Experts. They, and please correct me if I’m wrong, are in the care and custody of information about tobacco, a treasure trove of various tobacco company files, and of course, how to “
prevent” control its said use.
Those who hold fancy titles like “mechanic” or “editor”
use abuse their power and advantage leverage opinions to manipulate public perception of “everything” tobacco.
In reality, sitting around waiting for things to change, crumble or fall wouldn’t normally be my nature. I’m not sure about you, but I am enjoying a front row seat for the pending implosion of what is tobacco control from a consumer’s perspective.
Smell that? I think it’s already happening.
Beyond the blog fog, where it took 7 “experts” to stand together to whine about blogs, (much better than mine) was enjoyable. Watching them losing control over of all things, other opinions… was a sight to see.
There’s satisfaction in watching them desperately grasp at their own shallow standards.
Top Billing: Poor Stan
It seems tobacco control’s subliminal messages are fine, (try again, it takes time, plan to quit, we’re here to help, etc) but not ok for Hollywood.
Foiled again. He likes to stroke his beard while running around to various theaters finding smoking in movies so he can complain & talk about suing hollywood, claiming that “smoking in movies” leads to children smoking. May I offer you some popcorn?
Brad Rodu certainly can explain how he’s wrong better than I can.
Harry Shapiro writes about it here as well:
Stanton Glantz, again…
Stanton Glantz “redoubles” (a term I see and despise, yet I’ll use it for the obvious – shouldn’t all efforts have been 100%, or have they been half-assed all along) his efforts in doublespeak and misdirection on everything tobacco and his grubby paws are losing a grip on reality.
Christopher Snowden covered that here.
“This is the David and Goliath delusion on crystal meth. “
Christopher Snowden appropriately checks Ruth Malone as well.
Speaking of Alice:
Ruth certainly isn’t worthy of top billing, yet I do think of her just enough to break her balls in second place a bit as her indecision and world-famous non-commital stance is, well, I’m not sure – as I’ve shown here…
It seems Ruth Malone has more to contribute to the misdirected link between big tobacco and descends into how evil they really are.
I’ll quote our dear friend, Agent, who on occasion would bring two words graciously into a tweet: “Quelle surprise”.
I fixed the final thoughts for her if you’d like to skip the formalities.
The foundation of tobacco control are nicotine and gateways to smoking in youth.
“Think of the children™” is a well worn battle-cry of the well established morons.
Well, they can collect their tobacco control toys, stop enticing their free child labor and go home.
More importantly, they can choose to ignore, or listen and engage with professionals like Dr. Cranfield below.
“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.
“Nicotine dependence is not a significant mechanism for e-cigarettes’ purported effect on heavier future conventional smoking among young adults.”
Via Michael Siegel:
I’m not sure what to think of this yet, but there’s hope, possibly. There’s concentration of “understandings and lay beliefs” in this one, so I’m still chewing on it.
I’m still looking for addiction, in humans, to nicotine without tobacco control’s passive-aggressive proof by assertion. As nicotine “addiction” goes, I’ve covered, and continue to add to this blog specifically with my babbling, along with a ton of links within.
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?
Medical, Research, Science Professionals:
A Billion Lives
Your comments are NEVER filtered, always encouraged and welcome on this blog.
There is definitely more to come.
Keep ON #Vaping On.