Pippa Starr - Let's Improve Vaping Education! 🇦🇺

I’m no longer interested in engaging with those who spread false accusations, misinformation about nicotine vaping, or deliberately misrepresent my motives. My advocacy has always been grounded in one goal: helping people live healthier lives through harm reduction. However, moving forward, any individual or organisation that publishes or repeats defamatory claims about me or my work should be aware that such conduct may be subject to the full extent of legal remedies available. Healthy debate is welcome. Defamation is not.

*** EXCLUSIVE *** Dodgy smoke shops are ignoring closure orders. They’re reopening despite being shut down for selling illegal products. Listen to the details HERE. 2gb.com/exclusive-dodg…

Australia’s tobacco crackdown didn’t cut demand. It pushed it underground. Criminals took control. Violence followed. Yesterday’s drive-by shooting is the result. Policy should reduce crime, not create it – youtube.com/watch?v=AFYEJa…

The narrative around quitting in Australia is like: “Using a parachute 🪂 is just as harmful as not using one, quit skydiving! It’s bloody dangerous and ridiculous!” Vaping is the parachute to quitting smoking! @drjoesDIYhealth @MarewaGlover @GrimmGreen @Algore09algor

@LivePippas @MalloryGates14 You don’t save smokers by hiding the truth. You save them by showing the difference.

In tobacco harm reduction, comparison isn’t optional, it’s the whole point. Cigarettes cause disease primarily through combustion, which releases thousands of toxic chemicals, while vaping delivers nicotine without burning tobacco and therefore with far fewer harmful byproducts. If you don’t compare the two, you erase the relative risk difference that can help smokers switch to a less harmful alternative. Conflating vaping with smoking misleads the public, discourages smokers from switching, and ultimately risks keeping people on the most dangerous form of nicotine use, combustible tobacco.

@LivePippas Just allow the tobacco shops to sell vapes and cannabis. Allow people to grow cannabis. There is no need of a scare, reefer nightmare year after year . People know better now and support it !💚💚💚💚💚

@AngusTaylorMP An important message Angus, next time remove the expensive looking coffee out of frame because that’s not relatable to most Australians who currently can’t afford to drink a barrister made coffee!

Another rate rise and another excuse from the Treasurer. Labor's reckless spending has fueled inflation and it's everyday Australians paying the price on their mortgage and at the checkout. We deserve better.

🚀 It’s the year 2036, 👧 Why did Grandma die so young? 🧔‍♂️Australia tried vaping prohibition. It increased crime, it didn’t stop safe access, and left smokers like your Grandma behind. ⚰️ Up to 24000 Australians per year perished because of this foolishness. That’s why! 👧And Grandad? 🧔‍♂️He was in a shop that was firebombed! This is the future, it doesn’t have to be!

"Conclusions The findings suggest that governments should implement policies that incentivize smokers to switch to less harmful alternatives, even if they initially become dual users." sciencedirect.com/science/articl…

@1971SuzieQ @Algore09algor @smokevapeutah @sappholives83 Being a mumpsimus is not a good look!

@Algore09algor @smokevapeutah @sappholives83 My kind comment was to suggest she should limit vaping & wishing her luck on breaking her addiction. But by all means, continue to draw unknown contamination into your lungs. Vaping is not a good look for you…

It’s Sunday morning, and I haven’t had a cigarette since Thursday morning. After 28 years, I’ve actually managed to quit. I’m using a vape, which I guess is kind of cheating, but it’s getting me through this, so I’ll take it. Thursday was hard, but Friday I wanted to pull my hair out. Yesterday and today have been easier. See, the vape provides nicotine, but cigarettes have a whole cocktail of addictive chemicals in them, and each kind is slightly different to encourage brand loyalty. Someone who smokes Marlboros, for example, won’t get quite the same satisfaction if they smoke a Camel. With the vape, I’m missing out on all of the other addictive chemicals I was getting through my cigarettes, so I’m definitely still having cravings. It is nice not to have to go outside to smoke anymore, though, and I can already tell the difference in my breathing.

Remember these names every time outcomes as seen below occur! 👇 x.com/livepippas/sta…

Simon Chapman Becky Freeman Emily Banks Mike Daube & their friends. Remember these names every time there is another disastrous outcome from Australia’s failed tobacco & vapes policy! @Mark_Butler_MP took their advice and ignored real evidence based solutions from real doctors & consumers!

#281 Tobacco and Vapes War Firebombing 🔥🔥🔥🔥🚒 This one with bullets! But apparently this happened because Australia has the best tobacco legislation with a bill of well over billion dollars of tax payers money spent trying to apply its enforcement? Who has to die? 👇🤷‍♀️

Australia is a world leader in illicit tobacco, regardless of how @SimonChapman6 and friends wish to spin their ideological 🐂 💩 Australia is at least 4x better at creating tobacco/vape black markets! Illicit Market Share: 🇦🇺 Australia~by 39–40% (ATO estimate, real world % much higher) 🇬🇧 United Kingdom~9–12% 🇺🇸 United States ~8–11% 🇪🇺 European Union avg ~8–10% 🌍 Global average~10% Australia has a population of 26 million. Yet the ATO estimates ~40% of the tobacco market is illicit. That’s not “negligible”. That’s what happens when governments ban tobacco harm reduction products and push legal prices so high that organised crime becomes the most competitive supplier. Population size doesn’t matter. Market distortion does.

cancercouncil.com.au/wp-content/upl… @drjoesDIYhealth @jamomartin @MarewaGlover @ArielleSelya @Clive_Bates @Anne_Ruston @Mark_Butler_MP The “Access” claim doesn’t show what it pretends to show. One of the arguments often used to justify stricter vaping regulations is that new laws are making it harder for young people to obtain vapes. But the data presented here does not clearly support that conclusion. First, the report highlights that the proportion of young people who said they purchased their last vape themselves declined from 40.0% in Wave 6 to 20.4% in Wave 9. At first glance, this appears to suggest that restrictions are working. However, the authors themselves acknowledge that this change was not statistically significant (p = 0.172). In research terms, that means we cannot confidently say the decline reflects a real change rather than normal variation within a small sample. The number of respondents in each wave was also extremely small (between 82 and 123 participants), which further limits the reliability of the trend. In other words, the data does not provide strong evidence that youth are buying vapes less often. What the data actually shows is something quite different. Across every wave, the majority of youth who reported vaping said they did not purchase the vape themselves. This indicates that direct retail sales to youth were never the dominant pathway in the first place. Instead, vapes appear to be obtained primarily through social sources, such as friends or other intermediaries. If that is the case, restricting legal retail access is unlikely to address the main route through which young people obtain them. The second claim concerns perceived ease of access. The report notes a statistically significant shift in perceptions, with the proportion saying it was “very easy” to get a vape declining from 52.7% to 39.1%. However, the broader context of the data weakens the policy narrative. Despite the decline in the “very easy” category, the majority of respondents still reported that access was either easy or very easy. Reports of moderate or high difficulty remained relatively rare. This suggests that even after the introduction of stricter laws, most youth who vape still perceive few barriers to obtaining products. Taken together, the findings raise an uncomfortable possibility: regulatory changes may have shifted how products are obtained, but not necessarily whether they are obtained. When access is driven by social networks or informal supply chains, tightening legal retail restrictions often produces displacement rather than elimination. The result is a familiar pattern seen in many regulated markets: Legal access decreases, but informal supply fills the gap. If the goal of policy is to reduce youth access, these results suggest that simply restricting legal sales may not be addressing the mechanisms through which access actually occurs. And if the evidence does not show meaningful barriers emerging after the law changes, then the claim that these policies are “working” becomes far harder to sustain.

Idk what to do with this but I’m in England for a reporting project and I learned that the NHS pays for vapes to help people quit smoking

If there’s one thing an @AlboMP Govt excels at; it’s creating policy that makes small business explode! Not in a good financial sense, rather they prefer small businesses explode from over 280 firebombings in or next to their businesses. Small businesses are now often uninsurable! It’s that bad! Cut tobacco excise to stem the bleeding? Oh hell no Mr Jimflation says! 🤦‍♀️ @TimWilsonMP @Anne_Ruston @mattjcan

@JH_Otway_Ranges @_davidlimbrick It already has!

The Government minister just got up and said how great their tobacconist licensing scheme is working. Everyone laughed. Back in the real world, there was another firebombing last night in Glenroy.

@123eduz @_davidlimbrick The NGOs favoured by Labor Party!

@_davidlimbrick why is this such a big problem to fix - who has a vested interest ?