If you are into vaping, then you must have read the news stories about the negative impact of vaporisers on the human health. However, studies make the opposite statements.
The e-cigarette resembles a traditional tobacco cigarette, without the carcinogens that cause cancer and it serves the purpose of fulfilling your craving momentum.
So, there are individuals against traditional smoking, but they don’t like vaping as well. We made a research on the anti-smoking movement and their history to find out what their issue really is.
Tobacco companies pay a percentage based on sales
Did you know that back in 1998, 46 states signed a contract with the largest tobacco companies, known as the Master Settlement Agreement?
The states filed cases against the tobacco companies to pay a part of the health care costs, involved in the treatment of individuals who smoke. The money was intended for anti-smoking education programs and campaigns.
Due to these cases, the companies agreed to pay a portion of their profits on a yearly basis. Some states used the guaranteed money to purchase bonds as they didn’t want to wait for a return.
Vaporisersrevolutionise the industry
Ever since their popularity skyrocketed, the sales of the tobacco-related products plummetedconsiderably. At first, companies expected only a slight withdrawal of only two percent. However, the annual rate they drop with is around 4%.
The contract is bonded with the yearly sales and lower profits mean less money for the states. This was a problem for them because they have added the funds as a part of their yearly budget.
According to recent analytics, the electronic cigarettes will overtake the tobacco products within the next 10 to 15 years. Moreover, they claim that the tobacco sales will be reduced by 70% over the next decade.
What measures did the States take?
Did you know that all it takes to destroy a bank is a newspaper? News reports can seriously harm the reputation of a product as they can easily manipulate the public opinion
That’s why most States started campaigns against the vapes so that they can continue to receive money from tobacco companies. For example, in California, massive advertising campaigns were launched, which claimed that smoking a vaporiser is as harmful as a traditional cigarette.
That’s their first choice, while their second option is to define e-cigarettes as tobacco products. If this is allowed, then the vaporisers are categorised as a tobacco-related product, which is regulated by the Master Settlement Agreement. This would mean that the States would receive money from taxing vape sales.
The relationship between anti-smoking advocates &vaporisers
The situation is like this, the States need the money from tobacco companies to cover the budget deficiency. Most anti-smoking advocacy groups are funded by the State so that they can help them eliminate vaping or regulate it as a tobacco product.
Many studies have proven that vaping offers a great alternative to smoking. Ask yourself, isn’t it strange that organisations that try to find healthier alternatives for the human body are against the single most effective alternative – electronic cigarettes.
