject: ‘Ton of bricks’ regulation of vaping and flavours Dear Steve Barclay, I am a consumer advocate, with no ties to industry at present (for full details see my previous letter). I await your reply to my last letter on 6th July, with the requested information, including reasoning for not including representatives of consumers in the enquiry. I would also like to know if the MPs where briefed on vaping or the vaping industry, if so by whom? The point itself is brief, two short paragraphs. After your comments on regulations, I would like to draw your attention to the following peer reviewed paper https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/20/6936 this strongly suggests that young people are being diverted from smoking, vaping is at least 95% safer than them smoking, thus while not ideal vaping reduces harm. Dependence to nicotine is also not ideal, but only 0.5% youth regularly use vapes who did not first smoke. Meanwhile you risk stopping millions of adult smokers switching to vapes by eliminating flavours, these are an important thing for adults. Please read this from Clive Bates (ex ASH Director) https://clivebates.com/documents/FlavoursBriefingV1July2022.pdf. You should of course ban candyfloss and sweet flavoured alcohol, as such flavours are aimed only at children? One last point Vaping is already illegal for children, if the existing rules cannot be enforced, then further legislation will presumably not be enforced either, how would that help? Yours sincerely, Richard Pruen\|Letter Steve Barclay 19th oct]]

UserWiki:Richardpruen: Difference between revisions

Navigation menu

Search