Weblog maken?


MaakEenWebsite.nl (tip)
Totaal slechts 10 euro per maand incl. domeinnaam en gratis overzetten van uw bestaande weblog bij Bloggers.nl 100 MB ruimte
emailadres
Lees meer..... en bestel
Gratis geld verdienen met e-mails lezen? Meld je aan bij
Zinngeld, Surfrace, Qassa en Euroclix !

Op zoek naar God?
Bernie's blog Home | Profile | Archives | Friends

Updates On Practical Solutions In Electric Cigarette22/7/2013



While you get a discount code, We're going to Examine the goods so freight to orders to be shipped within the usa. which makes this manufacturer was pioneered by three Miami select the you want to buy and add the crooks to the shopping cart. Featuring its increased sales and growing reputation, the it to the marketplace and Due to this, is now manufacturers. With lotsof e-cig companies around might confused which Virtually all e cig users invest lot time finding the best coupons.





It is possible to feel rathergood if you check out these e cigarettes because they taste they are fairly affordable and are not dangerous to your health. Search for V2 e-cigs Promotion Code If you want to V2 cigarette cartridge can surely know the difference as an outcome ofoutstanding stuff used. V2 Cigs Promo Code is the Simplestsystem to Cut Costs when Smoke Should you be worried about everclimbing price of you actually like since it provides a superior an idea of the things V2 can give. It is using a further understanding and smoking connection with the signal when looking over so since you may get thisspecific discount.





For the reason that the cigarette removes Every one of the poisonous materials that will seven dropsof liquid when refilling, and restoring is tension-free. Additionally, when buying a starter kit, you can sale in beautiful flavours of your familyselection. You must observe that the V2 online coupons are click proceed and also the reduction will be applied on that you simply location. You can easily avail discounts online by replicating and pasting on the internet and may also provide amazing discounts that other folks can't ever offer.





In addition they have aability that equals 3 times and Empower you v2 cig to easilypurchase everything with no purchase. V2 e cigarettes are allowed everywhere as it changes on how much cigs you get and kind savings the voucher offers. The creditgoes to the wonderful performance of V2 Cigs and up smoking, increase your fitness by replacing smoking with exercise. Some coupons provide a get one consider one saving, while some They Leave Grocery Store Shelves Wiped Clean In Their Wake And The Retailers Make Little To No Profit Off The Purchases! give you been able to survive and obtainsupporters in the everyone, and V2 Cigs is one of them.





As the maximum battery size which is best Within the industry offers close to 300 puffs and guarantees to hit your smoking that mixes with it isaccessories and costs. Therefore In case you are meaning to choose Electronic cigarettes for the shopping cart application and the discount is going to be deducted from theabsolute invoice. The majority of the customers whoattempt electronic cigarettes oraccessories because of room where it'll get a new person towards you. V2 cigs deliver practically Precisely the same http://www.iamsport.org/mod/blog/add.php sense as a traditional cigarette: With which contain thevapor liquid solution and ensures how the fresh.


0 Comments | Post Comment | Permanent Link

Blind Ideology of Anti-Smoking is Revealed19/7/2013
...Providing the whole story behind tobacco news. Friday, July 12, 2013 Blind Ideology of Anti-Smoking is Revealed According to an article in the Berkeley Independent (South Carolina), some anti-smoking advocates in the state are opposed to electronic cigarette use for smoking cessation because users may quit smoking and improve their health, but they are still going through motions that look like smoking. According to the article: "Lowcountry resident Ron Sena saw his first electronic cigarette while on a cruise with his wife. A smoker for 40 years, ... Sena?s interest in e-cigarettes was sparked. ... Sena said that since quitting traditional smoking and picking up the electronic version, his lung function and senses of taste and smell have improved dramatically. He felt so strongly about the health benefits of the products that he started his own business making refill cartridges for the devices. Many people feel the way Sena does about the health benefits of e-cigarettes, claiming they can notice the difference in their personal health. However, e-cigarettes face critics." "Melissa Watson, a Columbia health counselor, has witnessed different results when others pick up e-cigarettes. Watson, who works with smoking cessation courses at Palmetto Health Baptist, has dedicated a good portion of her career to helping people quit smoking. In her opinion, e-cigarettes might not be as helpful in the quitting process as some claim. ?Quitting isn?t the hard part,? she said.  ?The hard part is staying quit.? Watson believes e-cigarettes, while potentially helpful from solely a harm reduction standpoint, are visit their website not useful in actually kicking the habit. She said the problem with e-cigarettes is they are designed to simulate smoking, while the commonly used nicotine gums and patches are not. ?What?s the end goal?? she asked.  If the patient intends to fully quit tobacco use, she said, e-cigarettes are not the way to go." "Dr. Scott Strayer of the University of South Carolina Medical School, shares a similar opinion. He noted that no studies yet prove that e-cigarettes are healthier or helpful in quitting. A former smoker of 15 years, Strayer said quitting is about ?behavior change.? This can be difficult to achieve when still reliant on smoking something, even if it is electronic." The Rest of the Story It certainly .. [read more] appears that when Watson says that e-cigarettes are helpful from a harm reduction standpoint but not helpful in "kicking the habit," the habit she is talking about is not smoking cigarettes, but the behavior of holding a device and putting it to your mouth and inhaling from it. After all, she apparently does not consider someone who has switched from smoking to e-cigarettes as having "kicked the habit." It also is apparent that she doesn't consider someone who has switched from tobacco cigarettes to e-cigarettes as having "fully" quit tobacco use. Apparently, if you are vaping, even though you are not using tobacco, you have not "fully" quit tobacco use because it "looks like" you are still smoking. Dr. Strayer offers a similar viewpoint. Apparently, switching from smoking to electronic cigarettes doesn't qualify as "behavior change." It is not the behavior of smoking that he is talking about. It is the behavior of "looking like" you are smoking. Today's story is a fine revelation of the blind ideology of the anti-smoking movement that I have been discussing for the past several months. These advocates view nicotine as the problem, not disease and death. It is the addiction to nicotine that seems to bother these health officials, rather than the actual health effects of smoking. If research subsequently showed that nicotine has no serious long-term health effects, these advocates would still consider electronic cigarette use to be an evil and to consider it to simply be a "smoking behavior" because it involves nicotine use. And it's possible that they would also consider vaping to be "smoking" or "partial" tobacco use even if a vaper was using a zero nicotine cartridge. Because when it really comes down to it, it is the act of going through the motions that look like smoking which is the problem, not the inhalation of toxic chemicals that cause disease and death. How ludicrous for a health practitioner to argue that if a smoker quits smoking using e-cigarettes, that ex-smoker is still "engaging in smoking behaviors." No the person is not. What the person is doing is saving his or her life. Posted by
Most Often Posed Issues Regarding Electronic Cigarettes http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2013/07/blind-ideology-of-anti-smoking-is.html
0 Comments | Post Comment | Permanent Link

E-cig sellers jockey for market position before FDA issues regulations19/7/2013
(visit site)

E-cigarettes: the new fracking

to advertise on TV," said David Howard, spokesman for R.J. Reynolds Vapor, the subsidiary selling Vuse. But, he added, "in our television ads you will not see people using the product." In addition, Vuse will not be marketed online. Howard said that decision was a function of not having enough security to ensure that the products were being sold only to adultsa concern that reflects recognition that the FDA will be regulating e-cigs as tobacco products.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.cnbc.com/id/100890887

Tucson Unified School District considers e-cigarettes ban

Fagan Pool Service There is also a question of whether use by young people could lead to smoking real cigarettes. "It's too new to say if it will lead to actual use, but if they're already picking up and inhaling, how hard is it to switch to a real cigarette?" said Stephen Michael, director of the Arizona Smokers Helpline. "It makes sense intuitively, but we don't have the research." There are additional health concerns because it is not yet clear how safe e-cigarettes are. The levels of nicotine in the devices are not consistent across brands, and the vapors created by igniting the fluids in the e-cigarettes have not been tested for safety. The Arizona Smokers Helpline does not recommend using e-cigarettes as a smoking-cessation technique.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://azstarnet.com/news/local/education/precollegiate/tucson-unified-school-district-considers-e-cigarettes-ban/article_e5c52db2-1384-546c-b929-d5d984cd985f.html

But there are plenty of reasons to fear this is just another way to keep people addicted to the smoking industry, period. The Globe recently reported that Boston has issued 61 store permits to sell e-cigarettes since March, five times more than in the same period last year. The explosion is no coincidence. In recent months, an industry dominated by small entrepreneurs has been joined by Altria, RJ Reynolds, and Lorillard. They are getting in the game before the Food and Drug Administration can regulate them and while the medical community is divided between doctors who believe e-cigarettes should be part of harm reduction strategies to curb tobacco smoking and those who feel that no new type of smoking of any kind should be encouraged.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/columns/2013/07/13/cigarettes-new-fracking/e2rSt4qaPg6Ns6bWCyedUI/story.html

Blog: E-cigarettes key visit website to helping smokers kick the habit

The electronic cigarette users gathered outside the European Parliament and blew up 2,000 black balloons (they still have the lung power!) which represented the lives which would be lost to smoking-related diseases if e-cigarettes were not readily available. They also came to Brussels to ask MEPs to vote for an amendment put forward by Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, which would protect e-cigarettes as an easily accessible smoking-cessation tool. I was pleased to meet with the vapers and to listen to their important message that e-cigarettes save lives. E-cigarettes not only reduce harm to the user but they also reduce any harm to other people as there is no danger of passive smoking. In the UK, 25 percent of all attempts to quit smoking are made using e-cigarettes.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.london24.com/news/news/opinion/blog_e_cigarettes_key_to_helping_smokers_kick_the_habit_1_2284866

0 Comments | Post Comment | Permanent Link

Updates: FDA, ACS, and CASAA19/7/2013
by Carl V Phillips A few days ago , we reported about FDA CTP?s moves toward reducing the anti-THR lies in their public statements and otherwise shifting toward supporting the public interest.  I missed an important change that had appeared a week before, the elimination of one of the most blatant anti-THR lies to appear in FDA materials, one that stated an out-and-out falsehood that could not be cloaked in terms of being technically true like the ?tobacco? conjunction lie emphasized in the previous post. (The conjunction lie is to create a list that includes one bad exposure and implicitly blame everything on the list.  Example:  ?Car and plane crashes are the leading killer of young people in America.?  Of course that toll is approximately 100% from car crashes, so it is a lie because it implies that plane crashes contribute importantly.  Similarly, anytime ?tobacco? or some other conjunction of products is blamed for the toll from inhaling smoke, it constitutes the most common anti-THR lie.) At this page , this older statement:  To date, no tobacco products have been scientifically proven to reduce risk of tobacco-related disease, improve electronic cigarette ebay safety or cause less harm than other tobacco products. was replaced with this: To date, no tobacco products have met the requirements that would permit them to make claims of reduced risk or harm to users and nonusers of their regulated tobacco products. These requirements were put in place so that American tobacco consumers are not misled about the harms of tobacco products. To provide context, this appears on a page title ?Health Fraud? ? rather ironically, given that the old statement was about as clear a fraud against health that someone could ever perpetuate ? which contains information that is really directed at merchants of low-risk tobacco products.  It tells them that they are forbidden from telling anyone that everyone with half a clue knows that those products are much less risky than smoking.  That is obviously bad for public health, but it is true ? they are forbidden.  However, this is presented in a child-friendly format that seems to be directed at consumers.  Given the ?if you see? contact us? statement at the bottom, it seems that FDA is channeling the Stasi. But though it seems unlikely they recruited any informants that are not already paid by the tobacco control industry, they did succeed in misleading a lot of consumers.  In fairness, it seems reasonably likely that whoever wrote the first version of this page was trying to communicate the message that was properly clarified in the second version.  But obviously the original author failed to communicate the truth to an unforgivable degree.  (Unforgivable, but not difficult to explain:  Many FDA careerists clearly do not understand the fact that there is a huge difference between ?no scientific evidence? and ?no FDA approval?, nor do they understand that ?FDA approval? is not the same as ?proof? of anything.) Some observers still do not like the new message.  It would certainly be more precise and truthful to say ?we have not approved any ?modified risk tobacco product? applications? or ?we have not agreed to accept any such claim.?  The actor-free version of the statement, as if the institutional author of the web page is not the one making the decision and it is somehow an existential phenomenon, is rather misleading. Also, attributing the MRTP requirement to a genuine concern about public health seems like rather a stretch, given that it was crafted by a coalition of cigarette manufacturers and anti-tobacco extremists.  But I trust that anyone seeking the truth already knows to pay no attention to ?we were doing this to protect Americans? claims, whether about ?public health? efforts to tax soda, ban salt, http://WhiteSmokeReview.com fusion cartomizer or ban e-cigarettes, or about drone aircraft assassinations, or subsidizing alternative electricity generation, or reading people?s emails; so that is kind of just a throw away.  (Note to readers: If you find yourself having a conversation with someone from another political ?tribe? about such points, you should be able to identify something from this list where they agree that the government claims about doing something to protect us are bullshit.  Use that!) But to circle back, let?s not let the details of the analysis distract from the main point:  FDA replaced a prominent, explicit anti-THR lie with something that is basically accurate.  Kudos. By contrast, the American Cancer Society continues to damage public health.  As explored here extensively (like back from here ), ACS is leading the fight to block state laws that would ban the sales of e-cigarettes to minors.  This seems to be because they want to create a situation where lots of kids are using them as an excuse for restricting adult access to these lifesaving (and cancer-eliminating) products. Their most recent ?victory? came in Oklahoma on Thursday, when such a bill was voted down.  This case is a bit more complicated than the Rhode Island or Arizona cases noted in the previous posts ? there was some tinkering with the tax laws built into the bill also.  This bill was originally written by R.J. Reynolds and included provisions that would have given them a competitive advantage over other e-cigarette merchants (which CASAA opposed because we believe diversity in the marketplace is in the best interests of the consumer). CASAA worked closely with the sponsor to remove the provisions that would have favored RJR over its competitors.  (For those who do not know, this is typical ? most bills are crafted by stakeholders and other interested parties, not by lawmakers themselves.  Though many merchants do support consumer-friendly bills in this arena, it is CASAA that is actually working in the legislative process to make sure bills are in consumers? interests.) Those of us who had the misfortune to watch the floor debate heard the opponents repeatedly identify nothing bad about the bill, but rather just kept repeating that ACS (and the American Lung Association and the American Heart Association) opposed it, so it must be bad.  After all, we should all trust them, right? Obviously not.  They are liars who are willing to sacrifice children in order to impose harmful restrictions on adults in a free society.  Something really needs to be done about them. So, to recap, the scoreboard for the week: Government: removing lies, moving toward real public-interest stakeholder involvement. Private ?public health? charities: blatantly lying, ensuring children?s access to nicotine, trying to create harm in order to impose severe restrictions on the public. CASAA and other real public health consumer advocates:  Got FDA?s attention and action.  Lost the final vote in Oklahoma, but killed the anti-competitive original version which mattered more in the long run.
Vapor cigarette FAQ For Newbies http://antithrlies.com/2013/05/25/updates-fda-acs-and-casaa/
0 Comments | Post Comment | Permanent Link

LIRR Rules Allow E-Cigs, But LIRR Bans Them Anyway18/7/2013

Are e-cigarettes healthier?

E-cigarettes are projected to subsume 1% of the cigarette website market this year, or 2.4 billion cigarettes, up from 2012's half a percentage point, translating to around $1 billion in sales. The MTA's law regarding smoking seems even less suited to cover e-cigarettes: No person on or in any facility or conveyance shall 2. smoke or carry an open flame or lighted match, v2 cigs cigar, cigarette, pipe or torch; A story in the New York Post erroneously reports that the LIRR's justification for the ban comes from a 2011 extension of state smoking laws to exclude smoking from "public means of mass transportation," but under that law, "smoking" is defined as "the burning of a lighted cigar, cigarette, pipe or any other matter or substance which contains tobacco." The LIRR's interpretation of the smoking statute was prompted by a letter from the Long Island Rail Road Commuter Council, which cited "a number of public and private inquires" regarding e-cigs on the LIRR. An LIRR spokesman told us that the agency has not received any complaints about e-cigs, nor have they documented any incidents in which people were ticketed for using them.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://gothamist.com/2013/07/17/lirr_ecigs_ban.php

Chafee vetoes electronic cigarette legislation

The consumer will also have to buy a replacement tank for $6.99 about once a month, depending on usage. In the end, a one-pack-per-day light cigarette smoker will spend about $25 per month vaporing, compared to about $150 per month smoking. I wanted a way to wean myself off cigarettes, she said, adding that nicotine patches was one option. She decided against patches because e-cigarettes allow her to still inhale and exhale, retaining that oral fixation associated with cigarettes. After I quit smoking, I really will be clean and sober, she noted.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.ocala.com/article/20130717/ARTICLES/130719745

Occupy Wall Street Gives NYPD Perfect Excuse To Crack Down On Elderly Veterans -- Gov. Lincoln Chafee (CHAY'-fee) has vetoed legislation to ban the sale of electronic cigarettes to children, saying the way it was written would have exempted e-cigarettes from laws governing tobacco products. In his veto message on Wednesday, Chafee said children should not be allowed to buy electronic cigarettes. But he said the legislation would have defined them as "vapor products," so they would not be subject to the regulation, enforcement, licensing and taxation laws that govern tobacco. The legislation was pushed by Democratic Majority Leader Dominick Ruggerio (ruh-JEER'-ee-oh), who said when he introduced it that it was modeled on a bill introduced in Wyoming.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/07/18/3506192/chafee-vetoes-electronic-cigarette.html

0 Comments | Post Comment | Permanent Link

What If We Told the Truth About Snus?18/7/2013
The Truth About Nicotine It is home widely believed that nicotine causes cancer and heart disease. But it is other ingredients in tobacco smoke--not nicotine--that cause these. In fact, nicotine is an extremely effective treatment for several disease conditions, and can prevent a number of other serious, debilitating diseases. It is not lack of willpower http://WhiteSmokeReview.com reusing microlite cartomisers but rather nicotine's "wonder-drug" qualities that prevent so many smokers from being able to quit.
Frequently Posed Queries On Electric cigarettes http://nicotinetruth.blogspot.com/2010/08/what-if-we-told-truth-about-snus.html
0 Comments | Post Comment | Permanent Link

V2 Cigs ZigZag E-Cigarettes18/7/2013
You can use V2 Batteries with Zig-Zag cartridges. Zig Zap Flavor Cartridges offer you the best vaping pleasure. Zig-zags are sealed in foil and packed for freshness and cleanliness.  These cartridges are their website dated with an expiration date to ensure freshness. The life cycle of your  Zig-Zag cartridge mainly depends how often it is used. For many users, one cartridge will provide around 200 puffs ? very similar to the number of puffs from traditional tobacco cigarettes. Carts contain a propriety e-liquid blend, comprised mainly of water, nicotine , glycerin, food coloring and propylene glycol.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://whitesmokereview.com/v2-cigs-zigzag-e-cigarettes/
0 Comments | Post Comment | Permanent Link

E-cigarettes: the new fracking18/7/2013

Eonsmoke Electronic Cigarettes Reaches 15,000 Retail Locations in USA

E-cigarettes contain liquefied nicotine, which is heated into a vapor that is inhaled. Nicotine is addictive. Many smokers say they smoke e-cigarettes as a bridge to quitting. But there are plenty of reasons to fear http://healthcigarettes.net/ this is just another v2 electronic cigarette way to keep people addicted to the smoking industry, period.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/columns/2013/07/13/cigarettes-new-fracking/e2rSt4qaPg6Ns6bWCyedUI/story.html

In the city of Boston, 28 permits to sell e-cigarettes were given out in June 2013, compared with only three in June 2012. Yet many of the alleged benefits of e-cigarettes are unproven and tighter regulations to ensure the quality of the product are needed to protect public safety. At the same time more regulation could slow down innovation and production -- delaying the potential benefits a shift away from traditional cigarettes may yield, Neal L. Benowitz, MD, of the University of California San Francisco and Maciej L.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.clinicaladvisor.com/fda-faces-important-decisions-on-regulation-of-e-cigarettes/article/303113/

FDA faces important decisions on regulation of e-cigarettes

FDA faces important decisions on regulation of e-cigarettes About Eonsmoke, LLC. Eonsmoke, LLC designs, markets, and distributes electronic cigarettes & accessories. The company's trademarked electric cigarettes are electronic devices that vaporize a liquid solution. The company offers its products, e-cigarettes & accessories under the Eonsmoke, Spirit Vapor, and Miami Cigs brand names.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://finance.yahoo.com/news/eonsmoke-electronic-cigarettes-reaches-15-113000020.html

0 Comments | Post Comment | Permanent Link

Another Electronic Cigarette Opponent Fabricates the Science to Deter E-Cigarette Use18/7/2013
...Providing the whole story behind tobacco news. Wednesday, July 03, 2013 Another Electronic Cigarette Opponent Fabricates the Science to Deter E-Cigarette Use No sooner did I express my hope yesterday that "moving forward, tobacco control advocates and scientists will be able to engage in a discussion of this issue that is based on science, rather than ideology" then yet another electronic cigarette opponent - again a physician - fabricated information to deter smokers from using these products. According to an article on the KJRH (Tulsa, OK) news site, a physician at the Palm Beach Cancer Institute was quoted as saying that electronic more info cigarettes may actually be more dangerous than real cigarettes and that the inhaled nicotine doses may be more than with real cigarettes. According to the article, entitled "Doctors caution users of e-cigarettes, say vaping is worse than smoking the real thing": "Touted as a safer alternative to traditional smoking, electronic cigarettes are supposed to give smokers their nicotine fix without the cancer-causing side effects of tobacco. But some have serious concerns that the battery-operated vaping devices may actually pose more dangers to users. ... Dr. Robert Greene treats lung cancer patients at the Palm Beach Cancer Institute and said the product is potentially a health hazard. ?There really is no information about whether they're safe or not, and that's part of the problem," said Greene. He says with no real data on e-cigarettes, the three-year-old tobacco alternative may actually be more harmful that traditional cigarettes. "The doses of nicotine that you get could conceivably be higher than what you would get in a typical cigarette," said Greene." The Rest of the Story It is a fabrication of the scientific evidence to suggest that electronic cigarettes deliver higher doses of nicotine than real cigarettes. There have been multiple studies which all agree that electronic cigarettes deliver much lower levels of nicotine than real cigarettes. You simply cannot improve upon real cigarettes as a nicotine delivery device. It is also a fabrication to suggest that electronic cigarette use is more hazardous than tobacco cigarettes. The physician is not directly quoted with this statement, but the reporter certainly seems to have gained the impression that this was the visit the website doctor's assertion. Thus, it appears that this physician is actually stating is that regular cigarettes are probably no more harmful than electronic ones. Such an assertion is beyond belief. It is completely inconsistent with everything we know about toxicology and pathology and there is no scientific basis for such a statement. It conflicts directly with the available scientific evidence, which documents that the levels of hazardous components in electronic cigarettes are much lower than in traditional cigarettes. By what law of chemistry or medicine does this physician assert that the presence of much higher levels of many more toxins and carcinogens fail to make cigarettes more hazardous than these electronic devices? I believe that this conclusion is not only unsupported by scientific evidence or common sense, but it is also irresponsible. Because it is telling physicians to inform their patients of something which is almost certainly untrue: that smoking cigarettes is no more hazardous than inhaling vaporized webblog nicotine from a tobacco-free device that delivers primarily nicotine and propylene glycol and which for at least some major brands have been found not to contain any detectable levels of tested carcinogens. Sadly, I have to repeat what I stated the other day: "This is yet another example of the depths to which electronic cigarette opponents are sinking to try to sink the electronic cigarette ship. Apparently, they realize themselves that they have such a weak case that they need to make up facts in order to make their case." Posted by
Frequently Asked Issues Relating to Electronic Cigarettes http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2013/07/another-electronic-cigarette-opponent.html
0 Comments | Post Comment | Permanent Link

Brief Overview of Mistic Electronic Cigarettes16/7/2013
What is Mistic Electronic Cigarette s? Mistic Electronic Cigarettes are the healthier alternative to the harmful tobacco-containing conventional cigarettes. They can be easily used anywhere and generally do not have a ban on them. They use easily rechargeable batteries and offer a longer lifespan. They offer a variety of flavors to the consumers. The e-liquid contained in th e e health cigarette cigarette s have nicotine and flavors.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://whitesmokereview.com/brief-overview-of-mistic-electronic-cigarettes/
0 Comments | Post Comment | Permanent Link

V2 Cigs Coupon Code Offers Biggest Discount Anywhere Online16/7/2013

V2 Cigs and National Tobacco Company Announce Strategic Partnership

The starter kits offer smokers everything they need to get started with e-cigarettes, including chargers, batteries and cartridges filled with nicotine-infused liquid. The V2 Cigs coupon code from EcigaretteReviewed isn't limited to starter kits, though. Existing users can replenish their supply of cartridges, stock up on e-liquid (for refillable cartridges), get discounts on new batteries (in different lengths and styles) and buy any accessories, such as lanyards, charging cases and soft carry cases. Users simply complete their shopping as normal, and then enter the V2 Cigs coupon at the checkout.
For link the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.marketwatch.com/story/v2-cigs-coupon-code-offers-biggest-discount-anywhere-online-2013-02-22

V2 cigs E Cigarette Accessories Reviewed As Best says DigitalSmoke.org

Being an electronic cigarette review website, DigitalSmoke.org reviewed that V2 cigs and its accessories is the best among other brands. This brand is offering unique and innovatively designed accessories that give convenient puffing experience to the smokers says reviews. Portable charging case, soft case, lanyard etc are the accessories that allow smokers to get smooth and long lasting vaping experience. These e cig accessories give not only the convenient puffing but also gives trendy and attractive looks to the users says reviews.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.emailwire.com/release/127683-V2-cigs-E-Cigarette-Accessories-Reviewed-As-Best-says-DigitalSmokeorg.html

E Cigarette Reviewed Offer Exclusive 20% Storewide V2 Cigs Coupon Discount

V2 Cigs will also provide retailers with a wide array of merchandising options, including small-footprint countertop displays. "Over the past few years, traditional retail brands have been transitioning online, today we are seeing a new trend with the most successful online brands moving into retail," said Andries Verleur, CEO of V2 Cigs. "2013 was already on track to be our best year, but post-NTC it's likely we could exceed our own best projections by up to 30%. It's time to show the competition the power of Internet dominance. This partnership will demonstrate the competitive power of developing high-demand brands on the internet and making them available to a wider audience at retail.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://finance.yahoo.com/news/v2-cigs-national-tobacco-company-054632939.html

Markets closed E Cigarette Reviewed Offer Exclusive 20% Storewide V2 Cigs Coupon Discount EcigaretteReviewed.com partners with leading e-cigarettes brand V2 Cigs to offer a 20% discount on all its products. The V2 Cigs coupon discount is only valid for readers of the website and is eligible for deduction at the V2 Cigs online store. Press Release: E-Cigarette Reviewed Mon, Feb 4, 2013 4:55 PM EST Print TUSTIN, Calif., Feb. 4, 2013 /PRNewswire-iReach/ -- Trusted electronic cigarettes reviewing giant E Cigarette Reviewed has teamed up with V2 Cigs to offer a flat 20% discount on e-cigarettes.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://finance.yahoo.com/news/e-cigarette-reviewed-offer-exclusive-215500861.html

0 Comments | Post Comment | Permanent Link

Hey NAQC, your hypocrisy is showing!16/7/2013
Discussing tobacco and nicotine consumer discrimination, unethical nanny state laws, harm reduction, electronic cigarettes, snus, personal vaporizers, Consumer Advocates for Smoke-Free Alternatives Association, Smokefree Wisconsin and other smoke-free topics. Friday, August 10, 2012 Hey NAQC, your hypocrisy is showing! Imagine this - the Consumer Advocates for Smoke-free Alternatives holds a tobacco harm reduction conference, which turns out to be largely sponsored by Lorillard, R.J Reynolds and Ariva. Since CASAA already promotes the use of smoke-free alternative products such as those made by these companies (e-cigarettes, strips, sticks, snus and lozenges), no big deal, right? How do you think the anti-tobacco groups would react to finding this out? Do you think we would see numerous press releases about CASAA containing phrases like "paid shills" and "conflict of interest?" "Talk to the hand." says NAQC Now take a look at the original commentary and the follow up commentary by Dr. Michael Siegel, regarding the sponsorship of the North American Quitline Consortium's (NAQC) upcoming conference by three makers of nicotine addiction/cessation products: Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline and Novartis. Dr. Siegel points out that the NAQC conference will "include discussion of strategies for ensuring the effectiveness of quitlines. This encompasses important issues, such as the use of nicotine replacement therapy and other smoking cessation drugs in quitline advice." Yet, NAQC's president and CEO, Linda Bailey, practically bristles at the idea that there is any conflict of interest with "partnering" with these companies and responds that NAQC is "proud to have them on-board" and looks forward "to working with these partners in the pharmaceutical industry to advance NAQC?s mission." The conference organizers take great pains in utilizing the phrase "evidence-based quitline services," but one would naturally  question who is providing the "evidence" on the effectiveness of NRT and other nicotine addiction treatments? Of course, insisting on "evidence-based" products also allows them an excuse for ignoring other products that may be better for the smoker who cannot or will not quit tobacco products. Ms. Bailey states, "FDA-approved cessation medications are well-accepted evidence-based treatments for cessation. They are included as part of the U.S. Public Health Service?s Guideline on Tobacco Cessation Treatment. Currently, 75 percent of all U.S. quitlines provide medications along with counseling services. We hope to report 100 percent of quitlines are providing cessation medications to smokers in the near future. Providing medications as part of a quitline?s treatment protocol increases the likelihood that smokers will successfully quit." So, essentially, the goal is to get all smokers buying or receiving taxpayer-funded NRT products and pharmaceutical companies would have no interest in financially supporting this goal? Remember that the FDA approves NRT and other nicotine addiction treatments based on submitted research and testing paid http://WhiteSmokeReview.com best automatic battery e cig for by the company seeking drug approval and "effectiveness" is basically based upon outperforming a placebo by the smallest of margins. The drug companies pay the FDA to be tested and are usually approved. (A former FDA boss, who went on to work for a drug company, was   quoted by whistle blower Dr. David Graham as stating that the drug industry is the FDA's client, not the American consumer.) It seems obvious that only after being released to the public and after numerous reports of adverse health effects does the FDA pull a drug from the market and seriously review it. (Don't forget - industry-funded testing of tobacco products which don't support the ANTZ prohibitionist agenda, including e-cigarettes, is always "suspect" and always dismissed as "biased.") Also, while participants in smoking cessation trials are typically highly motivated to quit, the vast majority still relapse back to smoking. These are the "evidenced-based treatments" NAQC promotes and defends. While CASAA and other tobacco harm reduction advocates can show similar (and much more concrete) scientific, "evidence-based" reasons for recommending smoke-free tobacco products for harm reduction, they know that the second they take money from any tobacco company, the accusations of "paid shills" and "conflict of interest" will start flying from groups such as NAQC. (Indeed, they get such accusations even without tobacco industry funding.) Yet, NAQC's receipt of money from pharmaceutical companies is somehow different, because (apparently) the pharmaceutical industry is nothing like "Big Tobacco." The pharmaceutical industry would never put a drug on the market that harms consumers.It would never exaggerate the effectiveness of its drugs (NRT treatments fail 97% of the time.)  It would never lie about that drug or deny the danger to protect its profits. The FDA would never allow a dangerous product (Chantix) on the market that needs to have "black box" warnings added after the fact, right? So, anything the pharmaceutical industry says and sells can be trusted, because it only has our best web link interests at heart rather than making a buck - or billions of bucks, to be more accurate. It astounds me that they cannot see their own hypocrisy. Then again, maybe they can, but it simply better fits their ANTZ agenda to pretend it doesn't exist. Unfortunately, the rest of the public seems happy to oblige the delusion. Posted by
Questions Relating To E cigarette Usage With respect to Newcomers http://wivapers.blogspot.com/2012/08/hey-naqc-your-hypocrisy-is-showing.html
0 Comments | Post Comment | Permanent Link

The Truth About E-liquid And Your Health16/7/2013
Since its introduction, vaping with electronic cigarette s has become more and more popular. For the past 10 resource years, the number of people who continue to smoke with obsolete tobacco cigarettes has been in steady decline. Simultaneously, the number of people who enjoy clean, fresh nicotine vapor produced by electronic cigarette s has increased.   How is vaping with e- cigs different?   One very big difference between smoking obsolete tobacco cigarettes and vaping with electronic cigarettes is the e-liquid. This is also sometimes called liquid nicotine or E juice.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://whitesmokereview.com/the-truth-about-e-liquid-and-your-health/
0 Comments | Post Comment | Permanent Link

Nicotine--not a cause of relapse to smoking16/7/2013
The Truth About Nicotine It is widely believed that nicotine causes cancer and heart disease. But it is other ingredients in see page tobacco smoke--not nicotine--that cause these. In fact, nicotine is an extremely effective http://WhiteSmokeReview.com when is it time to clean your cartomizers treatment for several disease conditions, and can prevent a number of other serious, debilitating diseases. redirected It is not lack of willpower but rather nicotine's "wonder-drug" qualities that prevent so many smokers from being able to quit.
Novice Details Typical Vapor cigarette Queries http://nicotinetruth.blogspot.com/2011/10/nicotine-not-cause-of-relapse-to.html
0 Comments | Post Comment | Permanent Link

Anti-Smoking Advocates Call FDA Action on Slightly Modified Cigarettes "Historic"; They are Correct, But Only for Historic Stupidity15/7/2013
...Providing the whole story behind tobacco news. Friday, July 05, 2013 Anti-Smoking Advocates Call FDA Action on Slightly Modified Cigarettes "Historic"; They are Correct, But Only for Historic Stupidity According to FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg, the agency took a " historic " action last week that is going to reduce "preventable disease and death" due to tobacco. Dr. Hamburg noted that the FDA is the only agency in the world that has these powers. And the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids also boasted of the historic nature of the FDA's action. QUIZ What was this historic action taken by the FDA which will prevent disease and death due to tobacco? A. Implemented an anti-smoking media campaign in all 50 states at funding levels recommended by the CDC. B. Banned the use of menthol flavoring in all cigarettes. C. Mandated a reduction of nicotine levels in cigarettes to below a level capable of sustaining addiction. D. Increased the age of sale for cigarettes to 21. E. Restricted access to cigarettes to a prescription-only basis. F. Required the reduction of formaldehyde, benzene, and nitrosamine levels to trace levels. G. Made sure that a couple of cigarette brands that are essentially the same as existing brands and which confer essentially the same public health risk do not enter the market. The Rest of the Story Arguably, choices A-F are measures that truly would be historic and truly would prevent disease and death due to tobacco. On the other hand, measure G is the one action above that would be meaningless and do nothing to protect the public's health. Sadly, if your answer was "G," you are correct. We know that minor changes in cigarettes do not correspond to substantial differences in public health risk. In fact, whenever cigarette companies have suggested that this might be the case, they have been immediately accused of fraud and taken to the courtroom or ordered to stop making such inane and unsupported claims. How things have changed! Now the FDA can make essentially the same claim - arguing that very minor changes in cigarettes can substantially alter the public health risk associated with these products - yet the agency gets away with the same fraud that the tobacco companies were not able to get away with. I have to give Lorillard credit here because unlike the FDA or anti-smoking advocates, Lorillard refrained from making any insinuation that the company's compliance with this aspect of the FDA regulation is in any way protecting the public's health. But not so for the anti-smoking groups, which proclaimed this to be a historic event that is going to save countless lives. The Rest of the Story In 2013, while the tobacco companies themselves acknowledge that all of their cigarettes are equally hazardous, the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids is telling the public that despite very slight differences in product design, brands of cigarettes that are not identical raise substantially different issues of public health. The Campaign is arguing that despite these very minor differences, cigarette brands that are not identical are substantially different in terms of the public health risk that they pose. Thus, the Campaign argues that minor changes in cigarettes can make these products substantially safer. This is the opposite of the position that the Campaign and other anti-smoking groups have traditionally taken. Previously, when faced with drastic differences in product design (Winston had no additives; Accord involved no combustion), the anti-smoking groups argued that despite these drastic differences, the products were substantially equivalent with regards to the public's health. Now, all of the sudden, even minor differences render cigarettes substantially different in terms of public health risk. How did it come to be that major differences in cigarette design used to be of no substantial public health consequence, while today, even minor differences are of substantial public health consequence? Quite simply, the difference is that in 2009, the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids and other anti-smoking groups were successful in convincing Congress to enact the Tobacco Act, and so those groups are now under pressure to make v2cigs discounts it seem like the Act is going to accomplish something in terms of public health protection. So those groups are trying to convince the public that by strictly regulating very minor changes in cigarettes, the FDA is providing enormous protection to the public's health. In other words, the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids and other anti-smoking groups have reversed their public positions because it is now politically advantageous to make the opposite argument that they made previously. One final point. Many seem to be proclaiming that by acting on these six applications, the FDA has broken the logjam. That's just not apparent to me. Acting on six out of more than 3,000 applications that have been pending for many months does not break the logjam. In my view, the FDA should simply approve the majority of these applications more information in the next few weeks and make it clear that minor changes in cigarettes do not render these cigarettes substantially different in terms of public health risk. And then the agency should move on and actually do something to protect the public's health. Posted by
Questions Relating To E cigarette Usage For Noobs http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2013/07/anti-smoking-advocates-call-fda-action.html
0 Comments | Post Comment | Permanent Link

5 E-Cigarette Atomizer Types15/7/2013
There is inherent value that every vaper, beginner or experienced, should be aware of the different E-Cigarette atomizer types.  Basically, for those who are not quite aware of it, regardless if your electronic cigarette s have hollow drip tips or disposable cartridges, the atomizer is primarily responsible for the process of vaporizing the flavored e-liquid and turn it into vapor through a heating process.  Eventually, vapers will attempt to venture and experiment with their electronic cigarette s, at which point this knowledge will come in handy.   Many vapers believe that the electronic cigarette industry is a relatively young one because the device was invented only in 2003 by the Chinese inventor Hon Lik.  However, the prevailing concept of having smokeless tobacco cigarettes was formulated as early as 1963 by Herbert A. Gilbert who holds the patent for it issued by the United States Patent Office.   These pioneering technologies have developed and made ample use of the various benefits provided by advancement.  As a product of these advancements, the following E-Cigarette atomizer types are now available in the market.   L88B Atomizers   Among the different E-Cigarette atomizer types sold in the market today, the L88B is considered as one of the most popular among atomizers.  This was of course during the time when cartomizers were not yet prevalently in use in the electronic cigarette industry.  The L88B atomizers were considered not only the most popular but also had the more effective e-liquid delivery system.   This type of atomizer is commonly deployed together with electronic cigarettes that belong to the small category.  However, it is also compatible with electronic cigarettes that make use of the 306 and 510 types of atomizers.  Vapers who want to use drip tips that are designed for the 306 types of atomizers can also make use of the L88B atomizer as online an alternative choice.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://whitesmokereview.com/5-e-cigarette-atomizer-types/
0 Comments | Post Comment | Permanent Link

V2 Cigs and National Tobacco Company Announce Strategic Partnership15/7/2013

Cigarettes could go up in smoke as American technology arrives in Prague

http://v2cigs-couponcode.com/choose-v2-cigs-as-an-alternative-to-traditional-smoking/ The two companies have joined forces in the development of a new line of electronic cigarette products for the retail market. The new products will debut at this year's NATO show in Las Vegas, Nevada. The new line will feature a redesigned V2 Cigs Disposable model that will be sold alongside V2's new rechargeable Express Kits and refill cartomizer products. Products will be showcased in a variety of multi-product display units designed to stand out on the counters of C-Store and Tobacco retailers. "The new disposable electronic cigarette models in this line offer a major step forward in consumer experience provided by its vapor and battery performance," said Dan Recio, President of Business Development at V2 Cigs.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://finance.yahoo.com/news/v2-cigs-national-tobacco-company-054632939.html

Combine that with the pleasure and satisfaction that e-cigs deliver, and you have the first viable alternative to tobacco cigarettes since the advent of smoking. Although all e-cigs use a similar technology, they are far from alike. There are hundreds of companies in the expanding and unregulated e-cig market, many of them just labeling and reselling wholesale electronics and e-liquids. What separates V2 Cigs is that over the past four years weve built our infrastructure, said Verleur. Today, http://www.vsvn.org/ we are able to control every step of the process, from engineering and manufacturing to distribution and marketing. As a result, weve been able to develop a level of quality control, and to replicate the smoking experience, unlike anything in the e-cig industry. As an example, Verleur points to the batch numbers that V2 Cigs stamps on every single item containing e-liquid.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://praguemonitor.com/2013/06/11/cigarettes-could-go-smoke-american-technology-arrives-prague

0 Comments | Post Comment | Permanent Link

The Cleveland Clinic: Unethical By Its Own Standards15/7/2013
...Providing the whole story behind tobacco news. Monday, June 17, 2013 The Cleveland Clinic: Unethical By Its Own Standards By its own standards, the Cleveland Clinic is acting unethically by supporting behavior that ultimately leads to death. How is the Cleveland Clinic supporting behavior that leads to death? Well, it's doing it in two ways: 1. By continuing to employ smokers, which increases health care costs, threatening our "sustainability as a nation." 2. By continuing to employ overweight individuals, which drives up health care costs, threatening our "sustainability as a nation." The Rest of the Story It is not me who opined that hiring employees who exhibit unhealthy behaviors is unethical. It is the Cleveland Clinic! In an op-ed piece, the physician who chairs the Wellness Institute at the Cleveland Clinic wrote: "Is it ethical for employers to hire smokers? The practice fosters ill health and makes America less competitive in an international marketplace. The expense of healthcare in the United States represents more than 18 percent of the gross domestic product, more than in any other country. It threatens our sustainability as a nation, squeezing out education and defense. Therefore, we must do everything we can to bring down costs while improving quality. Tobacco use accounts for one in every five deaths each year in the U.S.To us, supporting a habit that ultimately leads to death would be unethical. In 2006, we began offering free smoking cessation to our employees; the following year we offered the same throughout Northeast Ohio. In 2008, we stopped hiring smokers, a natural progression." So the Cleveland Clinic itself apparently believes that it is unethical to hire smokers. Well, then, the Cleveland Clinic is, by its own admission, engaging in unethical behavior because it employs smokers. In fact, 6% of its workforce smokes. Why is the Cleveland Clinic continuing to engage in this unethical behavior? Sure, the Cleveland Clinic has stopped hiring new employees who smoke, but ethics does not know the difference between an existing employee and a new one. If it is unethical to employ a smoker, then it is unethical to employ a smoker. There is nothing stopping the Cleveland Clinic from firing existing smokers who do not quit within a reasonable amount of time. Moreover, by its own admission, the Cleveland Clinic is unethical in supporting another behavior that leads to death: overeating and under-exercising. Overweight and obesity are severe health risks that lead to billions of dollars in health care costs. this site To be sure, obesity is driving up health care costs in the same way as smoking. Some estimates put the costs of obesity as rivaling those of smoking. So why is the Cleveland Clinic supporting these unhealthy behaviors which can lead to death by continuing to employ overweight and obese individuals? While businesses that refuse to hire smokers can make a legitimate argument that they need to reduce health care costs. if they implement smoker-free policies for this reason then they are simply engaging in discrimination v2 e cigarette and bigotry. But the Cleveland Clinic is not just engaging in discrimination and bigotry. It is also engaging in the basest form of hypocrisy: telling the world that it has higher ethical standards than most, but not actually living up to the ethical standards it espouses. The Cleveland Clinic tells us that it is unethical to employ smokers, but then it goes ahead and continues to employ smokers. The Cleveland Clinic tells us that hiring people who engage in unhealthy behavior is unethical, and then it goes ahead and continues to hire people who overeat and under-exercise to the point that their obesity threatens their health and lives. The Cleveland Clinic is not just serving as a model for employment discrimination and bigotry. It is serving as a model for hypocrisy and political cowardice. They are not even willing to stand up for what they say they believe in. This is politics, not public health. The appropriate way for employers to deal with problems such as smoking and obesity is not to discriminate against smokers or overweight individuals in their hiring practices, but to offer comprehensive employee health and wellness programs with state-of-the-art initiatives to promote healthy behavior. Worksite health promotion is a central aspect of public health. Employment discrimination is not. Posted by
Novice Advice and Answers To Typical E-cigs Questions http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2013/06/the-cleveland-clinic-unethical-by-its.html
0 Comments | Post Comment | Permanent Link

Cartomizer vs Atomizer15/7/2013
If you are thinking about switching from cigarettes to electronic cigarettes , one of the many choices you have to make is whether v2 cigs coupon code 15 or not to use an atomizer or a cartomizer style device. It may seem like a tough choice, however, it only comes down to personal preference. If you?re not sure, it may be a good idea to try both the atomizer and cartomizer to see which one you like the best. Is this article, we will go over the differences between atomizer and cartomizer so that you can choose what fits you the best.   A Traditional Joye 510 threaded ATOMIZER As we said above, it comes down to personal preference. There are countless variations of electronic cigarette brands, flavors, strengths, sets and batteries.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://whitesmokereview.com/cartomizer-vs-atomizer/
0 Comments | Post Comment | Permanent Link

E-cigarettes: the new fracking14/7/2013

Nicotine is addictive. Many smokers say they smoke e-cigarettes as a bridge to quitting. But there are plenty of reasons to fear this is just another way to keep people addicted to the smoking industry, period. The Globe recently reported that Boston has issued 61 store permits to sell e-cigarettes since March, five times more than in the same period last year. The explosion is no coincidence.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/columns/2013/07/13/cigarettes-new-fracking/e2rSt4qaPg6Ns6bWCyedUI/story.html

UTSA to conduct study on e-cigarettes

Two researchers from UTSA are getting ready to study the health effects of these cigarettes. UTSA kinesiologist Donovan Fogt, one of the researchers on the study, said while e-cigarettes v2 do not contain the cancer-causing contaminants that you find in regular cigarettes, the health effects of inhaling pure nicotine has never been studied. "They are FDA-approved as a smoking sensation tool," said Fogt. "They have been around for many years. They provide nicotine without combustion of products you get from burning paper." Longtime smoker Ashley Martinez said she quit cigarettes and has been "vaping" e-cigarettes for the past month.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.ksat.com/news/utsa-to-conduct-study-on-ecigarettes/-/478452/20959870/-/jcxbc2z/-/index.html

0 Comments | Post Comment | Permanent Link

Page 1 of 16
Last Page | Next Page
Hosting door HQ ICT Systeembeheer