Category Archives: Anti-Tobacco

Incoherent Screams & Observations

yelling

Some days

When I’m writing on my blog, I wonder, does anyone read it. Does anyone understand the consumer’s point of view?

I’ve said “we look harder for information, good or bad,” than those who pretend they present it to the public effectively and accurately.

Those self-centered “officials” who still pass information off as if it were “for the greater public good” (without regard to the actual public) and posing as experts –  are pissing me off.

You too? Good, let’s move along.


What Was Released

With the FDA regulations well underway, some idiots decided to “mine” tweets to observe “influencers” to determine and analyze “information shared on Twitter for insights into initial public reactions” to the regulations.

Denial, manipulation and keeping up appearances to protect cigarette sales is the goal. Because they’ll do a better job.

Public health advocates should consider using social media outlets to better communicate the policy’s intentions, reach and potential impact for public good to create a more balanced conversation.

There’s no balance. There are barely conversations.

There’s also no secret to professionals trolling on Twitter about e-cigarettes –  as it has been done in the past here and where we “may be an impediment to tobacco control research and practice” here.

Now it is being passed off as “research” and tends a reader to believe this is “may, could, might” be normal behavior of tobacco control or public health if there is such a thing.

I’ll get to that.

Another wonderful example of the scream test has found its home in the US National Library of Medicine National Institute of Health:

Public reactions to e-cigarette regulations on Twitter: a text mining analysis.


Screams Of Fear

What exactly are these people afraid of? They want their bias quota met. They want those who are against it suppressed. They want the public to know just what they want them to know, not information we are finding and providing, not what is factual or coherent. Just what they want the public to understand.

Much to my surprise, and with so much stiff competition, I proudly happened to be on the list of examples in the impugning world of influence balance and truth on twitter.


a


That insight to their scream test, control and predicted eventual demise is the actual report not shown in the first link here:

You know, the bigger picture. Click.

Public reactions to e-cigarette regulations on Twitter: a text mining analysis.

Maybe someday they’ll do some actual research about e-cigarettes instead of wasting everyone’s time and money.

Added 4/5/07:

From Tina in the comments:

Last I knew, this study was still going on:

Is Twitter Censoring Us?

The tweet from Big Vaping’s DrMA is from the 21st of March, the release date of the “analysis” above was the 24th.

I wonder how powerful “they” are. This “may, might, could” be coincidental.

Update 4/14/17:

An Update on Safety


Public Health Out Of Control

Is this normal behavior? Are the emporers not wearing any cloths?

Speaking of incoherent babbling – Public health all along has coerced, suppressed and controlled public opinion to create a “balance”, as long as it’s weighted to their decisions.

We are, after all, the “enemy of the people”.

I’m not sure who said this, I asked and did not get an answer.

I assume it was Martin McBubbleGum.


Enough Is Enough

Along the same subject line as above, with the attitude and behavior towards smokers, smoking or any other power “health” has over the “enemy of the people” follows below:

A sad statement for smokers from ACSH today showing what lengths “orgs” will go to demean rather than assist. It’s not about “you”.

This, is normal behavior?


Street Fight

We’re impugning. We’re getting on their nerves. They are hedging their bets with your health. They think they can keep getting away with it.

They are hedging their bets with the consumer’s health and choice.

While we’re trying to get every single drop of information, good or bad, from reliable sources about e-cigarettes, public health wants to play games. They want to control them.

Their livelihood and egos are obviously more important than our, and consumers who may instead keep smoking’s  – very lives.


They are in it for themselves first. This is about lives, choice and telling the truth.

Keep doing that.

This is a street fight.

Get LOUDER.

As David Goerlitz has said — and will again soon…the gloves are off.


Fundraiser:

WE are raising funds for Dr. Farsalinos & his team:

“Unbiased, reliable – full access” information.

We can’t expect him and his team to do his research for free.

So far the challenge has been ignored by public health, tobacco control, and government. We have raised $580.00 and one challenge has been submitted.

Make some noise.

Raising Funds For E-cigarette Research


Call to action from CASAA


NEWS from my friends across the pond: Vapers.org.uk.

You can find me here trying to be cordial on Facebook

You can find me here being a bit more evil on Twitter

You can also find me on LinkedIn

You can follow me on this blog!


 Medical, Research, Science Professionals

Research


Politics

E-Cigarette Politics 


Consumers Groups

A Billion Lives

This isn’t over:


Your comments are NEVER filtered, always encouraged and welcome on this blog.

More to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin

Save

Save

Save

Nicotine Addiction: An Open 30-Day Public Health Challenge

nicotine

Foreword:

For decades, Public Health, Tobacco Control, and Government experts have agreed in unison, that nicotine is the addictive chemical in cigarettes with comparisons and statements that nicotine is as or more addictive than heroin.

This “Public Health Challenge” is to show scientific proof that the assertions of addiction are true.


I have decided to put (our) money where your assertions are by taking you, the health, tobacco control, science and research communities, to literal task on nicotine addiction.

This is a 30-day challenge for anyone in public health to show nicotine addiction in humans, without MAOI’S, ammonia, or any other non-nicotine additive or any form of tobacco, without question.

You don’t need to prove me wrong, you need to prove yourselves right.

That’s it.


Nicotine Addiction

An Open 30-Day Public Health Challenge:

Addiction to a habit-forming substance is defined by Merriam-Webster:

Medical Definition of addiction

  1. :  compulsive physiological need for and use of a habit-forming substance (as heroin, nicotine, or alcohol) characterized by tolerance and by well-defined physiological symptoms upon withdrawal; broadly: persistent compulsive use of a substance known by the user to be physically, psychologically, or socially harmful [emphasis added.]


Criteria:

To show proof of nicotine addiction with existing clinical trials, case studies, data, and scientific documentation of addiction to nicotine alone, without any form of tobacco or Monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOI’S), ammonia, or any other non-nicotine additive, in humans.

Documentation submitted (either as a text file or in the form of a web link) must be accessible and not be behind a “paywall”.


Documentation:

Unacceptable documentation:

  • Animal studies (rats, mice, monkeys, etc.) are not acceptable.
  • Submissions not published in professional or scientific journals or government websites are not acceptable.
  • Anything inaccessible by the public, including “paywalls” via the internet, are not acceptable.
  • Oral presentations, press releases are not acceptable.
  • Existing clinical trials, case studies, data, in vitro studies, self-reported surveys and scientific documentation in humans that claim probabilities or hypothetical possibilities as they do not show nicotine “is” addictive and are not acceptable.
  • Existing clinical trials, case studies, data, in vitro studies, self-reported surveys, and scientific documentation cannot include words and phrases like “hand to mouth, dependent, habitual, ritualistic” or words like “can, conceivably, could, likely, may, might, perhaps, possible, possibly, possibility, probably, probability” and cannot include tobacco or MAOI’s, ammonia, or any other non-nicotine additive for this challenge.

Acceptable Documentation:

  • Documentation must be accessible to the public.
  • Documentation must show the acceptable definition of addiction in existing clinical trials, case studies, data, or science and include characteristics of addiction such as increased tolerance, and withdrawal symptoms of nicotine alone, in humans, without any form of tobacco or MAOI’s, ammonia, or any other non-nicotine additive.
  • Documentation showing addiction in clinical trials or case studies with 3% or 2 subjects, whichever is greater.
  • Documentation must include a clear description of methodologies and results.
  • Peer-reviewed submissions must include names and affiliations of reviewers.

Documentation submitted (either as a text file or in the form of a web link) must be accessible and not be behind a “paywall”.

Documentation submitted must also include proof of existence with at least three of the following compulsive use or behaviors identified and defined, such as:

  • Physical addiction
  • Loss of job
  • Erratic or deviant behavior
  • Decreased social activities
  • Increased tolerance of nicotine and use over time
  • Harm to the patient or others around them
  • Withdrawal symptoms, phases

Submission:

Documentation must be submitted to this blog publicly and directly in the comment section below.


Reward:

money6

If addiction to nicotine is proven according to the criteria above, 5% of the funds donated during this 30-day challenge (minus processing fees) will be donated to The Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids.

The remaining 95% (if proven) will be donated as follows:

In the absence of or lack of documentation submitted per the criteria stated above, or if this Public Health Challenge is deemed uncontested, any and all funds donated during this 30-day challenge (minus processing fees) will go to ecigarette-research.org for further research by Dr. Farsalinos and his colleagues.


To *donate any amount, please go here to the GoFundMe page:

Nicotine Addiction: An Open 30-Day Public Health Challenge


*If you cannot donate with GoFundMe (due to bank fees, country of origin or other reasons), please message me. I can accept your donation of any amount securely via PayPal here and I will then transfer it with your name or initials  (please specify) so there is a receipt for both of us.


Save

Save

Save

Save

Tobacco Control: Losing Control.

bloody-hands-2

According to “them”, tobacco control has an end game. Lots of players in the game. Lots of rules. All to “end” tobacco. Lots of money. Careers. Longevity.

Lots and lots of funding, grants, – you know – money. Well, money doesn’t motivate anyone. Lack of money motivates, but I digress.

It seems “they” – or at least seven of them have decided they don’t like – well – stuff. Now, they’re making more rules throwing a tantrum! Hurray!

Tobacco. Widespread carnage. Millions of lives. Important stuff. What are they babbling about? They don’t like personal blogs impugning. Awww. What that means in the #KeepSmokingWeNeedTheMoney scream test is:

Tobacco CONtrol doesn’t like their authority control being challenged or questioned.

In the words of Steve Martin: Well excuuuuuuse me.

Tobacco control can’t do its job and hasn’t for years. They’re losing control. Tobacco CONtrol is, after all, a punchline.


I’m not that good to perceive myself as interrupting the good work tobacco control alleges they “do”. I can’t imagine the “blog fog” from the BMJ Tobacco Control does anything to advance anything other than more control. After all, who doesn’t like an “I love me” or an “I’m so important” wall?

“Recent comments posted on some personal blogs impugn the objectivity of Tobacco Control and its reviewers, questioning our motives and the veracity of peer review.”

Funny, one of the authors of the “Blog Fog” tweeted this:

 

I do love ProPublica, they do awesome work.

Sorry, got off track.


I have my suspicions as to who – and there are multiple suspects, the “blog fog” could have been about. More power to them. I won’t try to assess the whining or illusions these 7 are under… pretending to defend themselves against defending themselves, I’ll let the links below do that.

What I did take to heart, and you may as well, is “personal blogs impugn the objectivity” and “questioning our motives and the veracity of peer review” within. Ya think?


I care about the unreasonable denial of less harm with vaping products that are ignored BY tobacco control resulting in inadequate and bias “objectivity”.

Act like adults. What I care about less harm with “ecigs” and how quickly dismissive it is for those in charge – to be arsonists to the very thing that may take their livelihood away from them. E-cigarettes.


And that, to my hearts content, will be blogged about about until my fingers bleed.


The tweet below isn’t a co-author of the “blog fog”, but it reminds me of the same.

This was part of a scolding I received last fall from another CONTROL fanatic.

(If you like, you can see my take on Ruth Malone’s objectivity (like Hefler’s) in Alice In TobaccoLand here)


SEVEN people had to “take the time” to contribute to what someone has – evidently – been impugning. You, you opinionated impugners!

Blog fog? Using rapid response to advance science and promote debate


Responses were swift & admirable. MORE of this, please:

Shannon: Open Letter to Ruth Malone

Paul: Denial of the Echo Chamber

Neal: Hey Ruth, This one is for you

Michael Siegel:

Tobacco Control Journal: There Can Be No Legitimate Discussion of Our Articles Without Our Permission

Carl V Phillips:

Editors of Tobacco Control admit they publish indefensible junk science

 Added 2/22/17 by Carl V Phillips (part II)

More on Tobacco Control’s “stop talking about us!” editorial

Dick Puddlecoat:

Hey! Bloggers, Leave Our Junk Alone!

Bolton Smoker’s Club:

The Abject Failure of the Tobacco Control Magazine

Frank Davis

If Air Traffic Control was like Tobacco Control


E-cigarette NEWS Monday thru Friday is here

from my friends across the pond at Vapers.org.uk.



Comments are not filtered and are always welcome on this blog.


  • Medical, Research, Science ProfessionalsGO HERE

If you’re interested in learning about vaping products:




You can find me here trying to be cordial on Facebook

You can find me here being a bit more evil on Twitter

You can also find me on LinkedIn

You can follow me on this blog!


I’m not shutting up, and blogging until my fingers bleed. Impugning, if you will.

You do the same.

More to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Vaping In the News

news2

Depending on where you look and who’s got the narrative on e-cigarettes –  There is good, bad, and ugly. Every DAY, vaping is in the news. Every day, something is breaking.

In the spirit of and inspiration from my friends across the pond at Vapers.org.uk, this is a quick selection of what I’ve seen (good, bad and ugly) this past week with the obligatory op-ed above each one designed to inform, enlighten and enrage.


The Outstanding News

outstanding

If you don’t know about Cole-Bishop, you need to hydrate, educate yourself –  and waste no time:

“There is a legitimate role for tobacco regulations, but vaping is not a tobacco product.”

“Regulations should be based on evidence and the FDA doesn’t have the evidence to say that vaping is a harmful product.”

“There is a legitimate role the FDA plays for tobacco regulations, but e-cigarettes are not a tobacco product.”

Rep. Tom Cole (R-OK) Discusses the Cole-Bishop Amendment with Nicopure Labs



The Good

news good.jpg

It’s an amazing thing when people take matters into their own hands when decisions they make have a direct impact on their lives. There is a continuous stream of light from consumers who have switched from smoking combustible tobacco and their journey with e-cigarettes. We, after all, are the experts.

Shining that light is a proactive effort to educate the public and smokers who may be thinking of switching to e-cigarettes.

A series of videos released by the National Centre for Smoking Cessation and Training (NCSCT) and New Nicotine Alliance (NNA) was released with personal stories from those who have made The Switch.

More on this from Diane Caruana at Vaping Post:

Short movies about vaping by the NNA and NCSCT


Next, another video released by CASAA with a no-nonsense tone explaining the obvious difference between combustible tobacco and e-cigarettes.

How they work, less harm, nicotine and more.



The Bad

news bad2.jpg

Click-Bait Trend

Click-bait is the staple of the media, and this a sparking example of controlling the flow of information by deleting comments.

You can read the sparkly tweet and have enough to decipher the stupidity, and to read the article would take you less than one minute. I’ve linked with a “do not link” url here so they get no traffic ranking from this blog. I’d venture to say if it weren’t for vapers, there wouldn’t be any traffic to some of these idiots.


Would you like fries with that?

The Mayo Clinic has released positive views about e-cigarettes here.

Now, they’ve caught the attention of who is, without question, impeccable. He maintains his class and style by adding condiments to an “unethical and misleading risk” sandwich to the Mayo Clinic.

I hope he sent them napkins.

Hold the Mayo



Idiot Of The Week

malpractice2

Because who doesn’t know how to describe “toxic exposure” better than Michael Cawley, PharmD, RRT, CPFT, FCCM:.

“Although controversy continues about the limited carcinogenic exposure of e-cigarettes compared to traditional tobacco products, a more alarming fact is the toxic exposure of liquid nicotine used by e-cigarettes.”

Sounds like it’s more alarming to vape than smoke, but if you’re not educated enough with all those letters after your name to find substantially reduced levels of measured carcinogens and toxins, DO some research. Even the American Association for Cancer Research knows better.

We already know that e-cigarettes are “not nearly” as alarming, but the way you put it,

Cawley goes on to insist at the end:

“In addition, potential drug interactions should also be discussed with patients since many do not consider liquid nicotine interacting with any prescribed medications. As pharmacists, we need to routinely include questions about the use of e-cigarettes in all our patients with a smoking history.”

I can’t stand linking it, but it is here:  Know the Toxins in E-Cigarettes



The Ugly

There was a “discussion paper” released in 2016 in Australia called:

Options to minimize the risks associated with the marketing and use of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) in Australia.”

discuss

Clive Bates covered it here.

One of the authors of that paper is none other than Simon Chapman. Now, he’s having a conversation on his article, “Twelve myths about e-cigarettes” The now retired professor wrote an article stuffed with his quit or die mantra, only this time there are responses including Cardiologist Konstantinos E Farsalinos.

Read the article (if you must), but GO to the bottom and hit “Show All Comments”. Turns out “the ugly”, with the help of Dr. Farsalinos and others within may just educate those in need the most: “experts“.

Twelve myths about e-cigarettes that failed to impress the TGA



The latest from me:

Exclusively on Vaping Media:

Rather than initiate dialogue or pursue evidence to present to consumers, U.S. officials are not mentioning it.

Why Are U.S. Health Officials Ignoring U.K. Colleagues about E-Cigs?

I wrote the President:

Dear President Trump:

I urge you to immediately order the Food and Drug Administration to cease and desist any and all activity involving “regulation” of e-cigarettes by classifying them “tobacco”.

Dear President Trump: Stop the F.D.A

Finally:

With more than 560 physicians surveyed, over 70% “indicated that e-cigs can help patients reduce or eliminate smoking” and “almost half believe they can reduce risk” according to a new survey by Andrew Nickels, M.D.

Doctors tell smokers: Switch to e-cigs 



E-cigarette NEWS Monday thru Friday is here

from my friends across the pond at Vapers.org.uk.



Comments are not filtered and are always welcome on this blog.


  • Medical, Research, Science Professionals:  GO HERE

If you’re interested in learning about vaping products:




You can find me here trying to be cordial on Facebook

You can find me here being a bit more evil on Twitter

You can also find me on LinkedIn

You can follow me on this blog!


More to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin

Save

Controlling tobacco roads – paved with g̶o̶o̶d̶ intentions

hell

Health officials, politicians and distinguished “experts” have, with all intents and purposes, descended into subliminal tobacco promotion – pro bono. Nice work! Despite fictitious and contrived positions against tobacco, they have consumed themselves by demonizing e-cigarettes.

The tobacco companies didn’t have to ask. The pharmaceutical companies sit quietly on standby. Healthcare organizations are dancing in the streets – still bleeding from loss of revenue. Government officials can barely contain themselves.

By design, tobacco control and anti-tobacco are promoting the consumption and continued use of cigarettes by both not saying a word and perpetuating fake news.

They’ve become the largest single advertiser – denying, downplaying, discouraging and ignoring facts to consumers about vaping products.

eyechart



If less tobacco use is the collective goal, they would have intervened and promoted the 79% success rate of e-cigarettes LONG ago. Instead, they violate the blind trust of the public by manipulation of facts with their opinions. They want revenue.

Nothing says “please keep smoking” like leading consumers to believe high profile doctors like Dr. Oz with his latest, or Dr. Margaret Quomo’s claim that “e-cigarettes will raise your risk for lung cancer but also other cancers, like liver cancer”.

Other delusions of grandeur like “nicotine is highly addictive”, “oral health“, formaldehyde-gate, Popcorn-lung-gate, particulate matters and the ever popular gateway-gate are still standard operating procedure to keep doubt and control of the intent of public perception.

These are professionals with standards?

Added 4/23/17

Against All Odds, the U.S. Tobacco Industry Is Rolling in Money


Deny, Deny, Deny

This please keep smoking advertisement comes from Senator Markey saying the “e-cig industry should be put out of business“.

Please, think of the children.

Scare the public with your faux authority, Ed. That leaves the choice obvious for consumers, Ed. Ban the safer alternative, keep smoking as the intent – you can see how Massachusetts needs smokers for the money.


Who’s left behind?

hell-2

See the smokers looking to switch in the rear view mirror?

To deviate from facts readily available to support a safer alternative to smoking is to act, with malice in promoting smoking and cigarette sales. Period.

Withholding differential risk information on legal consumer nicotine/tobacco products: The public health ethics of health information quarantines


Two recent examples of less harm:

New study comes the closest yet to proving that e-cigarettes aren’t as dangerous as smoking

Nicotine, Carcinogen, and Toxin Exposure in Long-Term E-Cigarette and Nicotine Replacement Therapy Users: A Cross-sectional Study


The tragedy – since National Tobacco Day, nicotine is now “tobacco”, is that the public has to ACCEPT their definition of nicotine as tobacco, and in doing so, taxes will be, and already are, the norm. That is their intention.

In that, they get what they want either way, and the cost will be in line with – or higher than cigarettes. Think five years down the road. Legislators asking for the farm by passing insane tax measures – like in Pennsylvania.


They’ve done this before.

proof-by-assertion

This is not their first rodeo.

abc


We are obviously getting louder and harder to avoid.

The “Senate Co-Sponsorship Memoranda” introduced by Senator Camera Bartolotta does mention Public Health England and Royal College of Physicians.

Then – the guilty as charged get what they want (funding, balanced budgets) by appeasing – and “lowering the bar” while their intention is manipulating us into believing or having to accept the fact that consumers, smokers who may want to switch, are getting a “good deal”.

They’re not doing a very good job of trying to fight us.

 

 




Added 02/10/17:

Here’s bias in print:

Research Collaboration Uncovers Biases in UK/US Physician Discussions on E-Cigarettes

Added 02/10/17:

Please, keep smoking.

The FDA’s multi-million dollar campaign attacking smokeless tobacco is almost certainly leading to higher levels of disease by causing Americans to use far-more-hazardous cigarettes,” adds Sweanor.

That’s here:

Smokeless Doesn’t Mean Harmless’ campaign may be doing more harm, researchers argue




I question their integrity, I question their intent.

They are, after all, in the control business.

They want their piece of the pie.




I’ve written President Trump:

Dear President Trump: Stop the F.D.A.




Cole-Bishop Amendment




Comments are not filtered and are always welcome on this blog.


If you’re interested in learning about vaping products:


Please visit

A Billion Lives

August8th.org


E-cigarette NEWS you can use… every day ~ Monday thru Friday ~ is here from my friends across the pond at Vapers.org.uk.


If you are a Professional,  go HERE.


You can find me here trying to be cordial on Facebook

You can find me here being a bit more evil on Twitter

You can also find me on LinkedIn


More to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin

Save

For immediate release: Dear Matt Myers, President of Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids

tobaccofreebullies

 

Ohio, 25th September 2016

Dear Matt Myers, President of Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids:

As I am sure you are aware, public health and tobacco control organizations must posture themselves with efforts to play a fictitious lead role in tackling the tobacco pandemic, which causes the death of 480,000 US citizens every year. This is without factoring all the suffering, disability and personal tragedy linked to tobacco use along with millions of dollars in funding, none of which can ever be quantified.

I, as a citizen of the United States, would like to express my strong concern for your valiant efforts to keep Americans smoking, and your lack of participation or interest for invaluable e-cigarette research that has taken place in England and many other countries.

I also could not help but notice you are heavily and blatantly sponsored directly by or in partnerships with medical associations, pharmaceuticals and medical industry along with front groups such as your founder, the Robert Woods Johnson Foundation, and of course the American Heart, Lung and Cancer Associations.

All of these groups, as you are also aware, irresponsibly supported regulation of vaping products as tobacco. Amazingly, not one national health or tobacco control organization has had the integrity to stand up for public health.

As you might not have noted,  a highly responsible and growing group of professionals from the medical profession and tobacco control, who are not afraid to speak to each other, or speak for the welfare of smokers, are with a group called M.O.V.E. (1).

On its own, Public Health England (2), and the highly respected Royal College of Physicians (3), have been supporting vaping products for tobacco harm reduction for quite some time, stating at least 95% less harm, staking their professional reputations and titles on these facts.

  1. M.O.V.E.
  2. A_report_commissioned_by_Public_Health_England.
  3. Expert independent review concludes that e-cigarettes have potential to help smokers quit.

As you are involved with an organization having unstable credibility at best, you should be placing smokers’ health and well-being as the highest priority. Your lobbying and backroom deals for tobacco companies best interests involving the Master Settlement Agreement and the Family Smoking and Tobacco Control Act shows a conflict of interest dripping with corrupt activities.

The involvement directly related to the pharmaceutical industry has been misleading and deceiving the general public for many decades and “could be” not only detrimental to your reputation but also the notoriety of your affiliated associations and institutions.

When informed about the staggering evidence of tobacco harm reduction (4), and ease in which smokers are switching to a much less harmful alternative (5), to combustible tobacco, some organizations like yourself have immediately ignored any and all correspondence towards one answer, less harm.

Now that these connections are clearly established and brought to your attention, I call on you to to disengage from denying information to smokers in the United States, deceiving them with misinformation (6), propaganda like “Think of the children“, and being the self-serving catalyst responsible for the 480,000 deaths per year from smoking from this moment on.


4. Top tobacco control experts to FDA: Studies of e-cigs suggest more benefit than harm

5. We Don’t Need ‘Decades of Research’ to Know Vaping Is Safer Than Smoking

6. Withholding differential risk information on legal consumer nicotine/tobacco products: The public health ethics of health information quarantines

You, Matt Myers, are at the forefront and part of the cause of the tobacco epidemic that is crippling our communities and targeting the most vulnerable smokers from switching. You need to embrace your professional and well paid position of alleged authority and vow to no longer be involved with an industry which has fundamentally irreconcilable interests from public health and welfare.


I know I will slow this pandemic of tobacco to a crawl without your ulterior motives, effectively allowing adult smokers to make the choice to switch to a less harmful alternative with proper and educated information.

I hope that your participation in the highly profitable pharmaceutical and tobacco control “end-game” has just been an oversight, a simple misunderstanding all these years. I’ll expect you to rectify and remedy this immediately.

If not, it is imperative for you to cease and desist any and all tobacco control activities until you get your head out of your ass.


Without respect or regret,
Kevin Crowley

P.S.

Reducing smoking, a challenging “Campaign” for Tobacco Free Kids

This is coming here.


A BILLION LIVES


You can find me here on Facebook

You can find me here on  Twitter


More to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.


Kevin

Reducing smoking, a challenging campaign for Tobacco Free Kids

tobaccofreebullies.JPG

The Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids (CFTK) has shown a rare glimpse into the desperate reach it wants to have with one of the finest examples of illiteracy in tobacco harm reduction. 

CTFK and the European Network for Smoking and Tobacco Prevention (ENSP) have joined together asserting themselves with this letter to Dr Christopher Russell presumably not meant for public consumption.

There was no concern for harm reduction in any form in the letter and was not an attainable goal or option. No mention of “how do we come and learn as well” or “sounds like there may be some valuable information extracted from this conference.” With typical Matt Myers “tobacco control” style, only intimidation, control, and manipulation were a concern.

Disapproval is of the highest order from these organizations to Dr. Russell for planning to attend the Global Tobacco & Nicotine Forum (GTNF).


 

Concern for Dr. Russell and his impeccable professional credibility seemed to be the focus in their letter. In my mind, they’ve been the recipient of this paragraph at some point.

It needs to be read back to THEM in court:

tfk

I didn’t know who “ENSP” even was until a day or so ago. I do, however, know who the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids “is”.

 

tfkorigin.jpg


 

paycut

 

 

I won’t bore you with all the details of my “meta-analysis” of this corrupt and unacceptable letter, I’ll leave that to these four five six & seven:

 


 

Clive Bates

To listen to someone, you don’t need to uncritically accept everything they say, but I have definitely gained insight from listening to them. I am also open to and welcome challenge and I’m prepared to have my owned received wisdom shaken up. I will accept good arguments if I hear them, whoever makes them.

The wilful ignorance of tobacco control McCarthyites

 


 

Vaping 360; Jim McDonald:

Of course, it’s okay for CTFK’s Matt Myers to talk with Big Tobacco companies. He secretly negotiated the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act with attorneys from Philip Morris (now Altria). For all his tobacco-free huffing and puffing, Myers’ backroom negotiations managed to result in a law that guaranteed the tobacco industry’s long-term health and profitability. One senator called Matt Myers’ handiwork the “Marlboro Protection Act.”

Scientist’s career threatened by anti-tobacco organization


 

Carl V. Phillips

If you want to get mad about something, definitely do so. But make sure it is the right thing: the 99% of available research funds that have a political litmus test attached; the use of those and other funds to blackmail institutions into censoring other researchers

CTFK threatens researchers but who cares


 

Dr. Sally Satel:

Shameless Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids Tries to Censor Researchers

 


 

By Dr Farsalinos:

Public health has been divided into two opposing groups (pro and against harm reduction) which never meet or participate in the same conference to exchange ideas and present their arguments collectively in an honest, open and public debate. Is this what public health and smokers deserve? Is this going to solve the problem of smoking? Is this scientific progress?

Public health urgently needs a “new deal”


Added 9/27/16

AND now from Neil McKeganey Ph.D. Christopher Russell Ph.D. themselves:

Why Academics Should Resist Pressure to Disengage with the Tobacco Industry


Thank you to Dr. Christopher Russell for the work you DO, and for allowing the world to see ineptitude from what is supposed to be authority by both ENSP and CTFK.

Here are results of just one of Dr. Russell’s surveys. NOTE it says Tobacco Harm Reduction.

Tobacco Harm Reduction, Vaping & E-Cigarettes


“In other news”

I wrote a letter to the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids.

Someone had to, I chose me.

For immediate release: Dear Matt Myers, President of Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids

 


 

Because this was directly a tobacco industry study, we shall wait for the “experts” to stake their claim:

BAT claims Ecig emissions 92-99% safer than cigarettes

 


Speaking of manipulation:

How the FDA Manipulates the Media

AND

A top journalist is suing the FDA over its alleged use of a banned and secretive practice to manipulate the news


 

E-cigarette Research is HERE.

MORE e-cigarette research is also HERE.

If you are a Professional  go HERE.

 


 

Graphic credit & thank you to The Vaper!


August8th.org

A BILLION LIVES


You can find me here on Facebook

You can find me here on  Twitter


More to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin

Is Public Health challenged about ecigs?

sealionblanknoborder

Public Health Experts:

Don’t take this personally, but listening increases your credibility. If you feel your job is to “inform” the public in a public format such as twitter about e-cigarettes, then expect the public to be listening. Having a title before OR after your name does not give you all access to intelligence-land. There are no guarantees we’ll be impressed.

You see, the arrogance of “always being right” in your chosen profession seems to have a direct correlation with your ability to have common sense. I know this may be a challenge, and I believe in you. Try harder. You can do this! I’m here to help.

I know, I know – there’s a bunch of self-indulgent pride among your other experts. Boot lickers beneath you in some instances. We are not, and do not find it in our hearts to be impressed. I’m calling that the stethoscope syndrome, because after all, this is a family show.

Oftentimes an expert will make a claim and just assume we will nod our head in agreement because that’s what YOU think we’re supposed expected to do because you have a title. Put that way before you hurt yourself. Let us take a moment to get past that, shall we?

We’ll cover “earning our respect” in a bit.

All set?

Good. Moving on.


Public Health

Public health refers to “the science and art of preventing disease, prolonging life and promoting health through organized efforts and informed choices of society, organizations, public and private, communities and individuals.” according to Wikipedia

  • Science and art of preventing disease
  • Prolonging life and promoting health through organized efforts

Here’s the important part

  • informed choices of society, organizations, public and private, communities and individuals

None of that says control, judge or presume. It most certainly did not leave communities and individuals looking in a window like children.

We don’t care about your opinion. It is not necessary. We have a hard time with using the phrase “yes, your majesty”.

May I suggest you see Clive Bates and his astounding assessment of your responsibilities for dealing with the public? Good. That is called

Memo to public health grandees: vaping, vapers and you.


Be Decisive!

If you want to tweet about e-cigarettes, I expect you to be engaging. It’s for your own good, really. You can choose to engage as a public health expert. Once you do, I’ll expect you to pay close attention. To listen. MOST of us will entertain a good and fair assessment with you and your dispute, if you have one, AND do it without what usually is claimed: harassment.

I am trying to keep you from looking stupid because I care about you and your well being. Once you’ve made a stance – good or bad, stick with it. Don’t sway. Don’t sit in the middle. We like clear positions. That way, we can accept or dismiss anything else you say. Really.


We are the public

Did you find a study that looks like it may be worth telling us to go back to smoking? Think about it before you hit that button! We use these devices, and they have changed our lives. We are knowledgeable. What I don’t know, someone else does.

We are a GLOBAL network of people who have reduced or stopped our tobacco use. By choice. We research harder for good – and bad –  than you think the public is able to. We want to know more about it than you because we USE THESE DEVICES. Our lives depend on it, and we can’t always depend on YOU. We can link science, data, reference material.

We all have personal stories you don’t want to hear. We assume you are misinformed at first. We all can recite and predict what you’ll tweet next, and it always ends with nicotine, children or don’t know enough. Then, the mute or block button becomes a choice.

We’re not trying to harass. We’re trying to engage. We are the public. We have MANY members of the twitter community who are Scientists, Doctors, Chemists, Nurses, and are in other facets of “public health”. Most of them were once like you.

The difference? They listened to us and understood what we said. Some, in fact are here at M.O.V.E. as well.

Here’s HOW and WHY Jim McManus changed his mind on e-cigarettes.


The public in public health.

I’ve devised a few rules and information for you to follow to help you on your journey to being a better expert. That’s why I’m here. I care. I’m concerned about both your reputation and well being. I want to stress to you that I am also under pressure to be right ALL the time. (That’s me below – @vapingit)

vapingit

It’s not easy, and boy do I eat humble pie on occasion. (I like pie.)  My own twitter peers, full of vinegar and nicotine, will tweet me up side the head when it’s deserved. (Some of them can be evil!) SO, in good fun and at times, boredom, I will tweet you back with a smart-ass remark once I’ve determined you’re not worth the paper your degree is printed on.

If we are wrong, we are wrong. Don’t pretend we’re unintelligent or misinformed. Don’t talk DOWN to us. Earn our respect. Tell us why. The information highway, it seems, is public health’s worst nightmare.


Get a pen. There is SO much to learn, I don’t want to overwhelm or burden you, so we’ll go with the basic package for now.

  • If you don’t know the difference between combustion and non-combustion, stop, turn off your computer and talk to your cat.
  • Tobacco harm reduction, less harm is the goal, it is the purpose. (See “public health definition” above.)
  • Dual use” IS less USE. ENCOURAGE new users.
  • Don’t use the word “anecdote” in any form. We don’t like that.
  • Smokers ARE allowed to smoke.
  • If you want people to smoke, say so. It makes it much less confusing.
  • If it is about public health, and that is THE most important thing, act like it.
  • If it is about you suddenly being embarrassed because you’ve overstepped your knowledge, see Clive again from above here.
  • Don’t discredit yourself with claims unless you KNOW what you’re talking about.
  • Don’t use *phrases like “what about the children” or “we don’t know enough”(see below) or “wibblewords”  like may, could, might.
  • Side step the urge to say nicotine is a problem. You don’t think nicotine is addictive, do you? If so, you should be taking that up with Johnson & Johnson.
  • Do not under any circumstances use Glantz, Chapman in the same sentence as “credible”.
  • Refrain from using the words “long term“. It makes us giggle.
  • It is discouraged to use or quote The Centers for Disease Control, Heart, Lung & Cancer associations along with ANY of their satellite offices and Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids, Truth Initiative and any other “Tobacco Control” entities. They have NO interest in reducing tobacco.
  • There is no such thing as UNICORNS.

Do NOT underestimate us.


“The straight-forward principles of harm reduction should be as uncontroversial for tobacco products as they are for alcohol, cars, air travel, children’s clothing, sexual practices, electrical goods and other goods and activities – until such time as there is compelling, proportionate evidence of imminent danger to public health overall that would ethically justify promoting health illiteracy with respect to these legal products.”

That is below here:

Withholding differential risk information on legal consumer nicotine/tobacco products: The public health ethics of health information quarantines


Misconduct:

FEDERAL POLICY ON RESEARCH MISCONDUCT


Quick visuals!

experts2

*Phrases:

wibblephrases

Thanks to @vaper_the and @Twigolet for the revised version!


 

FREE BONUS GRAPHIC!!! No extra cost!

trolled.jpg


I (or someone else) might may make an example of you.

Please note these few examples of blogs from when “I” have seen unprofessional conduct. You may recognize some of these names. They’ve been around a while. They need to go.

trolleye

Centers for Disease Control’s Director Tom “Skippy” Frieden

Australia’s tobacco control “expert” & resident *mangy chimp, Professor Simon Chapman.

Americas favorite Meta-Analysis mechanic & punchline for “expert”, Professor Stanton Glantz.

This one’s fresh: Professor, Nurse & Editor of BMJ Tobacco Control: Ruth Malone

*Thank you, Broony!


Finally, please remember,

public display is public.

The reputation you save may be your own.

sealion


Finally, there are resources for public health. If I can find it, YOU can find it.

“Can’t find it” is no excuse for you. It is unprofessional and unacceptable. If you’re the expert, act like it! At minimum, hop down from your tower and ask US where you CAN find it. Not all of us bite.

 

Added 01/09/2017

If an e-cigarette were used as a MEDICAL device it seems there’s potential. Suddenly:

Assessment of new-generation high-power electronic nicotine delivery system as thermal aerosol generation device for inhaled bronchodilators.

 


E-cigarette Research is HERE.

MORE e-cigarette research is also HERE.

If you are a Professional  go HERE.



Final public health homework:

Play this less than 2 minute video from A Billion Lives.


Got myself a bit of advice for my “vape mates” about this blog from Marita Hefler, who is
“News ed BMJ Tobacco Control, Menzies School of Health Research, Syd Uni.”,  and I’ve included my responses.

advice

  • Tobacco harm reduction, less harm is the goal, it is the purpose. (See “public health definition” above).

The tweet I added my “advice” to is just below.

You can decide if the document within the SEATCA tweet below shows any harm reduction efforts being employed here:

You can see the if the SEATCA mission statement shows any harm reduction here.


paycut.jpg


August8th.org

A BILLION LIVES


You can find me here on Facebook

You can find me here on  Twitter


More to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin

*Photo courtesy Big Bacon Morris. If it is in violation of copyright law or used without permission, please let me know and I will remove it immediately.


This blog was brought to you by a world of alleged good intentions and the hashtag #pubht.

Alice in TobaccoLand.

aliceintobaccoland

According to Wikipedia, Tobacco control “is a field of international public health science, policy and practice dedicated to addressing tobacco use and thereby reducing the morbidity and mortality it causes”.

Let me break that down.

Public health science.  It also says practice.

Dedicated to addressing tobacco use via public health science, policy and practice.

Thereby reducing morbidity and mortality it causes.

It says mortality, not morality.

If the morality on vaping products doesn’t cease, the mortalities will continue.


Down the rabbit hole.

There are hundreds of organizations dedicated to addressing tobacco use. Those organizations are normally funded, among other things, by tobacco use. The Master Settlement Agreement, taxes, government grants and funding by pharmaceuticals trying convincing researchers to see “their side” so the FDA will trust & approve it are all part of the bigger picture. Don’t want any of them chasing us down the rabbit hole now, do we?

Let us have some tea, shall we?

 aliceintobaccolandtea

Tobacco control for the cessation world, involves “approved methods”, counseling, quit lines & other mythical suggestions in tobacco-land such as the always encouraging “quit or die”, you’re not trying hard enough… as smokers travel down the stop smoking hole…

Along come vaping products. Contested? Hot topic? Absolutely. Proof? Yep. Doubts? As far as your fingers can tweet or read in the media in the U.S.A..

It seems simple, really. Less tobacco use by smokers with an alternative in ANY way possible by anyone in the public health field, or by organizations like the Heart, Lung or Cancer associations…would be immediately and swiftly encouraged……well – that, my readers seems to be a fairy tale.

On to “Alice”.


To be balanced there has been some tweeting of vaping products as an alternative. I can’t possibly search for them all, but DID get a “maybe” here in 2015.


Here, in 2014, there was “waiting on evidence”.


Smokers falling a long way seem to always land in a hall with many locked doors….and a table appears… with concoctions and promises of cures to the smoker trying to stop with “try me” and “use as directed” and “FDA approved”. What do they feel, those trying so hard?

Shame.

Without success, a smoker is shamed regardless of the method chosen. (That is Tobacco Control training 101, is it not?)  Shamed, by everyone and their brother – who have been taught that forEVER.

Frustration.

Despite the EFFORT to cease tobacco use, the tobacco plant has nicotine. The cigarette has -how many other- chemicals that also MAKE tobacco addictive by design. Nicotine itself is not addictive, but the world doesn’t know – because they’ve been taught that as well… so they offer nicotine “replacement” therapies. (Love that word “therapy”).

Disillusion.

After multiple attempts for various reasons – be it poor health, children, mortality sinking in, whatever the personal decision was to try -the quit attempt fails or is aborted and the tobacco control machine turns to spin cycle. Round & round the smoker goes, falling down the rabbit hole.


We don’t know enough -about- long term effects. We know enough despite our own government’s challenge of regulations – we’ve stopped smoking -many accidentally- in a way NO other product or advice has come close to succeeding with on our journey down the hole. We communicate with each other via twitter, facebook and more. Learning daily. Empowered, making an impact.

As for long term effects? Well – we’re not smoking – if it were EXACTLY the same risk – I certainly wouldn’t have a blog.


Know enough, Alice. Make a commitment. Part of the perils of knowing enough is learning as much as you can, without bias and being able to relay that knowledge to others seeking information.

Speaking fluently with truth and conviction, will come naturally.


Long term:

agent

What is your definition of a long term study?

Supportive & hopeful methods are applied here.

BUT


The Pool of Tears

“Alice swims through her own tears and meets a mouse, who is swimming as well. She tries to make small talk with him in elementary French –  but her opening gambit “Où est ma chatte?” (“Where is my cat?”) offends the mouse and he tries to escape her.”

That’s the thing about Alice. Clarity. I’m still not sure how clear she is. I need some more tea!


RUTH


Pig and Pepper

“The Cheshire Cat appears in a tree, directing her to the March Hare’s house. He disappears, but his grin remains behind to float on its own in the air, prompting Alice to remark that she has often seen a cat without a grin but never a grin without a cat.”

 A Mad Tea-Party

“Alice becomes a guest at a “mad” tea party along with the March Hare, the Hatter, and a very tired Dormouse who falls asleep frequently, only to be violently woken up moments later by the March Hare and the Hatter. The characters give Alice many riddles and stories…”

   I cannot tell.


 Yes. That’s where a consumer could choose an alternative to tobacco.


Not sure about you, but the ‘real world’ is where we are using #e-cigarettes instead of tobacco.


 I’m as authentic as they come. Lorien is also. I troll her more than I troll you. 🙂

Ahhh…. nicotine. That’s another of my blogs.


  Potential? Huh. Safer but too early to be so blithely reassuring?


 See – told you Lorien is authentic. Genuine & approved.


 Which are you, proponent or opponent?


Alice, involved in a paper with C. Gartner:

Dueling letters: which one would you sign?


In 2014, DO INDEED was capitalized for emphasis. I appreciate that.


Advice from a Caterpillar

I appreciate the fact that “Alice” is willing to engage with most on twitter. As you know, most of her colleagues will block and never engage.

Simon Chapman and Stan GlANTZ are two examples of (legaleeze: may, might, could) conniving denying monkeys. (Haven’t blogged Capewell or McKee yet.)

Everyone tweets something they regret at one time or another. We’re all human  -except the jury isn’t in on @Entropy72 yet.

This is where I was actually shocked at you. I know from another – personal experience when a professional diagnosis became a lawsuit to a “commoner”. Thing is, we’re professionals just like you. All walks of life, including mental health.

 You took your well deserved lumps.

Then you did it again…….

I couldn’t tell if you were joking on this one any more than I can tell your true position on less harm with vaping products.

So off we go to the final chapter of Alice In TobaccoLand…


Alice’s Evidence

The Queen shouts her familiar “Off with her head!” but Alice is unafraid, calling them out as just a pack of cards, just as they start to swarm over her.

You engage with anecdotal vapers quaintly without making a statement. Teetering on a picket fence without committing. Rocking back and forth. A dangerous line of indecision. I strongly suggest focusing your eyes on the ball. Less tobacco use for the public. I imagine the implications of a “well respected by her peers” professional like yourself facing one of two possibilities.

  1. You’ll be ostracized by them by merely stating the emperor has no cloths. (Think of the thousands of twitter friends you’ll gain!)
  2.  You’ll empower them to take the stand with you, realizing the potential of millions of smokers very lives hang in the frustrating and disillusioned balance.

Either way, you can’t win, I suppose. Indignant irreverence for your own chosen profession, recognizing the “public” in public health and the public it intends to serve -at least at face value- is unacceptable.

You yourself are a Professor, a nurse, an environmental activist. The Editor of BMJ Tobacco Control Journal. You cannot convince me you’re set on sitting in the middle in a rocking chair on a fence. Being pragmatic  <–(funny that link mentions a unicorn) is “real-world application”.

I am the real world. This is not a guessing game, and lives are at stake. TAKE your eyes “OFF the ball” of tobacco for a moment. Vaping products are being regulated, restricted, taxed & banned as if – tobacco control’s livelihood – is at stake. Rather than being accepted as one way to become the end game, it is the ball they have become.

Speak to colleagues – some who are active tobacco control members around the world, all who have professional titles. They aren’t some rogue set of flunkies, they are your counterparts. Colleagues. Each are aiming for the same goal. Tobacco harm reduction. Here, at M.O.V.E..

Once you’ve done so, you can decide which this is. Real harm reduction, where you can join other members of M.O.V.E. and take a stand publicly against the fire and brimstone establishment  – who don’t like to be tested….

Or grab a match… pick your poison… and let the cards fall where they may.

cards


I invited you to the A Billion Lives premier, you respectfully declined.  (I was serious.)

I KNOW they’re going to be in California, I hope you go. Take Glantz with you.


Finally, If I’ve offended you in any way, shape or form, good.

Check Clive’s “Memo to public health grandees: vaping, vapers and you

for reference.

You shouldn’t be offended, though. Did you see what I wrote about Simple Simon Chimpmanzee?

.

I hope you don’t block me and we’ll continue learning from each other.

It is about health, after all.


Speaking of health, this one’s fresh off the Dick Puddlecoat press:

Desperately Seeking Dictatorship.


Ruth Malone:

Via Tobacco Control BMJ

Via UCSF


Update 10/22/16:

Ruth has written this

“Yet, e-cigarettes and the burgeoning list of other non-combustible tobacco and nicotine products could represent potential leverage for accomplishing what once seemed unthinkable: phasing out combustible cigarettes, the single most deadly consumer product ever marketed.”

 

That is in full here:

The Race to a Tobacco Endgame

 


health

FIGHT:

THESE are national consumer and industry organizations in the United States who keep US informed.


August8th.org

A BILLION LIVES

E-cigarette Research is HERE.

MORE e-cigarette research is also HERE.

If you are a Medical Professional  go HERE.

More to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin

Organizations & Politicians LIE about E-cigs. It’s a business decision.

 

tax1

 

In the never-ending onslaught of misleadings articles about vaping, this one,  by Maggie Fox  (Senior health writer @NBCNewshealth Science/Health/Tech)  was titled: “E-Cigarettes should be a last resort, heart doctors say“. There is clearly a discrepancy or three in this one. There are no mentions of any heart doctors in the article , instead the title guides the reader straight into the American Heart Association.  It is possible to assume crack staff  writer Maggie may not know the difference between heart doctors and the the AHA? A quick search doesn’t show Nancy Brown is a heart doctor. I could be wrong.


Please continue smoking:

According to the article, the  AHA, evidently, would prefer smokers to keep smoking  – and if you must, only try e-cigarettes as a last resort. CEO at the AHA, Nancy Brown states “the FDA should HURRY UP and regulate them”. We don’t want to dilly-dally  with regulations, do we?  Evidently the Heart Association’s intriguing “last resort” thing is a new POLICY. Those funds won’t just appear in the bank on their own, FDA. Hurry up. Toot-suite. Quick, like a bunny – before the public finds out what organizations and politicians are UP TO.

The comfort level must be almost unbearable with the film A Billion Lives due to be released shortly. Once it’s out, the lies will be exposed, and the public scrutiny of regulations will begin. Chop-chop, FDA. They can’t hold their lying breath forever!

 

Fox takes innuendo to the standard level, eluding to the usual wrong “children” stats (discrepancies are here & here ) while misinforming her readers. There’s the obligatory lie statement from Nancy Brown : “We are fiercely committed to preventing the tobacco industry from addicting another generation of smokers”.  Of course there’s the obligatory lie statement of vaping being a gateway, and nicotine being the root of all evil.

The link in the article – to the lies statement from the American Heart Association – is “not released” and unavailable. So, who are the doctors saying last resort? Brown was quoted in the article, stating “We fear that any additional delay of these new regulations will have real, continuing public health consequences”.

Yes, Nancy Brown, the business decisions you make health consequences are that the public will believe your lies and continue to smoke – since e-cigarettes will be treated the same in your world. Regulation in the form of taxes, is the goal. Remember when LESS smoking was the goal? Milk is not beef, syrup is not wood and nicotine is not tobacco. Deny it all you like, Research does exist, Nancy.


 

The Lung Association.

The Lung Association, headed by National President & CEO Harold Wimmer, has a business decision stance as well.  Out in California, my pal, Senator Mark Leno – after being defeated with SB140 last year, has revamped his effort to have e-cigarettes “accurately defined as tobacco products”. Olivia Gertz – the CEO of California’s chapter of the Lung Association is found here gloating stating she’s “proud to co-sponsor” legislative efforts with her business decision “to increase the state’s dismal national ranking in tobacco taxes“,  where they also mentioned the obligatory youth and health lie statements like above, yet taxes are the goal….

Bear with me as I’ll babble incessantly for your amusement:

Dismal ranking, Olivia? Embarrassed much? You’re worried about appearances? Is this a mirror check? LESS tobacco tax revenue = LESS smoking. That’s from all those vapers NOT smoking. Um, You’re WELCOME? Remember when organizations wanted us to NOT smoke?  Didn’t anyone plan properly for a drop in revenue from the “tobacco control efforts” over time taking the credit? SURPRISE. We’re doing YOUR job as well.


 

Now, as SFATA pointed out, former smokers  who use e-cigarettes – along with the tax in California – and believe me, this will be EVERYWHERE:

sfata.PNG

That’s not acceptable.

Sorry, didn’t mean to yell. Who’s in charge? Where is the evidence and science to arbitrarily make things up? WHERE are the leaders? Why aren’t more in “public health” acting like Jim? Who will be the last organization standing? They are lying. They are making business decisions. If they have their way, they both will be. The AHA and the ALA were once well respected organizations within America. They once put their efforts towards helping people stay healthy (and educated, supposedly) in the minds of millions. Now they’re choosing instead to lie recoup millions of dollars in revenue, a day, keeping their business decisions and lies motives at bay to the general public at any cost. Their business decisions are now costing lives.

These (many) organizations who are now placing themselves squarely in the middle of the ring, hell bent on convincing the public they are fighting the good fight on vaping. Their only goal is to L I E to keep pressure on public opinion with the ONLY goal of “regulating” e-cigarettes for the sole purpose of keeping themselves in BUSINESS with tax revenue.

Accountability cannot come soon enough.


 

 

You, as an individual MUST be aware of what’s going on:

Inform yourselves.

casaa.org

vapingmilitia.org

notblowingsmoke.org

http://nomorecasualties.org


 

Your favorite online or brick & mortar retailer MUST be making every effort to keep you COMPLETELY informed of these issues.

If they aren’t a member of a state or national organization FIGHTING for THEIR business, I strongly suggest you find another place to do business.


 

Please, blow social media UP. Tell your non-smoking – non-vaping friends & family members they are being LIED to by these organizations and politicians worldwide.

TELL them about A Billion Lives.



 

I’m also here on Blasting News.

H.R. 2058 is up to now 50 supporters.


 

My challenge to ANY public health professional that nicotine is not addictive on it’s own.


 

E-cigarette Research is HERE.

MORE e-cigarette research is also HERE.

Medical Professionals  go HERE.

MANY Links are to the left and right of this blog! Please see them!

More to come!

Keep ON #Vaping On.

 

Kevin