Category Archives: Health Professionals

What We Know About E-Cigarettes: Data and Science Is Available

Are E-cigarettes Harmful

What We Know About E-Cigarettes

What We Know About E-cigarettes is clear. Data is easily found. Science is piling up. The Food and Drug Administration released their “Every Try Counts” campaign. I looked for the e-cigarette section on the link provided ~ because I’m a curious soul, and found the section “What We Know About E-Cigarettes”.

I’ve completed my meta-analysis and the data shows here that “Every Try Counts” only eludes to every try counting. The propaganda found on the website does not support e-cigarettes as a “try”. In fact, It looks like I may have found the “what we know about e-cigarettes” master draft journalists are using as a coloring contest fill in the blank exercise. By adding sentences, sprinkled opinions, various lies and fodder between the text and adding an ever catchy title with scary words for a click-bait title , ~voila~ they have a full article of “we just don’t know” here.


What should you know about e-cigarettes

If you are are a journalist. If you are a professional. If you are in any capacity in the medical field, feel free to reference my sentiments on the challenges of e-cigarettes public health experts face daily, here.
If you are a person with a prestigious title similar to “politician, front group liason, expert, media contact”, etc.) and have an uncontrollable urge to look stupid, please, consider not doing that.
Science and data show e-cigs are a safer option and cessation rates are high according to available government research.

Below are my edits in bold, italics, etc, and with links below each paragraph to data and science.


Paragraph one:

E-cigarettes are officially known as electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS). They are more commonly called e-cigarettes, e-cigs, e-hookah, or vapes. You may have seen ads or stories on the internet that say e-cigarettes are a safe safER choice to help smokers quit choose to switch from smoking. There isn’t enough is plenty of scientific evidence to say if this is true or not. Opinion alert: Here’s what doctors and researchers do know right now.


What we know about e-cigarette research

Research: Here, here and here. Oh, here, here, here and here. That should get you started.

Paragraph two:

We already know this: E-cigs work by heating a liquid that may or may not has have nicotine and other chemicals in it. Heating the liquid turns it into a vapor. That’s what the user inhales and exhales. Some research shows that this vapor includes chemicals that are known to be less harmful. Scientists are studying the health effects of using e-cigarettes. New information is coming in, but they don’t have the answers yet. but is being all but ignored.


What we know about withholding information:

There’s Withholding differential risk information. Information is available here, and “Lower Carcinogen Levels” here, scary science here, and “Harm reduction in COPD smokers who switch” here.

Paragraph three:
Although FDA is working to regulateregulating e-cigarettes to restrict, tax and ban these devices,no more innovation can be achieved,currently they are not regulated. That means the makers of e-cigs don’t have to say what is in them. There are ways to know is no way to know exactly what chemicals are in e-cigarettes, it’s called science or how much are in these products.

What we know about regulations

National Tobacco Day is covered here.


Paragraph four:

We do know that some, not all e-cigs contain nicotine. Nicotine is by proof of assertion, what you believe is addictive what makes tobacco addictive. Nicotine can (may, could, might) also affect how the brain develops. Because childhood and teen years are times of important brain development, the nicotine in tobacco and e-cigs is believed to be especially bad for children and teens.


What we know about nicotine

Nicotine is covered here, and here with “approved” methods, proof by assertion (the addiction to saying it is addictive) is covered here, and more nicotine is here, nicotine propaganda is covered in-depth here, and by me here.

Think of the children™ is covered in-depth, where there is no such thing as a gateway here, 10 years of smoking rates are plummeting for children here, described as weak here and covered here, and very interesting points of restrictions here… my fingers are tired, but I’ll press on because it’s important.

I’ve covered gateways and nicotine addiction, here.


Paragraph five:

It’s also not very clear if e-cigs do help people quit smoking or or if  and the government, public health, tobacco control experts purposely get in the way of people quitting. Researchers are working hard to find the answers to these important questions. For now, we do not know if using e-cigs is a safER and helpful way to quit smoking, so using e-cigs is not recommended. There are other proven, safe, and effective methods for quitting smoking.

Explore the options to find a quit method that’s right for you.

What we know about helpful

There’s that pesky National Institutes of Health (NIH) and National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) showing 79% success rate here.

Clarity on research misconduct happens to be here.

I can show you 7,238 answers to helpful here.

Science and data show e-cigs are a safer option and cessation rates are high according to available government research.




I typed slow, but you can bookmark this page and refer to it anytime, share it with your professional friends, and while you’re here, may I suggest if you’re writing an article or op-ed on e-cigarettes, try harder for information. Look to the left and right of this blog.

Repeat after me:

Science and data show e-cigs are a safer option and cessation rates are high according to available government research.


Advertise with YOUR text link or banner!




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

vapersukgraphic.JPG


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


Tobacco Harm Reduction For Life

GONZO GIVES




Medical, Research, Science Professionals:

Research:


Politics:

E-Cigarette Politics 

A Billion Lives

A Billion Lives


There is definitely more to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin

Simon Chapman: The E̶m̶p̶e̶r̶o̶r̶ ̶ Emeritus Wears No Clothes Down Under.

bapt

Simon Chapman: The E̶m̶p̶e̶r̶o̶r̶ ̶ Emeritus Wears No Clothes Down Under.

There comes a time where things need to be said. People in charge need to be pointed out. There have been things that no one, specifically Simon Chapman, wanted to talk about, like suggestions of law, regulations, and opinion to manipulate nicotine in this instance, but “don’t talk about it”.

Public health, is top secret stuff, evidently.

chapmandiscussion.jpg

ENDS-Discussion-paper


I would be irresponsible if I didn’t link Clive Bates covering the paper above here.


Less smoking in Australia comes with fines

The “discussion paper” (Note the other names in that) surely in part, brought this idiotic fine “penalty system” where posession of nicotine includes fines (and jail time) and cigarettes are legal:

Aussies 3 with smokes


Act Like An Expert

I’ve proudly called Simon Chapman a “chimpmanzee” among other obvious things here.

As an “expert” in tobacco control, it’s been pointed out by much smarter people than I am (in many instances) that Simon is wrong. You’d think, with his Ph.D. in social medicine that he would know better.

It isn’t the first time Mr. Chapman has been called out here, here & here.

Christopher Snowden could go on here.

chapman1.JPG


An assertion does not make you correct

This one is one of my favorite instances of assertion by Simon Chapman, and it still puzzles me as to why he would ever make such a rookie professional mistake.

Remember, this statement is from a tobacco control EXPERT influencing public HEALTH and tobacco control. I’d expect such a person to know everything there is to know about nicotine.

If you happen to be an “expert”, act like one. Make it a goal to know more than common people like me, or Judith below.

 

chapman nicotine.JPG

 

Even in his retirement, he wants to assert control.


Name calling and… well, who’s above that…

I’ve thought of calling Simon Chapman a “pretentious prick”. A “man-child”. I’ve thought “what an arrogant pompous ass”, yet I’ve only given time and effort where I thought it may be most appropriate. Like now.

It isn’t like Chapman would ever call anyone attempting to engage him properly,  (yes I did) trolls.

Let us clear the decks, call out the lies of those who have more power and funding than brains who are influencing idiotic policy with less than desireable required credentials and force them to answer the questions publicly.

I don’t want to waste any more of our time.

You can see Senator Leyonhjelm who has balls, discussing Simon Chapman below.


 

“…Department of Health was so taken aback by Simon Chapman’s false statements that they felt the need to go on the record and clear things up”

“Ill-informed, willfully ignorant and downright malicious”

“Snake oil salesman come in all shapes and sizes. Sometimes they take the guise of an emeritus professor of sociology” ~ Senator Leyonhjelm

 

 


 

Don’t spread this around, Simon is talking about litigation.

Spell my name right, Simon.


As a footnote, the last time I wrote about my pal Simon, he graciously reviewed my inane drivel on Twitter. I aspire to do the same again. Seriously.

chapman drive.JPG




Keller and Heckman is pleased to announce its 2nd annual E-Vapor and Tobacco Law Symposium. If you’re interested in attending, please click on the graphic below!

Symposium.JPG

2018 E-Vapor and Tobacco Law Symposium




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

vapersukgraphic.JPG


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


Tobacco Harm Reduction For Life

GONZO GIVES




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


Of interest:




“I am a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for (me) to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.”

Vaping In The News – October 14th, 2017

hourglass

As I put this weeks edition together, I pondered all the time and public OUR money wasted over the past 10+ years by experts – tracking tweets, buying media, pretending to do studies and claiming science… Then, I wonder…. what have they tried to accomplish… and what other much more important items they’ve done the same with, or ignored in the process.


Johnson Creek is going out of business ~ Science Lesson ~ Marathon Man ~ Bloomberg ~ Tobacco 21 ~ Teen Cigarette Narcs ~ Doug Teitelbaum ~  Foundation for a smoke-free world ~ Tobacco Free Kids ~ Screaming ~


This is Vaping In The News for the week ending October 14th, 2017


Instead of babbling, I’ll lead off with a spirited tweet from Ann, who I (and others) miss dearly.


Johnson Creek is going out of business

Their statement:

Important! Johnson Creek is going out of business


Science Lesson

One of the best ways to learn is to listen and read. That’s why I like reading Carl’s blog. I don’t always agree with Carl, and that is how I learn.

“Ecigs are a replacement for tobacco products. They are not a replacement for lost tobacco taxes.”

I’ve said this a thousand times.

In this instance, there should be NO tax imposed on vaping products (other than normal sales tax). Period. We agree.

Science Lesson: The Optimal Tax Rate For Vapor Products Is Zero


Marathon Man

Chris Baxter, who I’ve followed over on Twitter:

YES.

Lancaster man vapes his way to marathon success

Related: Jerry Iozzo

Former Smoker Turned Marathon Runner Thanks to Vaping


Bloomberg

Dr. Carrie Wade at the Daily Vaper takes on another big donor of anti-tobacco with reduced risk and research:

Bloomberg School Of Public Health Should Live Up To Mission Statement, Save ‘Millions At A Time’


Tobacco 21

While the public is, you can’t be convinced this will work. You’re too savvy for that.

Tobacco 21 Is a Catch-22


Denver Is Hiring Teen Cigarette Narcs

Where I’ve covered the Synar Amendment and the recreation of the problems here in June of 2017, I made a prediction.

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.

Well… imagine my surprise when I read (bold is my emphasis)

“….the department hopes to snag even more vendors, projecting a 23 percent noncompliance rate by the end of 2017.”

Denver Is Hiring Teen Cigarette Narcs

Imagine my surprise from one of my favorite rodents, Phil:

Here’s that breach, including e-cigarettes:

Anne Arundel County tobacco sting finds one in four stores sold tobacco to minors


Doug Teitelbaum

NJOY’s Doug Teitelbaum is Leading a Crusade Against Cigarette Smoking – Don’t Bet Against Him


Foundation for a smoke-free world

Derek Yach
Just so you can see the screams from Matt Myers – it is close enough to Halloween to hear him clearly.

Matt Myers: Philip Morris has a long history of funding what it calls independent research by previously credible researchers


Still Screaming

Another from one of my favorite bloggers, and consider him a friend: Paul:
Next, how PR firms create “dialogue”…

Then:


And…

Former American Cancer Society CEO John Seffrin endorses cancer research venture funded by Philip Morris




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

vapersukgraphic.JPG


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


Tobacco Harm Reduction For Life

GONZO GIVES




Medical, Research, Science Professionals:

Research:


Politics:

E-Cigarette Politics 

A Billion Lives

A Billion Lives


There is definitely more to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin

Save

Save

Save

Save

Vaping In The News – September 16th

yelling

 




Vaping Is Not A Crime ~ Sinner, Keep Sinning – We Need The Cash ~ Philip Morris Pledges $1 BILLION ~ Australia ~ Nicotine ~ E-cigarette use and associated changes in population smoking cessation ~ Resolution of recurrent tonsillitis in a non-smoker who became a vaper ~ The Corruption of Public Health ~ FDA Revised Guidance ~ It’s Not About Health ~ Mice ~




Many things to cover. David Goerlitz explores Canada, Sinners equal cash. Philip Morris makes public health experts and tobacco control more nervous. Corruption of public health will be no surprise, “guidance” from the FDA and a few other moments make up this weeks….

Vaping In The News ~ September 10th ~ 16th




Vaping Is Not A Crime

Canada is under extreme opposition. David Goerlitz is scratching punching the surface in this first of a series while visiting Montreal, Quebec.

This is another example of regulate, restrict, tax and ban worldwide. No matter where you are, fight.

 


Sinner, Keep Sinning

Mr. Puddlecoat probably sprained his fingers typing this one up… Thank you D.P.

Sinner, Keep Sinning – We Need The Cash


Philip Morris Pledges $1 BILLION

I trust tobacco companies more than government or public health. As an example in the UK, THE Fergus Mason’s favorite “authority figure” hag says this in the following article.

“The tobacco industry has a terrible track record of funding research designed to support its efforts to block policies to cut smoking,” Deborah Arnott, chief executive of London-based Action on Smoking and Health, said in a statement. “Tobacco industry claims can never be accepted at face value.”

This. This is fear. Losing power. Loss of control. Out of the loop. “Policies” are in question. The scream test looks nice in print.

I don’t trust public health, with a few exceptions.

I do however, trust Philip Morris (despite self-promotion of their heat not burn, etcetera) and this initiative far more with Yach at the helm.

This is progress, not control.

Philip Morris Pledges $1 Billion to Fight Smoking


 


Do you know about NNA?

nna.JPG


Austrailia

Please keep smoking. That is all.

After all, this: Don’t share this

Leads to this:

Harm caused by e-cigarettes uncertain


A Case for Nicotine Use

I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again. Nicotine is not addictive.

Because it is such an assertive claim and everything is riding on the myth, (Like Santa, you never want to tell the kids) either few professionals “understand”,  choose to understand or will admit it. They instead, are either incompetent or believe it themselves.

Gorokh has a twist I liked:

“…..drawing conclusions about nicotine from smoking studies is like measuring the effects of lemon juice by administering participants rounds of Long Island iced teas!”

That’s here below.

A Case for Nicotine Use


Do you know about THR4LIFE?

bod1


E-cigarette use and associated changes in population smoking cessation:

Evidence from US current population surveys.
Seems we’re not anecdotal any longer, we’re population level status now.

E-cigarette use and associated changes in population smoking cessation: Evidence from US current population surveys. 


Resolution of recurrent tonsillitis in a non-smoker who became a vaper.

A case study and new hypothesis.

Resolution of recurrent tonsillitis in a non-smoker who became a vaper.


The Corruption of Public Health

Where do I begin. Is it when the Food and Drug Adminstration formed? When Chapman or Glantz were born? When Frieden took his first baby steps from his sterilized crib? I don’t know. Find out here:

The Corruption of Public Health


Are you familiar with INNCO?


tobacco products zippo.jpg

FDA “Revised Guidance” was released.

Ash trays and lighters are not tobacco products, but your list of what is, is here:

FDA issues revised final guidance on tobacco manufacturer registration and product listing


It’s Not About Health

I love this man.

It’s Not About Health: A Potted History


Mice.

Well, here’s my favorite of the week.

I’ll let you decide if you actually want to read this bullshit, but here are my favorite quotes from the article:

“As always, it is difficult to extrapolate the findings to humans…”

“but the effect on humans still needs to be investigated…”

May I suggest a few humans?

One is an expert at any-hand smoke named Stan “Puff – n – Stuff” Glantz.

Third-hand smoke in furniture and clothes damages mouse organs




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

Health aspects of e-cigarettes – Short information for physicians

dr

E-cigarettes are a choice. Dr. Mayer has released this statement informing physicians about the health aspects of e-cigarettes.


“Plasma levels of toxic substances…substantially decrease” and are “identical to the levels of non-smokers…”

“From a medical point of view, individuals who switched from smoking to the consumption of e-cigarettes have to be classified as non-smokers.”


 

berndmayer


Dr. Mayer’s document is found here:

Health aspects of e-cigarettes – short information for physicians

 

Added 6/25/17:

Information for consumers: Switching from smoking to vaping

Dr. Mayer’s website is here: bernd-mayer.com


To reduce the risks of smoking, physicians need proper information to rely on and relay to their patients. E-cigarettes are another way to reduce or eliminate smoking.

The worldwide claim of professionals “not knowing” the risks of e-cigarettes has come to a close.


There’s no reason for physicians to dismiss e-cigarettes or less harm to patients.

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


Related:

Public Health England

Ecigarettes: an evidence update

 


Eureka Alert

Of 560 physicians surveyed, over 70% “indicated that e-cigs can help patients reduce or eliminate smoking” and “almost half believe they can reduce risk”:

Majority of US doctors discussing electronic cigarettes with their patients


Dr. Cranfield

Dr. Cranfield explains the health effects of users over three years.

Users showed a 96% reduction in adverse health problems by users of three or more years. Conditions such as heart disease, high blood pressure and asthma improved by 61.8%

Conditions such as heart disease, high blood pressure and asthma improved by 61.8% of those diagnosed with those health issues while they smoked.

Health Effects and Demographics of Electronic E-cigarette Users. A Comparison Health Events in Previous Smokers with Three or More Years of Electronic E-cigarette Experience



Analytical Assessment of e-Cigarettes: From Contents to Chemical and Particle Exposure Profiles (Emerging Issues in Analytical Chemistry)


Do Less Harm: E-Cigarettes a Safer Option Than Smoking

Do Less Harm: E-Cigarettes a Safer Option Than Smoking


Public Health Leaders Call For ‘Correction Of Mistaken Beliefs’ On Vaping

Public Health Leaders Call For ‘Correction Of Mistaken Beliefs’ On Vaping


Annual Review of Public Health Harm Minimization and Tobacco Control: Reframing Societal Views of Nicotine Use to Rapidly Save Lives

Annual Review of Public Health Harm Minimization and Tobacco Control: Reframing Societal Views of Nicotine Use to Rapidly Save Lives


The health impact of e-cigarettes they don’t want you to know




Medical, Research, Science Professionals:

Research:

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!


A Billion Lives

Politics:

E-Cigarette Politics 


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

More to come.

Keep ON #Vaping On.

Kevin

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

Ecigs: Paradigm shift or Pavlov’s dog?

greed

Have you noticed a shift in in reporting in the United States about e-cigs? Have they completely lost their minds? No… If you start to notice it, there’s a reason. On August 8th, 2016, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) deemed nicotine as tobacco –  and took the reign over ecigs.

It’s mind-boggling how nicotine and such things as batteries being defined as tobacco products can make an expert think.



The public has suffered an onslaught of headlines, #fakenews and click-bait touting “A million more times harmful” and “formaldehyde”. A chorus of experts have sung everyone’s classic “Think Of The Children™ in tune to garner support.

Americans have been settling for less.

This change in the weather has taken a LOT of work. Health groups have been working in tandem to demonize e-cigs without fail to create the controversy, to control public opinion, to keep resistance to a bare minimum. Now it’s suppertime.

Not so long ago, e-cigs were bad. There are astounding examples and a great blog by Robert Innes about that here:

But I Am Hardly an Expert…





shift

Now, since the FDA has defined nicotine as a “tobacco product”, a paradigm shift has occurred. There must be one big-ass mass email of “ok folks, let’s roll the other way now” put out by tobacco control.

Not all, but some organizations are posting “less hateful” news. I predict more.


The government is serving pie.

 



*DING

pavlov

The bell has rung. They don’t care about safety, children, chemicals or your “journey” to stop smoking. Now they’re motivated. There is official drooling and control.

Please, smoke ’em if you got ’em- and now taxes of your vaping products will be sufficient.

The association with “safer” in the health world is the addiction trigger to all who, directly or indirectly operate with or, are funded by, tobacco tax –  as e-cigs become surprisingly more acceptable.

“When it’s over I predict that each camp will claim plausible deniability to the fact that it takes someone from smoking, keeps them from smoking, and keeps all involved from revenue unless it is deemed & taxed like a tobacco product.”

(Please, KEEP SMOKING! Plausible Deniability, an Incestuous Relationship.)

Get your napkins. The”taxing of nicotine” bell has rung.

You can almost hear the good intentions coming down tobacco roads.

You can almost smell fresh pie cooking. (Thanks FIG!)

UCSF Awarded $20M Federal Grant on Tobacco Regulatory Sciences

 


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

E-cigarettes: A Public Health STRATEGY Or TRAGEDY

strategy tragedy.GIF

The positioning of Government and health organizations clamoring for “less smoking” is becoming dangerously close to a sitcom without the laugh tracks. The strategy of health officials in the United States has reached a “beyond unacceptable level” – now at the point of being a tragedy.

According to their own numbers, with the money they thought would never end from the Master Settlement Agreement, they are costing lives. That’s their strategy. Until, of course, taxing e-cigarettes is the norm by making nicotine – tobacco. THEN they will come around.

If they were trying to help their estimated 480,000 tragic deaths from occurring annually, they’d stop being “yes men” to the power of persuasion. Tragically, they’re manipulating the public with no strategy towards harm reduction.

 


Below is a power-point I’ve put together to show the difference between the strategy from the vaping organizations  – and the United States Government, Health (puppets) officials, and Organizations et al  ~tragedy~ by claiming they’re thinking of public health – despite their titles.


E-cigarettes – A Public Health Strategy or Tragedy

Any smoker still on the fence about e-cigarettes at this point can message ME. If you’re choosing to switch, I’ll give you the basics – or you can browse my blog…



 

You know when you ask yourself the question “is it me”? Well, my fellow sheep, it’s not just me. Witnessing the insanity as my friend Alan has stated, there is Action Required to Halt Plummeting Public Perception in the world of “public health”.

Another friend across the pond, Paul, has pounded another nail through the forehead of the media’s inability to be journalists:”On the lack of research in the media

Speaking of tragedy – from Dr. Brian Carter, Consumer Advocates for Smoke-free Alternatives Association (CASAA) – Director of Scientific Communications:

“They readily accepted all sources as being equally reliable, failing to properly distinguish between established and respected scientific organizations and extremist political front groups with lofty sounding names.”

That, from Dr. Carter, is here: Critical Thinking 101: Source Evaluation


 

Added 01/26/17:

You can click here or on the link below to find your association’s most likely “answer” you’d give to someone inquiring about switching to e-cigarettes in a phone call or in person.

E-cigarettes: A Tobacco Harm Reduction Assessment Tool

 


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


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.

Save

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

Save

Save