60 replies to this topic

[alfsboy]

I see BAT are making E cigarettes  now at least at first glance .i was too lazy to read the whole article BUT .... .Could  E Cigarettes advertising end up on F1 or indeed any other racing car and would it be the cash cow  it once was .If I was a team boss i would certainly be looking at this even if if its in theory illegal.  Me ..........I will wait for the E joint I

[Andrew Hope]

E Cigarettes, Formula E.. marriage made in heaven.

[GhostR]

They're advertising these things on TV in UK. Suspect they'd be fine as sponsors as well. For a while anyway.

[stanga]

I don't see why it couldn't. Are E-cigarettes proven to be harmful? I don't see much evidence of them being particularly bad.

 

In the West, diabetes and obesity in general are probably of greater concern. Good job they banned fizzy drink manufacturers from F1!

[study]

They're advertising these things on TV in UK. Suspect they'd be fine as sponsors as well. For a while anyway.

 

What they are legal to advertise?

Edited by study, 20 February 2014 - 17:23.

[OO7]

I don't see why it couldn't. Are E-cigarettes proven to be harmful? I don't see much evidence of them being particularly bad.

 

In the West, diabetes and obesity in general are probably of greater concern. Good job they banned fizzy drink manufacturers from F1!

They haven't been proven to be harmful, however there is apparently a question mark over the oil based chemical ingredients and there have been calls for more rigorous testing to be done.  Even a leading Chinese manufacturer stated that more studies into the effects of such chemicals were necessary.

[Andrew Hope]

Ewww. I'll stick to the regular cigarettes, thanks.

[Ross Stonefeld]

I have a hunch E-Cig advertising will be clamped down on before the industry is big enough to do big time sponsorships. It's all relatively small stuff at the moment.

 

And since they have traditional forms of advertising available to them I'm not sure they'll rush into racing. They only went balls deep on racing the first time around because it was a clever way to get on TV.

[Dolph]

Does'nt Bourdais' 2014 Indycar feature e-cig advertising?

[midgrid]

Skycig has supported Tom Ingram in the British domestic scene for several years now, and will presumably follow him into the BTCC this season.

 

[smitten]

They are already in some motorsport

[Andrew Hope]

Does'nt Bourdais' 2014 Indycar feature e-cig advertising?

 

[OSX]

Ok or not ok, smoking unfortunately isn't that PR sexy anymore as it used to be even a mere 10 years or so ago. And the gadgety e-cigarettes completely lack the appeal and the glamour once associated with the real things.

 

[Ross Stonefeld]

They're actually pushing the glamour angle pretty hard. We haven't seen celebs endorsing cigarettes in a long long time.

[Rob G]

Does'nt Bourdais' 2014 Indycar feature e-cig advertising?

 

Yes, and Rahal's car had e-cig sponsorship in a few races last year too.

[KWSN - DSM]

In New Jersey 'smoking' (Vaping?) an E-cigarette is legally looked upon as regular smoking when anywhere state law regulate smoking. There is a constant debate about and over the E-cigarettes overhere, most of the arguments against being that it encourage children to take up real smoking. In addition mumblings and rumblings about possible health risks yet to be discovered.

 

Most likely the various better knowing politicians around the world will decide to regulate an over counter product as if it is the only scourge of modern life.

 

[KWSN - DSM]

About the glamour a lot of the advertising over here is targeted at the female buyer as a sophisticated, glamorous innocent vice.

 

 

 

[Fastcake]

Skycig has supported Tom Ingram in the British domestic scene for several years now, and will presumably follow him into the BTCC this season.

 

One day I'll start paying attention to the cars and I'll spot these things first...

 

Anyway, the amount that gets spent on domestic series sponsorships is minuscule, and the industry is too small to currently have Marlboro McLaren's back on the grid. It's hard to see past Ross' point, there's already calls to place restrictions on e-cigs, and that's probably going to happen. Unlike with the real fags, there is not going to be the decades long loophole that allows them to sponsor motorsport, they'll ban it all at once.

[427MkIV]

Maybe it's coincidence, but the "good ol' days" a lot of us remember were the same days of the John Player Special, the Marlboro McLaren, the Rothmans Porsche, the Skoal Bandit, the Winston Cup and the Camel GT.

[Andrew Hope]

In New Jersey 'smoking' (Vaping?) an E-cigarette is legally looked upon as regular smoking when anywhere state law regulate smoking. There is a constant debate about and over the E-cigarettes overhere, most of the arguments against being that it encourage children to take up real smoking. In addition mumblings and rumblings about possible health risks yet to be discovered.

 

Maybe those advocate groups would see more success if they encouraged parents to take up real parenting.

[KWSN - DSM]

Maybe those advocate groups would see more success if they encouraged parents to take up real parenting.

 

I am not sure what the percentage of smokers in the US is, I am sure which or what ever number the report it will be way lower than the actual percentage. Last one I heard was 25%, which I would venture to be daily smokers and there will be a lot more if you count 'party smokers', in the building I work there are 3 vapours, and 5 'non smokers' who when we have parties can be found pulsing away. I am all for banning indoor smoking, I am all for suggesting and promoting that kids do not pick it up.

 

However banning smoking in Central Park and on Broadway is really over the top.

 

Sure parents should try to get their kids not to smoke, but if the presumption is that 'kids'  - vaguely defined as until you leave college - are not partaking in boozing, smoke, drugs, pills and inhalers then the presumptors are living in a fairytale land.

 

We all know that smoking is not healthy, we all know that drugs hard and soft are not healthy, we all know that alcohol is not healthy. But we also all know that the 'kids' will smoke, drink and do drugs in high percentages, if the nanny-states want to control smoking then they should ban it outright and equaling vaping with smoking is placing us in an Orwellian society.

 

[Shiroo]

geez so e-ciggs are fine but ciggs are not?

Mustache, avators, and marlboro in soft pack all the way!

[HaydenFan]

geez so e-ciggs are fine but ciggs are not?

Mustache, avators, and marlboro in soft pack all the way!

 

Where you an adult film actor in the 70's? 

 

Seeing as they don't have the same mass marketing appeal (and profit margin) as the real cigs, even though the major manufacturers are quickly getting involved, I don't think we'll even see a massively budgeted advert campaign in motorsport to even a percentage of the scale seen previously. 

[Deluxx]

Personally I think it should be classified under the rule of other tobacco products, but that's just me.

 

They're just as bad for you.

[chdphd]

They are being banned from various forms of public transport, so negating one of their "benefits".

[KWSN - DSM]

It is water vapour with taste, how can that be worse than cars, and industry smog?

 

[Brother Fox]

As Australia is relentlessly striving for worlds best practice in stupidity, electronic cigarettes are illegal to sell here but legal to import from overseas

 

Their legality and acceptance as 'ok' is looking quite messy so I'll throw my hat in with the crowd that thinks they'll be clamped down on before they get a chance to get a foothold.

[Tsarwash]

Personally I think it should be classified under the rule of other tobacco products, but that's just me.

 

They're just as bad for you.

Have you got any evidence for that ? Don't you think that they might be a help to people wanting to give up smoking and therefore could actually become a big positive for the while ? Or are you just going to throw out ill-thought out opinions as fact ?

[KingTiger]

I don't think they'll ever rake in anywhere near the amount of cash of the real things and without that they just don't have the financial firepower to make the same impact. 

[Tapz63]

The real cigarette industry apparently doesn't like these e-cigs and are possibly behind most if not some of the regulations against them, paticularly in America.

[Brother Fox]

I find that attitude .... odd... to be polite.

[Tapz63]

Yes. Quite.

[KWSN - DSM]

The real cigarette industry apparently doesn't like these e-cigs and are possibly behind most if not some of the regulations against them, paticularly in America

 

I am not sure that is the whole story, I have no sources here but think there were articles just before christmas of how the big tobacco companies owned or part-owned some of the e-cigarette comtypanies and that being the reason for the pretty substantial upswing in e-cigarette advertising.

 

[KWSN - DSM]

I find that attitude .... odd... to be polite.

 

I see where he is coming from.

 

[HaydenFan]

Personally I think it should be classified under the rule of other tobacco products, but that's just me.

 

They're just as bad for you.

 

I hate that argument for it though. Are cigarettes bad? Of course. But they'll give you cancer over decades. You can go on a bender and drop dead from alcohol poisoning over a few hours. But you have Miller and Budweiser on the quarter panels of some of NASCAR's top drivers. Same with energy drinks. Especially as they are still gearing much of their advertisement towards the younger population. No one has really done any major studies to see what Red Bull, Rockstar, Monster drinks do to people. 

 

It's a loophole that has been found. Some states have little regulation on them. There is the non-harmful aspects of cigarettes repackaged with other potentially harmful chemicals. 

 

I think 4L3X had the same idea behind smoking I've discovered. We don't really care for them, but socially (at least for me in a college setting), it's a good way to meet people. And it's not like smokers are bad people. Just a bad habit.

Edited by HaydenFan, 21 February 2014 - 02:02.

[Deluxx]

Have you got any evidence for that ? Don't you think that they might be a help to people wanting to give up smoking and therefore could actually become a big positive for the while ? Or are you just going to throw out ill-thought out opinions as fact ?

 

Don't want to get into an argument about this really, haha.

 

Just look up Propylene glycol, and read this:

 

"Adverse responses to intravenous administration of drugs that use PG as an excipient have been seen in a number of people, particularly with large dosages thereof. Responses may include "hypotension, bradycardia... QRS and T abnormalities on the ECG, arrhythmia, cardiac arrest, serum hyperosmolality, lactic acidosis, and haemolysis".^[27] A high percentage (12% to 42%) of directly-injected propylene glycol is eliminated/secreted in urine unaltered depending on dosage, with the remainder appearing in its glucuronide-form. The speed of renal filtration decreases as dosage increases,^[28] which may be due to propylene glycol's mild anesthetic / CNS-depressant -properties as an alcohol.^[29] In one case, intravenous administration of propylene glycol-suspended nitroglycerin to an elderly man may have induced coma and acidosis.^[30]

According to a 2010 study by Karlstad University, the concentrations of PGEs (counted as the sum of propylene glycol and glycol ethers) in indoor air, particularly bedroom air, has been linked to increased risk of developing numerous respiratory and immune disorders in children, including asthma, hay fever, eczema, and allergies, with increased risk ranging from 50% to 180%. This concentration has been linked to use of water-based paints and water-based system cleansers"

 

 

 

 

Like ethylene glycol, propylene glycol is able to lower the freezing point of water, and so it is used as aircraft de-icing fluid.

 

And that's not counting the problems ingesting a concentrated version of nicotine causes 

 

[Alfisti]

I have a friend who works for one of the big Tobacco companies and he feels ecigs are gonna be huge, I don't share his optimism. They are working very hard to release various varieties but I keep telling him they should be be branching out into alcohol instead. 

[Deluxx]

I hate that argument for it though. Are cigarettes bad? Of course. But they'll give you cancer over decades. You can go on a bender and drop dead from alcohol poisoning over a few hours. But you have Miller and Budweiser on the quarter panels of some of NASCAR's top drivers. Same with energy drinks. Especially as they are still gearing much of their advertisement towards the younger population. No one has really done any major studies to see what Red Bull, Rockstar, Monster drinks do to people. 

 

 

Oh I agree. That stuff is just as bad. McDonalds etc too.

 

But there is already a ban on Chewing Tabbaci and cigs... It's like if they banned beer advertising but mike's hard lemonade was able to still advertise.

 

I agree there are worse things than it, but I don't understand the double standard ^_^

Edited by Deluxx, 21 February 2014 - 02:09.

[Nustang70]

The real cigarette industry apparently doesn't like these e-cigs and are possibly behind most if not some of the regulations against them, paticularly in America.

The big three tobacco companies in the US all either own or are in the process of launching ecig brands.  The primary corporate opposition to ecigs actually stems from pharmaceutical companies that are afraid of ecigs eating into their smoking cessation aid market share (such as nicotine gum).  

 

As someone that switched to ecigs last year, I can say that I personally feel much healthier now; my lungs are healthier, I don't get winded like I used to, I'm no longer prone to throat and lung related infections.  All the studies I've read suggest that although certain carcinogenic toxins are present in ecig vapor, they are found in levels that are orders of magnitude less than cigarette smoke (too lazy to dig up the research).  

 

Though I'm not optimistic, I hope that ecigs aren't subjected to the same advertising restrictions as cigarettes.  The more people that switch, the better.    

Edited by Nustang70, 21 February 2014 - 07:03.

[Tsarwash]

Don't want to get into an argument about this really, haha.

 

Just look up Propylene glycol, and read this:

 

 

 

And that's not counting the problems ingesting a concentrated version of nicotine causes 

 

Selective quoting of wikipedia. 

The paragraph before that one is this;

 

 

Propylene glycol is considered generally recognized as safe (GRAS) by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and it is used as anhumectant (E1520), solvent, and preservative in food and for tobacco products, as well as being one of the major ingredients of the "e-liquid" used in electronic cigarettes along with vegetable glycerin. It is also used in pharmaceutical and personal care products.^[4] Propylene glycol is a solvent in many pharmaceuticals, including oral, injectable and topical formulations, such as for diazepam and lorazepam that areinsoluble in water, use propylene glycol as a solvent in their clinical, injectable forms.

 

 

 

The acute oral toxicity of propylene glycol is very low, and large quantities are required to cause perceptible health damage in humans; propylene glycol is metabolized in the human body into pyruvic acid (a normal part of the glucose-metabolism process, readily converted to energy), acetic acid (handled by ethanol-metabolism), lactic acid (a normal acid generally abundant during digestion),^[15] andpropionaldehyde (a potentially hazardous substance).^[16][17][18]

Serious toxicity generally occurs only at plasma concentrations over 1 g/L, which requires extremely high intake over a relatively short period of time.^[19] It would be nearly impossible to reach toxic levels by consuming foods or supplements, which contain at most 1 g/kg of PG. Cases of propylene glycol poisoning are usually related to either inappropriate intravenous administration or accidental ingestion of large quantities by children.^[20] The potential for long-term oral toxicity is also low.

 

 

Anyhow I don't see why the cig firms (who are beginning to realise the potential of these things and are steadily taking over the market) won't try to spend large sums of money on advertising them. They've got nothing to lose. Governments are not about to ban nicotine, and I can't see how it could be any more restricted than it already is. 

So far we've had, TV advertising ban then total advertising ban, public indoor smoking ban, shop display ban, plain packet enforcement, and now a ban for smoking in front of children. What more can they do against the cig companies? The funny thing is if if everybody stopped smoking tomorrow the governments would be screwed. 

Edited by Tsarwash, 21 February 2014 - 03:57.

[chunder27]

Personally advertising has lttle effect on me with regard to what I buy.

 

it might increase awareness, but that is all.

 

I realise fag advertising was going to be banned but I never really understood why!  I know why governments felt the need to do it, but no one forces you to smoke, you do it out of free will and I got a little uppity with being told my fave sports might suffer financially as a result!  As I say I see the conundrum but the whole deal is pbased on the assumption smoking is forced on you! It clearly isnt. You can choose to drink, smoke, take drugs, play games, watch telly. You cant drive through a town these days without a pub being turned into an Indian, a major impact of which was smoking forcing a lot of people to drink at home more and supermarkets realising this and lowering prices to insane levels, why doesnt anyone do anything about that? 

 

Get over themselves in reality.

 

Doesn't surprise me that fag companie are jumping on e cigs, they  are a legal version of the same thing with a far lower habit reign and pull in. But still a habit and the potential to make money. I never had an issue with fags sponsoring sport, and I don't have an issue with e gigs. They might still be addictive. But I don't smoke and never will, so I don't really care.  Yes the NHS might wilt under the strain, but it is really wilting because of the 4 million Europeans that the government have allowed to flock here, most of them smoke and drink like chimneys (which is going to put more strain on NHS) and the NHS and free money are the main reasons why they come in the first place.

 

Prioritising that might be a little better than nimbying about fags and e cig advertising.

[7MGTEsup]

I think the reason governments are not happy is they don't get much tax revenue from E cigs like they do from real cigs. So if lots of people switch they will lose out on billions a year in tax. So watch this space for them to lobby to add 50% tax to these things to recover the lost revenue.

[Peat]

Another example there.

Personally, I'm not convinced that they are a healthier option. Anecdotal evidence, i know, but a friend of mine switched a few months ago and currently suffers from a HORRIBLE chest infection that he is having real trouble shifting.

[PassWind]

Hoopla over Ecigs is incredible, the use of nicotine in ecigs is infinitely more healthy than smoking cigarettes end of story. For those non smokers out there be thankful there is a real alternative for people who are long term smokers. This is where ecigarettes have their best sucess. I know many people who have instantly quit tabacco using these products after being heavy smokers for 30 plus years. Thankful that in the long run massive increases in funding needed to treat smoking related disease may dramatically drop off if there is a mass shift to a much safer alternative. Who cares how a person quits, as long as they quit tobacco products. You don't have to have tobacco to source nicotine either.

PG is in many everyday products I would be suprised if there were many people not absorbing it or ingesting it everyday. The nicotine is the same nicotine used by the pharmaceuticals who make millions making smoking cessation aids. These companies are the real enemy of ecig companies and the future of ecigs. As to the harmful effects of nicotine itself. Its deadly in high concerntration, so is water by the way. Fully immerse someone in a tub of that for about 10 minutes see how they get on. Nicotine used to be a common insecticide and has returned of late in some regions that want to claim the organically grown tag. Nicotine is found in tomatoes and egg plant. In small amounts its not particularly harmful at all. There is a carcinogen nitrosome however the dosage is lower than levels deemed dangerous in ecigs. A glass of water is pretty good for you too.

Nicotine is being used in some medical research for its properties in effecting mood in the treatment of depression and also degenerative neurological conditions.

But I suppose if its a floats it must be a witch. Science has always struggled in the face of mob stupidity. I however fully empathize with the distrust of allowing big tobacco to shift modus operandi, the advertisement should be strictly related to smoking cessation and not a glamorous alternative to a cigarette. Taxation should be what the normal tax levels are for any other commodity. Tobacco should still suffer heavy taxation to fund the public health systems that need it to treat those who succumb to its effects.

There has been some very good research into the effects of e liquid, from what I have been able to find, there is nothing for people to be worried about and if pg does become this centuries evil the majority of people are **** out of luck just brushing their teeth.

[PayasYouRace]

Personally I think it should be classified under the rule of other tobacco products, but that's just me.

 

They're just as bad for you.

 

But I suspect they're a lot less bad for the people around you, which is always what I hate about smokers, because everyone around them is forced to do it too whether they like it or not.

[Deluxx]

True.

 

Bottom line is if it's not banned, and they have money, they're gonna sponsor stuff!

 

 

Selective quoting of wikipedia. 

The paragraph before that one is this;

 

Toxicity =/= health problems. They're just talking about OD's not long term effects.

[Disgrace]

Ok or not ok, smoking unfortunately isn't that PR sexy anymore as it used to be even a mere 10 years or so ago. And the gadgety e-cigarettes completely lack the appeal and the glamour once associated with the real things.

 

This isn't the same everywhere. As far as I can make out, smoking is still considered "cool" in Francophone countries.

 

 

I have a friend who works for one of the big Tobacco companies and he feels ecigs are gonna be huge, I don't share his optimism. They are working very hard to release various varieties but I keep telling him they should be be branching out into alcohol instead. 

 

Or marijuana.

Edited by Disgrace, 21 February 2014 - 13:24.

[GhostR]

I wouldn't be surprised if they get clamped down on pretty quick ... but not for any of the reasons listed here already (that I saw on a quick scan-through). 

 

It'll be because of stories such as one I saw recently giving rise to bad publicity (not to mention giving 'bad eggs' ideas they don't need to have). What happened is that a puppy chewed on an e-cig refill, punctured the container, and was killed by the concentrated nicotine that coated it's tooth as a result (despite spending a night at a vet getting emergency treatment). 

 

Concentrated nicotine is a reasonably potent poison, and as a result it's probably inevitable that these things will become heavily regulated. It's just a matter of how long until a politician decides to drive it forward.

[Deluxx]