"Correct me if I'm wrong now. But did ANY of us start with normal cigarettes for the taste? No, they didn't. But it was the flavors in the e-cigarettes that made me finally throw the cigarette" writes Mathias Norman.
This is a debating article. The opinions are those of the named writer. Comment or contact editors if you want to reply!
The debate about the flavors of e-cigarettes, and their merits or demerits, has now reached the corridors of power. And with it comes an old weapon. It is a weapon that is now extremely worm-eaten but which unfortunately does as much damage as before with the intimidation it carries in its wake.
I am, of course, talking about the "corrupting youth" bat.
Lena Emilsson (s) stands and chants that it is the flavors that attract young people more than anything else. Correct me if I'm wrong now, but did ANY of us start with normal cigarettes for the taste? With my hand on my heart, I have to say a hard "no" myself. However, it was the taste of e-cigarettes that made me finally throw away my cigarettes 4 years ago.
"Tobacco tastes like shit"
Young people try e-cigarettes for exactly the same reason I started smoking cigarettes myself. Because I could. It was part of my own rebellion growing up, a rebellion that in others' cases goes to greater extremes. But I'm pretty sure it wasn't the taste that got me there, because in plain Swedish, tobacco tastes like shit. It was only with habituation and addiction that it kept me there. But it kept me in an iron grip.
Advertisement
Laughable arguments against flavors
I think Lena Emilsson, in her attempt to attract more contributions to her party's coffers, is screaming herself hoarse with misinformation. Has ANYONE in the decision-making bodies actually looked at the research coming out of the UK? I am pretty sure that is not the case. Michael Anefur even becomes laughable and ridiculous in his claim. He argues that smokers should be able to settle for fewer flavors to stay away from cigarettes.
"Anyone switching from regular smoking to e-cigs should, in most cases, like the taste of tobacco," Michael Anefur told Vejpkollen.
Tavern without spice
By the same logic, all spiced alcohol should be removed from the shelves, because ethylics are satisfied with pure liquor flavor without seasoning. Welcome to Michael Anefur's new tavern. Can anyone actually check the research that exists, to justify their positions with facts instead of taking a position according to the idea of who shouts loudest?
Mathias Norman
Flavors are important for 2 reasons.
Firstly, it helps the smoker to distance themselves from the taste of tobacco. It doesn't take long before the path back to something that tastes like an ashtray is blocked for good.
The second reason is to create a barrier so that "puffing" young people (unfortunately an inevitable problem, as young people have always tried the adult world) will NOT go on to smoke. To ban other flavors than tobacco is to train young people to accept the taste of smoking.
Is it a problem at all if young people vejpar?
Would smoking be a problem if nicotine-free tobacco was available?
I would say that very few people would smoke if it were not addictive. Looking tough with a cigarette in your mouth quickly loses its charm, but by then it's usually too late because the addiction has set in.
More important then to actively keep nicotine away from 'newbies'.
As a former smoker and now a vejp user, it was important to get nicotine in a way that resembled cigarettes because that was how I had gotten used to it. I have tried both patches and chewing gum but it did not give the same "feeling".
I can't see any problem with a fifteen-year-old tough guy puffing on an e-cig as long as it doesn't contain nicotine. All the serious research I've seen points to it being largely harmless and the novelty will wear off pretty quickly.
Many young people chew gum without switching to nicotine products, even though they are available in both mint and fruit flavors.
Turn it around.
Would tobacco have been a problem for society if it tasted like tea instead of being smoked?
No, probably not. In the cafés there would have been coffee, tea or tobacco to choose from and no one would have ever questioned it.
Nicotine has an undeservedly bad reputation because of the toxicity of its carrier, tobacco smoke.
It should not be forgotten that nicotine and caffeine are very closely related. Plants produce it for the same reason, as a protection against insects, and it affects the body in a very similar way.
First things first: e-cigarettes do not come with a "natural" flavor, so "tobacco" is a flavor just as much as chocolate, kiwi or candy cane. In other words, creating a tobacco flavor is as much a flavoring as a candy or fruit flavor.
Also: e-cigarettes are *not* tobacco. No matter how much some people try to lobby for it. And never will be.
A major argument in this embarrassing soup of lies is the absurdity of e-juice suppliers being forced to produce tobacco flavors when their business is based on a non-tobacco alternative. Wrong, crazy and shameful.
One thing we should NOT forget is "what is tobacco flavor?"
ALL tobacco sold on the market has LOTS of flavorings added to it, to create a unique taste for the manufacturer.
Some of the substances added are also unhealthy. For example, most cigarettes contain diacetyl. The substance that can cause popcorn lung and which e-cigs were accused of containing. Well, cigars contain just as much diacetyl and, ironically, no smoker has ever gotten popcorn lung.
So the consequence of politicians' simplistic decision to ban everything except tobacco flavors must mean that all flavors added to tobacco can also be used in e-cigs.