Category Archives: data

Vaping In The News – September 9th, 2017

eye

The New England Journal of Medicine: Wrong

Surgeon General report: Wrong

Lowering nicotine in cigarettes: Looks like prescribing smoking “could” be coming…

Toxicity of the main electronic cigarette components, propylene glycol, glycerin, and nicotine from Science Direct…

Canada needs a petition signed.


Vaping In The News September 9th, 2017


New Research Puts the Final Nail in the Coffin of the NEJM Formaldehyde Study ~ Surgeon General ~ The War on Nicotine begins ~ Prescribing Smoking ~ Nicotine – The Zombie Antidote ~ Big Tobacco Goes Soft ~ Science & Data ~ E-cigarettes and youth smoking: be alert but not alarmed




New Research Puts the Final Nail in the Coffin of the NEJM Formaldehyde Study

It seems in my estimate, 99.994% of what is passed of as “research” is done improperly because they don’t talk to vapers directly, or interperet data incorrectly by choice.

With all the wannabe scientists and researchers searching for fame and funding, there has to be one constant goal to the consumer.

The truth, good or bad.

Science Direct:

E-cigarettes emit very high formaldehyde levels only in conditions that are aversive to users

New Research Puts the Final Nail in the Coffin of the NEJM Formaldehyde Study


Surgeon General

When the last Surgeon General released his report the governmental “Think Of The Children™” propaganda agenda last year, it was very obvious he and his fiction writers were creating an illusion. We all knew that, but damage control may be futile.

Covered by Clive Bates here, now Riccardo Polosa,Christopher RussellJoel Nitzkin and Konstantinos E. Farsalinos have collaborated below.

 

“The next US Surgeon General should consider the possibility that future generations of young Americans will be less likely to start smoking tobacco because of, not in spite of, the availability of e-cigarettes.”

👇
A critique of the US Surgeon General’s conclusions regarding e-cigarette use among youth and young adults in the United States of America

Related, Cannot Be Ignored:

James Dunworth of the Ashtray Blog interviews Professor Polosa on why they (thankfully) decided to release the above critique.

Scientists Criticise US Surgeon General`s Attitude Towards E-Cigarettes

Another perspective from Steve Birr over at the Daily Vaper:

‘Misleading’ Surgeon General Report On Vaping Battered As ‘Fiction’


The War on Nicotine begins

Carl V. Phillips takes a shot at the war on nicotine, tobacco, the FDA and… well….

The War on Nicotine begins


Century 21

I can’t make this up. With the FDA’s announcement to reduce nicotine in cigarettes…and the support from organized crime got me to thinking.

They’ve been wrong about all the other cessation methods, why not.

Carl got me thinking — as he usually does. One search turns into another and although I didn’t find what I was looking for, I found what I’d predicted here

 

In print:

 

X-22 is the first and only smoking cessation product in the form of a combustible cigarette.

X-22 is a six-week prescription treatment which utilizes Very Low Nicotine (VLN) cigarettes (95% less nicotine than conventional cigarettes) to satisfy a smoker’s craving for cigarettes while separating the act of smoking from the rapid delivery of nicotine.

X-22 Smoking Cessation Aid In Development

But… wait… there’s more to this company, they also have “high nicotine” cigarettes. Imagine that.

 

Red Sun

This is its American brand sold in more than 600 stores. It is a high nicotine cigarette. It might seem counterintuitive, especially given the health benefits claimed by its very low nicotine cigarettes, but high nicotine cigarettes could have significant health benefits as well.

X-22 has certain advantages:

“It’s a cigarette, people seem to prefer that”

“It has no side effects, apart from the harmful effects of cigarette smoke”

“It has been proved effective in six clinical trials”

22nd Century’s Unique Cigarettes Create Growth Opportunities


Do you know about THR4LIFE?

bod1


Dick Puddlecoat

If you’re not new here, Dick needs no introduction, but I like doing it anyway.

Spot The Difference



Are you familiar with INNCO?


Nicotine – The Zombie Antidote

Saw this in a Facebook group I belong to  – from 2012. Nice perspective.

 

“My aim here is to defend the rights of people who choose to smoke. It may surprise you to know that, while the percentage of the population that smokes has declined in recent years (due to government propaganda), the incidence of heart disease has not declined. The reason, shock! horror! is that smoking is not the real problem to begin with!”

Nicotine – The Zombie Antidote


Big Tobacco Goes Soft

It seems Philip Morris is ahead of the curve of researchers, experts and distinguished nimwits in the tobacco control and anti-tobacco control “field”… again.

Gregory Conley submitted this in support.

‘Experts’ will continue to refrain from seeing less harm as the goal with the heat -not- burn product from Philip Morris.

Big Tobacco Goes Soft

 


CANADA:

Canadians only, Get this petition to your friends, neighbors, weird cousins….

Speaking of weird cousins…

Dimitris is willing to allow Phil Busardo to shave his chest if it hits 10k…

*Canadians* only should sign this petition. Here’s the link:

Vapers have a voice! Bill S-5 and petition E-1237


Do you know about NNA?

nna.JPG



Science And Data:

The truth, good or bad. Again.

Toxicity of the main electronic cigarette components, propylene glycol, glycerin, and nicotine…….

  • Ninety-day rat inhalation study to assess toxicity of e-cigarette liquid components.
  • Aerosolized mixtures of propylene glycol and glycerin with and without nicotine.
  • Aerosol mixtures showed only limited biological effects with no toxicity.
  • Adding nicotine to the aerosol mixtures resulted in effects previously reported

Toxicity of the main electronic cigarette components, propylene glycol, glycerin, and nicotine, in Sprague-Dawley rats in a 90-day OECD inhalation study complemented by molecular endpoints


E-cigarettes and youth smoking: be alert but not alarmed

MY position on “kids” vaping is clear.

If “children” are already smoking, they’re smokers regardless of age.

That personal position will not change.

Coral Gartner has taken the “Think Of The Children™” to task in her paper.

Coral Gartner, who I follow on Twitter, and she, of all I follow, has briefly messaged back and forth with links for me, and has engaged reasonably….

has a piece in the Tobacco Control Journal.

“Several things should be considered in the interpretation of these studies”



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




Have you met my OUR friends at vapers.org.uk? 

vapersukgraphic.JPG


Medical, Research, Science Professionals:

M.O.V.E.

Research:

Ecigarette Research

Dr. Konstantinos E Farsalinos (Research)

E-Research Foundation


Politics:

E-Cigarette Politics 

A Billion Lives

A Billion Lives


think

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


There is definitely more to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin


Save

Save

Save

Vaping In The News: September 2, 2017


news1

Vaping In The News – August 27th – September 2nd, 2017

What Trump’s FDA director gets wrong ~ First Clinical Evidence of Unharmed Myocardial Function in Vapers ~ Data-Driven Meta-Analysis E-cigs cause less smoking ~ BrandFire ~ New York City ~ Tobacco 21 ~ Youth ~ Seattle Smokers ~ Ruth Malone ~ Puff-N-Stuff – Nicotine ~ American Vaping Association




 What Trump’s FDA director gets wrong

“The FDA’s failure, to date, to acknowledge that e-cigarettes not only are safer than combustible cigarettes, but that they are much safer, results in confusion among would be consumers.”

What Trump’s FDA director gets wrong

First Clinical Evidence of Unharmed Myocardial Function in Vapers

Dear Professor Glantz,

Before you sharpen your pencil:

First Clinical Evidence of Unharmed Myocardial Function in Vapers

 


Data Driven Meta-Analysis

The wild, wild west of data driven meta-analysis just isn’t full enough yet – of meta-analysis about e-cigarette use. I’ve decided to go west.

Because data. Yep. I thought it was way overdue. Because data.

My Data Driven Meta-Analysis: E-cigarettes cause less smoking.

Via Michael Siegel:

Center for Tobacco Products is Lying to the Public About Youth Tobacco Use


 BrandFire

Adam Padilla of “BrandFire” where the claim on their “about us” page brags of their approach as “creative and “It has the power to disrupt your competition”.

Mr. Padilla put out, on social media sites, a box showing a baby with “my first vape” on it.

It of course, spread around Facebook with ease – and on Twitter….

It turns out my new friend Adam at BrandFire has Pfizer (owned by Johnson & Johnson) listed as a client on their “client” page, but doesn’t show any dazzling “work” for Pfizer on “our work” page.

I looked.

How interesting. This must have been it.

Thierry Bonnevap tweeted this.

Choose the Auto-Translate at the top of the blog link By below to read more:
Who is behind the new false viral vapor ads for children?

Jim McDonald also had his say on Vaping360:

Is Pfizer behind the My First Vape meme?




a


Do you know about THR4LIFE?

bod1


New York City

With the Bloomberg regime off in the distance, the next generation of nannies want to pretend to lower smoking rates in New York City, or profit from those who keep smoking, regardless of the price.

Because of the failure of Bill de Blasio’s city to be fiscally responsible by budgeting what they have,  he’s decided, and includes e-cigarettes… that less people smoking… paying more for public housing… for not smoking… is the plan.

Oh, except New Yorkers being smarter than he is, and of course the black market that doesn’t exist.

Firmly stating “We are sending a loud and clear message that we will not let their greed kill any more New Yorkers without a fight”.

Greed can be misconstrued by “imposing a new 10 percent local tax on tobacco products other than cigarettes” and raising the cost of cigarettes from $10.50 to $13.00 could never be classified as “greed”.

Win/win.

It’s Official: A Pack Of Cigarettes Now Costs $13 In NYC

 


Tobacco 21

Here’s how their game plan “works” in writing.

Raising The Age Of Purchase For Tobacco Products: Lessons Learned from Tobacco21

Seems the plan isn’t working for compliance, or is it?

In my (highly acclaimed by me) opinion, as the age of purchase was 18, they are having a difficult time keeping their percentage at acceptable levels, and now want to raise it to 21 to recreate the problem.

If they raise the minimum to 21, they create a whole new class and “infringement rate” – and in the process, create more funding to do what “they’ve” already allegedly done.

Job security.

The plan is working to keep “control” relevant as I’ve predicted here and here.

Suddenly, in California, bad laws create bad people and relevance for tobacco control. Now they will “need” more funding to fight “it”.

The rates of “underage sales” failed 50%. They quietly (not to me) created more “problems”…

This is exactly what they planned. More “self-created” problems, more job security to “fight” it.

More proof that “laws” don’t stop “children” (redefined as 18-20 year olds as well) from tobacco use.

August 28, 2017: Tobacco Retailer Compliance Operations Cases

Sheriff’s report of the same:

Tobacco Retailer Compliance Operations

If there were only more 18-20 year olds like this:

Letter: Tobacco 21 will actually create more young smokers in Detroit Lakes


 Youth

“most e-cigarette experimentation does not turn into regular use, and levels of regular use in young people who have never smoked remain very low.”

Young People’s Use of E-Cigarettes across the United Kingdom: Findings from Five Surveys 2015–2017

Lies:

FDA Lies About Vaping While the CDC Inches Toward the Truth


 


 Seattle Smokers

Aside from taking exception to “Thus, the statement that e-cigarettes are addictive is true”, I actually was pretty impressed with this article from Alex Berezow and the American Council on Science and Health.

If Seattle Smokers Follow King County’s Health Advice, They Will Die


Ruth Malone

Last week, Christopher Snowden had a few words to say another idiotic statement from Stuff-N-Puff Glantz and “big tobacco”:

“This is the David and Goliath delusion on crystal meth. “

That shady link between Big Tobacco and nicotine gum

This week, Ruth Malone has more to contribute. SURPRISE!

“It doesn’t seem to make sense for a company that sells cigarettes to help smokers stop using them”: A case study of Philip Morris’s involvement in smoking cessation

Then, with his knife resharpened, Christopher Snowden took another stab by appropriately lunging at Ruth:

Get your story straight

I fixed the final thoughts for her.

ruth malone drivel.jpg


Poor Stan

I’m torn between considering Stan a punching bag or a punchline.

Time to make the donuts.

Teen Smoking Unconnected to Cinematic Smoking


Do you know about NNA?

nna.JPG


Nicotine

My favorite subject.

Smokers’ understandings of addiction to nicotine and tobacco: A systematic review and interpretive synthesis of quantitative and qualitative research



Are you familiar with INNCO?


American Vaping Association

Via Gregory Conley:

Today, AVA submitted our comment on PMI’s modified risk tobacco product application for iQOS and its associated HeatSticks.

greg.JPG

Outstanding. THIS is louder.

American Vaping Association Submission (PDF)




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




Have you met my OUR friends at vapers.org.uk?

 

vapersukgraphic.JPG


Medical, Research, Science Professionals:

Research:


Politics:

E-Cigarette Politics 

A Billion Lives

A Billion Lives


think

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


 

There is definitely more to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

My Data Driven Meta-Analysis: E-cigarettes cause less smoking.

kid smoking



Imagine you’re a tobacco control “expert”, a professor, in fact. There is notoriety, fame even. You’re not a scientist, but while bumbling through your meta-analysis, you elude to being one for decades. Ahhh the life.

While walking upright, there’s a noticeable amount of donut powder in your beard (to show your expertise) in almost any sterile artifical setting — where everyone will nod their heads in agreement…

glantz tweet


Since I have the formalities out of the way, I will meta-analyse the chart below for before Professor Puff-N-Stuff gets his grubby paws on it.

I’ll submit my findings for all you math / data / science /statistitians for peer review below!

Aren’t you excited?


Submitted by Kevin Crowley, AKA @VapingIT, SPE, EEI.

(You have to have the fancy-shmancy initials!)

Title

(or whatever they put at the top of important studies)

E-cigarettes cause less smoking.

“Important stuff”:

E-cigarette use was tracked by the FDA & CDC – from 2011 – 2016.

It went up, peaked in 2015 and went back down.


 

Purpose:

I suppose I should explain myself like they all do, but I won’t, I’ll do it my way.

To have determination a deliberate (Thanks Fig!) and honest assessment of whether e-cigarettes cause more smoking (or not) in youth without using words like “may, might, could” or any phrases like “more studies will be needed to determine” (with or without nicotine).

This could be difficult, and I’m not an “expert” so I certainly hope you’re rooting for me.


More Stuff

Cigarette use in the same time frame – went down. (Check my math, this is important).

kids youth gateway

Findings:

Most children around adults not smoking has caused the children to not smoke. The adults choosing to use (e-cigarettes) vaping equipment instead of purchasing cigarettes, so the children can’t steal cigarettes from parents who are not smoking.

E-cigarettes cause less smoking in children, and adults.

(Being informative is exhausting!)

Result:

Since 2011, adults smoked less, making cigarettes less available to kids. 8% of children will still try cigarettes.

Links:

Chart above is here.

Study below the chart is here.

You can purchase my metanalysis for a billion dollars once I put it behind a paywall.


Conflicts Of Interest:

Like this matters, but I’ll play along. None, consumer.


Opinion

Big Ole’ long sentence assesment warning!

It is in my opinion that around 8 percent of the children in the United States are the core group of rebels who, despite any half-hearted efforts by tobacco control organizations or esteemed professors like Puff-N-Stuff, will try smoking, skip school and daredevil and adventure off into other activities deemed dangerous or delinquent-like.

Less than that will continue try cigars, hookah, pipes and smokeless tobacco.

It happens. That will give more time for experts (uninterested in blaming themselves or rebellion) to have something to do, like blame Hollywood for the remaining 8%.

I want to beat Professor Glantz to the metanalysis submission frenzy:

How’d I do?

Peer review my findings! Someone check my math!


Related:

“most e-cigarette experimentation does not turn into regular use, and levels of regular use in young people who have never smoked remain very low.”

Cumulatively these surveys collected data from over 60,000 young people.

Young People’s Use of E-Cigarettes across the United Kingdom: Findings from Five Surveys 2015–2017

“Nicotine dependence is not a significant mechanism for e-cigarettes’ purported effect on heavier future conventional smoking among young adults.”

Evaluating the Mutual Pathways among Electronic Cigarette Use, Conventional Smoking, and Nicotine Dependence.


Related:

Via Michael Siegel:

Center for Tobacco Products is Lying to the Public About Youth Tobacco Use

Mine:
Smoking and E-cig use among teens is down, again – (Don’t tell Stan)

Added 9/6/17

I must have done well:
  • Riccardo Polosa
  • Christopher Russell,
  • Joel Nitzkin and
  • Konstantinos E. Farsalinos

A critique of the US Surgeon General’s conclusions regarding e-cigarette use among youth and young adults in the United States of America

 

 


Do you know about THR4LIFE?

bod1



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


Have you met our friends at vapers.org.uk?

vapersukgraphic.JPG


Medical, Research, Science Professionals:

Research:


Politics:

E-Cigarette Politics 

A Billion Lives

A Billion Lives


think

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


 

There is definitely more to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin

 

 

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

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

Professionals Just “Don’t Know Enough” About E-cigarettes

You’ve entered the “I’m tired of your bullshit” zone.

doctors4

The word “Bullshit” is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy… that’s found here.

Sound familiar?

To be clear:


Are you an expert?

expert.JPG

The degree you’ve worked so hard to attain needs to be used properly, not at your discretion. I know you are proud of your accomplishments and contributions to society for your vast knowledge.

I know you are the “go to” person in your prestigious department or institution of higher learning. I know you know everything and have an “I love me” wall to prove it.

I have been known to pass out extra points if your degree(s) hang higher on the wall than photos of your family. I offer a double bonus if the only photo(s) in your office are of you.

You’ve entered the “I’m tired of your bullshit” zone.


Breathe snowflake, breathe.

gif-stunned

I know many of you are truth-a-phobic. Let’s be honest, you’re not used to your integrity being questioned or spoken to in this manner.  I want to earn your respect.

If you recognize yourself in the above description and want to skip the formalities, I’ve covered the true experts here:

Is Public Health challenged about ecigs?


Still with me?

welcome.JPG

I’ll presume for time and space that you already know what combustible tobacco “is”. I’ll also presume you “know” what e-cigarettes ~are~.

Let’s move on.

Use that brain for something other than a hat rack. I know, you think nicotine is addictive. That, my dear expert is called “Proof by assertion“.

You can’t fathom some uneducated consumer can out-research you?

Think again.

The link (PDF) below covers all the important stuff you don’t know and more.

Nicotine. Children. Chemicals. Battery Safety. Research. Resources. Less harm.

Go ahead, click it:

When tobacco use decreases, less smoking occurs.

You know you want to. I’ll wait.


Let’s Talk About You

eyes

Pride and social status does impede one’s sense of intelligence. One of the hardest things to do is ask for help. Another is for one to admit they are wrong.

E-cigarettes. Think less harm. No combustion. Not smoking.

The pretentious attitude concerns me from those who’s job it is to know better. I know you know better. You know you know better.  The amateurish display of stupidity about e-cigarettes shall now come to a close.

If you don’t know enough, why are you babbling? I know, you’re a snowflake and feel too important to be chastised for your own stupidity.

For you who are professionals, this is a need to know basis. I’m trying to help.

Claiming expert status without being an expert makes you an idiot. Study all you can about that tweet or article you’re destined to write. Stop depending on your daily dose of information from your peers or media.

Pro-Tip: Stop surfing the internet in a drunken stupor to “find” information about e-cigarettes. When you google, the top five results are not always the correct results.

The words “we need more studies”, and we “don’t know enough” are unacceptable.

Become an expert, have some nerve, stick with that choice. People will continue to smoke based upon your opinion, make it count. Prepare for your big interview.

Millions of people have switched from smoking to e-cigarettes. Millions more are afraid to try, and instead rely on information from “reputable” sources.


Swallow your pride or display it proudly

pride.JPG

Please, put your big researcher panties on.

I’m trying to keep you from looking like an imbecile. (They do exist.) Don’t say you “don’t know enough” any longer.

I know you like data, so for reference, here are two examples of high profile tobacco control imbeciles here and here. (References for tobacco control and public health are available upon request).


Wibble Words & Phrases

If you insist on continuing your train wreck down the track, please  -use phrases like:

“I’m too lazy to do research”

“I’m afraid of what my peers will say if I speak out”

“But the CDC, FDA (or pick a lying organization) say”

Or, as seen below, wibble words will also suffice.


You are a professional, act like one.

research4

SEEK knowledge. Talk with other professionals.

Engage with consumers. LINKS are all over this blog.

Stop saying you “don’t know enough”.  Here’s a quick expert exercise:

Say “I don’t know enough” out loud to yourself.

Are you trying to impress or coerce. (That isn’t a question).

Think about how uneducated you sound.

Above all, stop trying to bullshit people.

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


Instead of trying to prove people wrong, try proving yourselves right.

Via Clive Bates:

Memo to public health grandees: vaping, vapers and you

 

If you still insist on having an agenda to keep people smoking, by all means –  continue to lie to yourselves and bullshit the public to your hearts content.


Medical, Research, Science Professionals:

Research:

Consumers Groups:


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!


Your “Rapid Response” is NEVER filtered and are always encouraged and welcome on this blog.

More to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin

Save