For Immediate Release Wednesday, March 25, 2015 To: Center for Tobacco Control / Research & Education, University of California, San Francisco. Attention: Distinguished Professor Of Tobacco Control, Stanton Glantz:
Mr. Glantz, if your goal is to get people off tobacco, as a Distinguished Professor Of Tobacco Control, I must point out that a 1st year high school chemistry student can see e-cigarettes are MUCH less harmful. I do not understand the goal and can only conclude you have become delusional. I question your “sudden” support of the CDPH. You are stating that the goal of your department and that of the CDPH is not first and foremost for public health?
You state in your blog that “It is the best thing out there so far”… now you’re back on their side? Were there doubts of their performance thus far?
One gleaming example of a long standing, ever-failing cash filled campaign is the “war on drugs”. There’s still a problem, and there’s still a war. Tobacco control, as you are well aware has its own battle scars, but I digress.
I urge you, in fact IMPLORE you to step back from this issue for a moment, think outside the box, and put your best foot forward in becoming one more of many standing up in the field with others. With resources at your disposal & your evidently proud and tenacious nature, you could help change the world.
I encourage swift, immediate healthy engagement by you and staff. Please contact the M.O.V.E. organization as Researchers, Scientists, Doctors, Nurses & other responsible Health Professionals are there. See what they have for truth & research on the matter; consider becoming a growing part of it. As a leading researcher yourself, this should be a piece of cake.
(M.O.V.E.) https://sciencecig.wordpress.com/move/ Please also see proper research that has already occurred: (Ecigarette Research) http://www.ecigarette-research.org/research/index.php
Please, if you are in doubt of the sincerity of this post, delete it. I dare you. You don’t have to answer and certainly you don’t have to post it. You are however, well aware, regardless of your views or claims by the very nature of receipt of this correspondence, there ARE answers, facts, science and research, and they are not hiding. I will post this to your blog, Twitter, Facebook and my blog will hold it for posterity. I like facts. I like engagement. You are free to come to my blog and autograph it any way you like. You know – if it’s worth the public health’s time…. (I have to “approve” comments, but I will not delete a word, so I freely invite you to do so).
It seems unimportant and ignored, even seems to conveniently elude some IN the research world, public health and media. “Gut” feelings, emotions and opinion are not science. Can’t you correspond with one another? I simply challenge you to either A. Check those two sites, contact Dr. Farsalinos directly here email@example.com with ANY question B. Dispute them at that point with your own research. Be prepared as I am sure you are, for scrutiny on how it is done.
You see, (I) we as vapers are not looking for the “best” answers to studies fitting our needs nor to be on “our side”, Mr. Glantz. Good OR bad, we are looking for the truth, and we seek those who will tell it like it is. The ONLY thing we’re not sure of is “long term” effects-that is boringly claimed a lot and so far, I say not one of us has died from vaping. We’re willing to take our chances over tobacco, and we’re healthier in the process.
These have been around for more than 10 years and are still more effective and MUCH safer, in fact SAFE compared to combustible and traditional cigarettes. The fact that you deny any other alternative is ironic, irresponsible, counter-productive, and completely unacceptable to your own goal in “tobacco control”.
I am sure you are aware of tactics to other campaigns in the tobacco world. If you’re wrong once and it is corrected it is a mistake. Twice is an irresponsible act. When it is a campaign in my “uneducated” hypothesis, to deter people and without question confuse some, you keep them on combustible tobacco by the very lies perpetuated by it. Leading public health researchers’ are calling for tobacco to be phased out by 2040, a sad, costly and detrimental twenty-five year goal to many lives.
The campaign “Still Blowing Smoke” you mention in the blog is right about one thing.
This is about children and the adult relatives surrounding that child being able to have a viable choice other than tobacco, when all other options simply fall well short with traditional nicotine reduction methods. Please check and evaluate the failure rate on those. Tobacco is simply an adult choice for anyone. Get off the “control” of e-cigarettes, or get on the responsibility of proper science and research. E-cigarettes work as a way to get off tobacco for those who choose to do so and should be and remain a choice. The website Not Blowing Smoke has truth and science in it.
Well educated people can learn from those of us without “degrees”, Mr. Glantz, and are better people for it. If you’re the smartest person in the room, you need to change rooms. This is what tobacco control has been looking for all these years. It’s right in the palm of your hands. You can choose to grow a pair and effectively end tobacco without even trying, or you can continue on your path of denial as you are, or like it says in the movie you are in – – –
presenting yourself in the media, health and scientific community as an authority, yet having the contrary aim of spreading maximum confusion about well-studied public “threats” ranging from “toxic chemicals” to “cancer”- irresponsibly as you are at the moment. Does that sound familiar?
I am just one person; I am a father, husband, and former smoker who stopped with an e-cigarette in just under two days, tobacco free almost two years. Kevin Crowley Email: firstname.lastname@example.org Blog: https://atomic-temporary-76342073.wpcomstaging.com/
One from Nancy on Twitter that has not been approved: