Vaping In The News covers media stories on smoking, vaping, snus, heat not burn, e-cigarettes, exposing tobacco control, public health, government, regulations, policies and more worldwide.
“The largest threat to Public Health is an informed consumer.”
Deadly agency nominated for award ~ Lessons From the Public Health Responses to the US Outbreak of Vaping-Related Lung Injury ~ A Look Back at CDC’s Award-Nominated “EVALI” Response ~ Cigarette sales are rising in the middle of a pandemic ~ Nicotine Policy Should Not Be Exempt From Science ~ How ASH turned the views of just SIX smokers into a headline-grabbing 300k ~ Speaking of government math ~ What’s that? Juul and Pave? ~ Survey: ‘Cool’ factor, not flavor, drives teens to vape ~ Dependence on e-cigarettes and cigarettes in a cross-sectional study of US adults.
Deadly agency nominated for award
Because you need to pat yourselves on the back for a pseudo-job well done. You have work to do with those states banning ‘our’ products on false pretenses. Now you have the tools.
Human beings died while we eluded to something else causing the problem – and that assumption caused cities and states to ban nicotine vaping products.
We’re still confusing the public. We’ll mention it, but we’re not going to blow the same budget resources admitting or rectifying blatant misconduct. But hey, look at us! We’re a finalist for an award!
Congrats to CDC’s Dr. Briss & 2019 Lung Injury Response Team for being #Sammies2020 Science & Environment finalist! They identified the chemical compound responsible for the outbreak of e-cigarette, or vaping, product use-associated lung injury (EVALI): https://t.co/fiwSBUwD23
— Rochelle Walensky, MD, MPH (@CDCDirector) May 4, 2020
Lessons From the Public Health Responses to the US Outbreak of Vaping-Related Lung Injury
You have work to do with those states banning ‘our’ products on false pretenses. Now you have the tools.
“The CDC’s public advice and the media were slow to report the evidence on the role of cannabis vaping. Popular government regulatory proposals – bans on sales of nicotine flavours and vaporisers – were based on the assumption that nicotine vaping was the cause of the outbreak.”
If one person is tested three-times and all three tests come back positive, it counts as three instead of one https://t.co/lAW8C1N9Er
— Rogue1-the Jeff Faria Project (@PatriotsOfMars) May 5, 2020
What’s that? Juul and Pave?
This 60 second snippet from PAVE has them telling the truth (and then distorting it). Not that that's news to anyone, I'm sure, but they did FINALLY admit the "JUUL rep" (in the school) wasn't a "JUUL rep". pic.twitter.com/Sy5cqYvxnh
What Carl said, and the video Jerry is in was “produced at taxpayer expense”.
What type of person refers to himself using a seldom-used unjustly flattering nickname? (Hint: Pretty much anyone who is part of our basket case governing cabal.) https://t.co/2q3hTIT8IA
United States of America. The only country in the world to deem a blue screwdriver a tobacco product per @FDATobacco … When are you going to wake up America? Your government is lying to you about vaping and ecigs! Do not let them hand over the industry to BT. #firetheSGpic.twitter.com/04VokflIqW
Vaping In The News covers nicotine, smoking, vaping, snus, heat not burn, e-cigarettes, harm reduction, tobacco control, public health, government, regulations, policies & more worldwide.
The largest threat to Public Health is an informed consumer.
If you are afraid of going back to smoking, seek out other smoke-free alternatives. ~ The emotional and irrational hysteria in the US ~ Vaping Illnesses: Consumers can Help Protect Themselves by Avoiding Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)-Containing Vaping Products ~ VTA Responds to CDC & FDA Statements ~ Vaping and the Mic with Kim Shilling ~ E-Cigarettes: Smoke & Mirrors ~ Speaking of needing “treatment”. ~ For posterity ~ Michigan Governor Declares Cigarettes Safe
Consumer Advisory: If you are afraid of going back to smoking, seek out other smoke-free alternatives.
The Consumer Advocates for Smoke-Free Alternatives Association (CASAA) has (now updated) a release:
Simply use “vapinglinks” at checkout for 15% off your entire cart!
Please visit my proud sponsor
Vaping and the MIC with Kim Shilling.
This is well worth listening to Kim Shilling as she discusses the Michigan fiasco.
E-cigarettes: Smoke & Mirrors
This video gives me hope that critical thinking may still be lurking in the United States.
With Dr. Sally Satel, Dr. Roger Klein, and Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller.
Speaking of needing “treatment”.
Surprise! Pfizer sponsored research has found they need to fill a need because you need their product as “treatment” to cease vaping product use.
This gem is in the text. Bold and italics are my emphasis.
There aren’t antismoking treatments for people who smoke only electronic cigarette (single users) or electronic cigarette and classic cigarette (dual users). Surprisingly, there aren’t data available in the literature on smoking cessation intervention for this specific disease group …
In the spirit of having a record of informing readers now, and years to come, I will point out the wording is impeccable for propaganda, and the press was asking great questions. However, I will link the CDC transcript, and their inability to have any tangible findings, here
I understand the cringing. There were a few uneasy about this (my) blog because the Governor of Michigan didn’t actually say or “declare” cigarettes are safe.
Now, think of the never-ending, non-stop, click-bait (three hyphenated words in a row is a record for me) articles you see, read, get tagged by your friends, and millions share daily. That are not true.
Nope, she didn’t ‘say’ or ‘declare’ cigarettes are safe, but it was implied. Call it tongue-in-cheek, call it satire.
She isn’t banning cigarettes, therefore, cigarettes are safe.
Those in control are power tripping all over themselves trying to ban flavors in vaping products. Once a smoker, you shall never deserve pleasure derived from a less harmful alternative while you’re bullied to quit smoking their way by the same peoplehaving you by your short-hairs. Flavor bans are good for smoking.
Do they want less smoking?
Do “they” truly want less smoking, or control? The choice to impose any flavor ban is a choice to protect income derived from smokers (NOT tobacco companies as public health likes to imply) in the form of predicted and lucrative revenue in accordance with the Master Settlement Agreement.
Why would anyone want to ban or tax a less harmful alternative to smoking? Why would you ban adult choice?
What do they know?
When someone stops smoking, food not only tastes better, sense of smell improves. The olfactory nerves from taste to smell are in overdrive within a few days. Senators, for example, are trying to ban flavors, but have enjoyed a “candy desk” since 1965. Really. In fact, surprise, now there are TWO.
With most, if not all examples of “stop smoking” programs comes the fact that taste buds return and will enhance the perception of flavors. That means flavors are pleasurable in the journey of a smoker choosing not to smoke. That means flavor bans are good for smoking.
You could take my word for it, or find examples of
“suggesting that the effects of smoking on olfaction may be reversible” here.
“The ability of olfactory stimuli to uniquely alter craving states and cognitive processes associated with smoking, and disrupt well-learned smoking routines, would offer a distinct and novel method for reducing cravings” here.
“Your damaged taste buds will recover relatively quickly and your ability to relish delicious food will be among the greatest rewards you will get for your efforts in quitting smoking.” here
“In two days, the blunted senses of smell and taste begin to sharpen again” here.
“Did u know quitting smoking can make food taste & smell better? Yum!” from National Cancer Institute’s (NCI) “SmokeFreeUS” here.
“A few days after someone quits smoking, their taste buds kick back in. Celebrate those strong taste buds with some delicious healthy treats!” (Another) found from NCI here.
” Quitting smoking can help improve your sense of taste! Celebrate #NationalWatermelonDay by enjoying a smokefree afternoon & the delicious taste of watermelon.” from the Centers for Disease Control here.
Simply use “vapinglinks” at checkout for 15% off your entire cart!
Please visit my proud sponsor
69,233 Former Smokers Show:
“Fruit and dessert/pastry/bakery flavors were the most prevalent choices of the adult established, dedicated US e-cigarette users who participated to this study. The same flavors were also considered particularly important in their effort to quit smoking and to prevent relapse to smoking.“
“However, this doesn’t mean we don’t have plenty of peer-reviewed evidence that they’re invaluable tools. In fact, a new report concluded e-liquid flavors help adult smokers fight the urge to start smoking again far better than tobacco flavored e-liquids do.”
Is the number one priority actually reducing smoking rates? Either they want less harm, or they don’t. Either they want less smoking, or they don’t. Smoking rates for teens and adults are the lowestin history. Is that bothering them?
It’s clear “public health” has made their decision. They want to have fewer flavors – but keep “tobacco” flavor. Think about that. That means flavor bans are good for smoking. They want to ban choices that work at any cost.
To pretend banning flavors will not protect cigarette revenues means you live in a fantasy world. You can ponder that statement at one of over 30,000 Starbucks – while enjoying one or more of your 80,000 available flavors.
“Morals are standards set by those who want their standards met by others.”
After all, smokers, and former smokers do not deserve motivation or pleasure – only defeat, disapproval, and shame. How’s that feel?
The public officials (all) bleating they want less smoking is irony in control. They are still asserting their “authority” while trying to hold what little control they have left.
Less smoking, after all, really isn’t their goal. Quietly mentioning lowering nicotine on occasion, burying within press releases, without much fanfare, they are INVESTING over 100 Million Dollars for more cigarettes….. Flavor bans are good for smoking.
At the risk of sounding sound redundant, repetitive and repeating myself: Do they want less smoking? Those in controlare power tripping all over themselves trying to ban flavors.
“Good public health policy must recognize this continuum and leverage this knowledge to move continuing smokers, as rapidly as possible, toward less harmful nicotine delivery products while simultaneously preventing the adoption of all nicotine containing or tobacco products among youth.“
Vaping In The News covers nicotine, smoking, vaping, snus, heat not burn, e-cigarettes, harm reduction, tobacco control, public health, government, regulations, policies & more worldwide.
Kids Under the Bus, Vapers Down the Slope ~ Tobacco Sales to Kids Is a Problem For States, Not Retailers ~ Public Misunderstanding of Health Risks ~ These people have lost their minds ~ David Goerlitz ~ California: ~ Why the Next FDA Chief Shouldn’t Block Alternatives to Cigarettes ~ Scott Gottlieb wants more smoking ~ Reynolds just rolled out berry and cream nicotine lozenges ~ Lozenges are to be banned in prisons
“The largest threat to Public Health is an informed consumer.”
Kids Under the Bus, Vapers Down the Slope
This, a thought-provoking article I wish I had written. I’ll ask the question again: “At what age is a smoker considered a smoker”?
Go on, read about fascism, Tobacco Control. Never look away.
Tobacco Sales to Kids Is a Problem For States, Not Retailers
“The simplest route to obtaining age restriction compliance seems to be FDA pressure for stronger state enforcement, rather than agency action against retailers or product categories.”
Why is “the” industry NOT talking about this? Current laws. Synar Amendment. Scapegoats. Sheep.
These people have lost their minds. Now, evidently – nicotine “stops” brain growth.
We are launching a new public awareness campaign w/ @PimaSchoolSup to prevent teens from taking up vaping. Vapes are nicotine delivery systems. Nicotine is highly addictive & can harm brain development in youth. learn more: https://t.co/GerDrBEqK3pic.twitter.com/qP9Xn2mNw8
Scott Gottlieb wants more smoking before he leaves.
(“Lower nicotine” is covered by me here and how much the “public health” groupsorganized crime supports it, here.)
-Meanwhile, below – and before he leaves, he wants to be sure his legacy includes more combustible tobacco.
From the above article: “The FDA should be allowing private solutions that reduce the amount of cigarette smoking, not leading efforts that would help maintain it.”
Is access to public data an unreasonable request? What will the complete data reveal? Are snippets of data the best way to inform the public? If the full spectrum of the data is withheld, what is real, what is contrived?
“If you repeat a lieoften enough, it becomes the truth.”
The problem with research misconduct must be of epidemic proportions. So much so, the Department of Health and Human Services has its own division defining such misconduct called the Office of Research Integrity (ORI), and a definition of said misconduct.
“Research misconduct is defined as fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results.”
“Falsification is manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record.”
It would seem all data would be required to have a clear picture of the information being displayed presented to make an informed case, decision, or outcome. The authority in charge has no business writing or promoting a narrative, when data can and shall speak for itself.
Instead, snippets become headlines, and headlines create the story narrative.
“If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth“
In the case of e-cigarettes, and the latest “data” on youth use, it is to present manipulate the claim of an ‘epidemic’ in order to willfully threaten legal adult choices, using snippets of data designed to “fit a narrative” as my friend, U.S. Surgeon General, Dr. Jerome Adams has done, and has accused.
It’s backward. Snippets (subliminal or not) can sell ideas. Create campaigns. Change public opinion.
Mining for data can be useful. Depending on the criteria, displaying data to ones liking is misleading. Similar to Stanton Glantz below, that is propaganda.
Skewed data is…well, you can make anything look like you want it to look for your own purposes. I think I am afraid of both films Nicolas Cage appears in, and pools. Why? I’m not sure what I’m afraid of, Nicolas Cage isn’t his real name, but looking at data tells me I should… Oh never mind.
In this blog, I will attempt to demonstrate two things. First, the following tweets and subtweets can be confusing. Second, if I can post things in here properly and explain, you won’t be confused. Either way, they are snippets, and you’ll probably be confused.
It started with (well, not really, I’m using my interpretation of the data) a question to the highest “ranking” Medical Doctor from Mike Peterson:
In this tweet, the Surgeon General clearlyseems to has “doubts” that Mike “really wanted this information”. Surgeon General Adams must not look away from his snippets accomplishments on his “I love me” wall and must be suspicious of anyone questioning his integrity my snippet. Shame on you, Mike!
Oh, I think Mike wanted the information. That’s alright, Dr. Adams. You don’t require my assurance adults are looking harder than you are for any detrimental outcomes of any facet of e-cigarettes.
It’s not as if we’re a large and growing community of consumers including Doctors like yourself, Lawyers, Teachers, Nurses, Statisticians, Scientists, Cooks, Truck Drivers, and other professionals, along with lovers of data and science. And math. In fact, one of us is a… nope… my narrative, so further down the data hole you go.
I’ll insert a quick snippet from my personal life. The words from a Neurologist to my wife was:
“We’re setting up testing for onset of Alzheimer’s and dementia.”
Is that a snippet of a much greater assessment? Can you discern from the quote she, in fact, has Alzheimer’s or dementia? Do you have enough data to make the determination? You really don’t know. I’m saving it for a different blog.
Note the words ” in the interest of correcting misunderstandings”. Misunderstandings are snippets, Dr. Adams. Vape shops aren’t included in “this” analysis is correct, by stating “equally high violation rate”, you overstepped your ego, data, or knowledge, position narrative.
I know I said I wasn’t going to comment but in the interest of correcting misunderstandings, this looked at retail chains. Most all vape shops are independent, so they aren’t included in this analysis- but fact is some independent vape shops have an equally high violation rate.
— Dr. Vivek Murthy, U.S. Surgeon General (@Surgeon_General) February 9, 2019
He’s right. Snippet. The statement just above was “they aren’t included in this analysis” and “shops have an equally high violation rate“, and refers to this graphic he posted below:
I proudly show you my snippet! Go ahead, click on it, it’ll enlarge.
Because he was prompted by – anyone’s comments – and saw my amateur hour cut/paste of his just above, below he explains how narrative and roles to play suddenly are important. His data went from “equally high violation rate” to some vape shops. Also, he displays his knack of interacting with the public quite… well, I’ll let you come to your own conclusions. Go ahead, click on it, it’ll get bigger!
“It’s easy to cut & paste snippets”…because the whole picture isn’t a narrative, I just couldn’t let that one go. If data and information is explained properly, there is no need for “snippets”. Go ahead, click on it, it’ll get bigger!
Here, I’m not sure if he’s being condescending on purpose, or if he just doesn’t know he’s tweeting to a known impugner. I am also an uneducated “backwards backwoodsman from one of the colonies.” (Thanks, Alan, I knew that would come in handy eventually! ) Oh, go on, there’s something I was determined to take out of context. Damn me. Go ahead, click on it, it’ll get bigger!
To further reiterate his position snippet, he grabs some more data from his cuff and explains some gibberish about technical stuff I probably wouldn’t understand anyway… something about this does look like a high ranking public health official explaining a snippet narrative, maybe it’s just me. We’ve gone from … well, this data thing just isn’t my forte’.
Well, Mike (he’s mentioned above), and Jake got data. In fact, they mined the data. Turns out twenty-one money penalties were assessed. Go ahead, click on it, it’ll get bigger!
To “That Damned Ninga, he agrees. Vape shops are “doing much better”… he also wants everyone else to agree. I often forget I’m constantly asked to agree with something because it will fit a narrative. I wonder what happens when the public just nods their head in agreement when a public official says to. Couldn’t be all bad, I suppose. Either way, he wants everyone to agree. By golly, I’m almost going to agr…. nope. Go ahead, click on it, it’ll get bigger!
Simply use “vapinglinks” at checkout for 15% off your entire cart!
Please visit my proud sponsor
Trusting the highest doctor in the land to provide competent, well-constructed answers to convey issues with facts, when he, in fact, won’t do it seems futile. Instead, he has chosen to act on authority, instinct, and sticks to the data (dammit) script.
“If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.”
Then, addressing (you and me) the public as if we’re a bunch of nine-year-olds is pretty – well, idiotic. Starting at about the time I could talk, I’ve questioned authority and integrity a long time. Pre-loaded answers come with loaded questions where I come from – the backwoods of one of the original colonies.
In fact, I’ll use your “It’s easy to cut & paste snippets” own sarcastic words against you, Dr. Adams. Also, I have repeatedly asked for data. So much so, it’s redundant, repetitive and repeats itself. It should, could, may, might or even would, speak for itself.
The reason I keep asking the same questions over and over?
Dr. Adams own words:
In the meantime, if you’re approaching a city, township, county, or state hearing about sales to minors, or that vape shops are contributing to the delinquency of minors, I highly suggest these two graphics to use at your disposal, just as the Heart, Lung, Cancer, and other healthorganizations will. Let them sort it out with facts, not preconceivednotions and media sound bitessnippets (dammit) data.
Here’s the chart from Jake Jacobsen: According to data, if you click on it, it’ll get bigger!
Here is the chart alone from Mike Peterson: Yep, click:
Bring your nose a bit closer to the screen – at a second glance, this is what you may have missed: Wait, back up, just click!
The overall narrative is to put big scary numbers out, fueling the fire of an epidemic. I (we, vapers paying attention) want the truth. I don’t for one minute think any of us want anything less, good or bad. We’re adults, we can take the snippets data.
When looking at inspections just above, there is no “epidemic”, and the fact is, in 2018:
There were 146,376 inspections.
There were 17,456 total violations
Of 17,456 violations, 2,060 were “ends and e-liquid.
Of those violations, 229 were vape shops. (Vape shops: STOP that.)
Things that make you go hmmmm…..
And Juul? If you believe their “epidemic” data, Vuse was the front runner of underage sales violations at 1,729… so, they should have at least tried harder at purchasing Juul to complete the narrative.
Silly data makers. Go ahead, scroll back up if you need to. I’ll wait.
Sounds as if you’re still confused. I apologize for torturing you, but I feed a mouse cheese just to do my math for me.
This an enforcement issue all the way around. Underage sales at vape shops are NOT a contributing factor to an epidemic, which is still a snippet of the overall message portrayed. Kids stealing from their parents like they did cigarettes? Probably. Straw purchases? Likely.
Illegal sales – meeting the “definition” of an ‘epidemic’? Doubtful.
Snippet alert:
Found in my previous “Nod In Agreement” blog here.
“If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.”
On to the “epidemic”.
If, after reading this blog, you are still confused, I will conclude, from snippets, and so shall you, that confusion is intentional. The snippet below is a confusing mess, by design. The bottom right tweet on his personal account, in a “non-official” capacity, was just a few days before he announced as Surgeon General there indeed “is” an epidemic. I hope we can all agree, the data is in the contrived details. Go ahead, click on it, it’ll get bigger!
“Morals are standards set by those who want their standards met by others.”
I don’t want situational ethics, nor do I want morals and feelings mixed into the narrative. Here is what I want. I want the law to be obeyed. I want parents to be aware, not act on “reefer madness” type propaganda, and ultimately, parents to parent.
Specifically, I want the data to speak for itself. Both for adults looking for a safer alternative to smoking, and the narrative of an “epidemic” to be scrutinized, specifically when a public HEALTH official is threatening adult choices for less harmful products – unless we agree with his narrative. Jim McDonald says it best.
We won't tell smokers that vaping is safer until a few vapers on Twitter admit that a large increase in occasional use constitutes an epidemic of addiction.
No kidding, that's exactly what he's saying. It's a threat, and it's not appropriate for a public health official. https://t.co/5k0IMDiSmr
Unless you suffer from cognitive dissonance, I want the data as it stands, not as it fits my narrative “out of context” with some silly twitter snippets, Dr. Adams. I don’t want to hear about plausible deniability. I don’t want proof by assertion. Confirmation bias is unnecessary.
I want the public to be aware of the best information available rather than striking panic in the streets.
So, what’s the snippet? What’s the truth? Still confused? So are adults looking for answers to a less harmful alternative.
“If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.”
I am a consumer, while I try to be a voice for consumers, I don’t speak for “all” consumers. I have a higher standard for medical and government officials. The Surgeon General of the United States (or any public official) should not rely on “googlesearches” (in a personal or public capacity) to fill a narrative.
In my assessment, Dr. Adams should post facts. Period.
Snippet Alert!
The Surgeon General should resign or be fired. Immediately. That’s my narrative. That’s my snippet.
With that, no high ranking publicemployee official has no business writing, or tweeting, or sharing an opinion, or narrative, when data shall speak for itself.
I’ll stick to my guns, check on my wife, and keep my #SGWatch up to see when comprehensive information to adults has been displayed with half the attention the ‘epidemic’ has received.
I’ll readily and publicly admit I’m wrong, but until that happens, Dr. Adams has to answer these questions concerning the ‘epidemic’:
What users were of legal age?
What users didn’t use nicotine?
How many were smoking & switched?
Why is marijuana included with “any vaping“?
Why is “use” defined as in the past thirty days, not daily?
Until that happens, I’ll keep pointing out discrepancies in the narrative of an alleged epidemic, or one of you can convince me why I shouldn’t.
For balance, after the release of and tagging him in this blog: (Coincidence? Doesn’t matter. Snippets.)
Important study, with important caveats: 1) This was done in UK (diff legal/ regulatory environment) in motivated quitters who presented to clinic & 2) trial accompanied meds with behavioral support -> so was Cadillac scenario 3) OK for adults DOESNT mean ecigs are safe for kids.
— Dr. Vivek Murthy, U.S. Surgeon General (@Surgeon_General) February 13, 2019
Oh, that’s right, I’ve got that screenshot snippet from a Dr. Girgis… wait a second… it’s… Yes, legal and regulatory environments. That’s right. No guidelines. Except when.
Snippet alert: showing “restraint”.
I highly recommend what Clive Bates has to say on the alleged U.S. “epidemic“.
THIS one is an eye-openingmust-read for ANY aspect of public health. Your opinions aren’t about your needs. Stop being nannies.
“The average American is like my patient: resentful toward those who tell him or her how to live.”
Vaping In The News covers nicotine,
smoking, vaping, snus, heat not burn, e-cigarettes, harm reduction,
tobacco control, public health, government, regulations, policies &
more worldwide.
All photos courtesy Moose Jooce Vape Shops, Michigan
FDA: Conflict of Interest or Business As Usual ~ Collusion | Dirty Details of the Coordinated effort to Kill Vaping ~ State of Public Health: Failure ~ Smokeless Tobacco ~ Having Health Insurance Increases Your Risk ~ Does the American Lung Association Really Hate Smokers ~ Why is vaping now more dangerous ~ ATR Leads Coalition ~ It is about church ~
FDA: Conflict of Interest or Business As Usual
Bookmark alert: I’d say this is ass-ripping testimony.
Collusion | Dirty Details of the Coordinated effort to Kill Vaping
Are you paying attention?
Censorship of information and policy, funding interests behind the scenes to fit a controlled narrative of non-profit organizations (of any issue) is clear.
Brent Stafford works very hard with Regulator Watch Canada to disseminate fact from fiction with Michelle Minton here in the U.S.
I, and thousands have been saying this for a very long time.
State of Public Health: Failure
Similar to what I hope you watched just above, I searched for “positive” statements from “health groups“. It took me a substantial amount of time to find them. It makes me “feel and believe” they can say they’ve “said” it, they’re just (unsurprisingly) very quiet about it.
Simply use “vapinglinks” at checkout for 15% off your entire cart!
Please visit my proud sponsor
#SGWatch
On the 5th of February, Surgeon General was quoted below saying nicotine is “pound for pound, as addictive as heroin”:
"A lot of people still think e-cigarettes are not harmful. But studies show that nicotine is, pound for pound, as addictive as heroin." @Surgeon_General Jerome Adams at #CADCAForum Meet and Greet pic.twitter.com/1NhxnXNdll
Then, on the 7th I see this. So far during my ‘one-man’ Surgeon General watch I’ve linked my challenge, Aaron Biebert has asked Dr. Adams politely for an interview, and the thread gets more interesting by the day.
For the record we’ve gone from a definitive statement of “pound for pound, as addictive as heroin”, to “a medical viewpoint-& it’s complicated” in two days.
If you don’t believe this idiotic fight is already a political and money-motivated movement, don’t start now. That said, I’d better see you dressing nice and in your pews on Sunday.
Award-winning independent filmmaker Aaron Biebert is on the move again. He and his core team are ready to get to work on his new ground-breaking documentary, “You Don’t Know Nicotine”. In just four days, momentum is building quickly towards the first goal of funding this new film.
How does nicotine actually affect developing brains?
Are there any benefits to adults who use nicotine without smoking?
Who’s covering up the truth about nicotine, and why?
Updated 1/30/2019: “Thanks to you, our project is currently the #1 most popular film project on Kickstarter!”
What they say
Varied statements of nicotine being as addictive as “heroin and cocaine” have been made for decades. They don’t just say it, they areassertiveabout it.
Action on Smoking and Health quotes Dr. Gottlieb stating it “rivals the addictive power of heroin and cocaine. For teens, it is particularly risky” and it “can rewire an adolescent’s brain“.
Cliff Douglas, “Vice-President Tobacco Control, American Cancer Society, and faculty, University of Michigan School of Public Health” states nicotine leads to changes in the brain.
“The great enemy of truth is very often not the lie–deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic…”
Are There Benefits? Are they right?
Think about it: is nicotine addictive? Is it dangerous? What are the health risks? Can it harm brain development? Are there benefits to the chemical?
What are they hiding?
Is there justification to what you’ve been told about nicotine or is the information outdated? Is what they say taken out of context? Do some of the people repeating it know it’s true or false?
“Too often we hold fast to the cliches of our forebears. We subject all facts to a prefabricated set of interpretations…”
Here’s a great and exclusive deal from Lunar Rover!
Simply use “vapinglinks” at checkout for 15% off your entire cart!
Is there a controversy?
The subject matter of this film is intriguing to me. In March of 2017, and in collaboration with others, I conducted a “30-day NicotineChallenge (with criteria: still uncontested).
What I expect from Aaron Biebart and his seasoned team is thought-provoking truth. I am looking foward to their findings, good or bad.
Why has this not been explored before?
Like his last award-winning independent film, I’m fascinated to see this subject taken head-on. I expect the public health community to line up (in an orderly fashion) to take unprecedented opportunity to explain themselves intelligently and end the debate publicly.
I also expect some to ignore it.
We enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought. ~John F. Kennedy
Searching for answers
While getting to the bottom of this, I expect – and predict – this director will enlighten us in the process, bringing this subject front and center, telling the world what we don’t know about nicotine.
I fully support this project because I understand the freedom of expression without outside influence. I understand educating the public is much less about ego and much more about education.
Regardless of the outcome, I look forward to the opportunity of discomfort of thought.
I’ll leave you with what the Kickstarter page says:
“We will chase down as many experts (willing & unwilling) as our budget allows. It’s time to get answers from all sides of this debate.”
If you’re interested, you can pitch in as little as $5.00 or much more, with levels and rewards being different, such as your name in the credits, an early streaming link, honoring a loved one who died from a smoking-related or brain-related illness, a public screening license, and much more – up to and including the “Tater Tot” level.
Vaping In The News covers media stories on smoking, vaping, snus, heat not burn, e-cigarettes, tobacco control, public health, government, regulations, policies and more worldwide.
“The largest threat to Public Health is an informed consumer.”
You Don’t Know Nicotine ~ The great American youth vaping epidemic. Really? ~ The FDA hearing that wasn’t ~ The Impact of E-Cigarette Warnings ~ Burning Sub-Ohm ~ Bucking Bad Legislation in the Buckeye State ~ Electronic Cigarette Fires and Explosions (U.S.A.) 2009 – 2016 ~ A Meme
You Don’t Know Nicotine
Aaron Biebert, Director of A Billion Lives, announced his new project during his visit in Oklahoma City at Vapers Carnivale:
If you’re interested, you can pitch in as little as $5.00 or much more, with levels and rewards being different, up to and including the “Tater Tot” level!
With the lack of being a professional statistician or researcher, I did my improvisational best covering the Surgeon General’s affirmation of the U.S. teen ‘epidemic’. I questioned the absence of daily data and babbled about it as I do.
Here, Clive Bates, someone I admire, explains what I could not, well beyond my expectations.
Speaking of curing children, and a fraudulent epidemic, the FDA took it upon itself to hold a public hearing on the youth vaping “epidemic”. Instead of a balanced conversation between harm reduction proponents and anti-tobacco activists, the hearing became a one-sided stage for fanatics.
Next up… contrived epidemic. Our friend Chris just below explains the “epidemic” was a plot (graphic below found here) to start with from this tweet in November of last year.
I’m not sure what to call this study. Note it was submitted on the 21st of September 2018. In the theme of warnings, something the ‘epidemic’ was based on, this short paper shows an “online experiment” and ‘“brain” and “chemicals” warnings’ were higher discouraging youth from e-cigarettes.
Paul puts common sense down so even I can understand it. I don’t sub-ohm. I’m certainly no mathematician, but I do understand researchers must have fire extinguishers ready at all times.
Electronic Cigarette Fires and Explosions (U.S.A.) 2009 – 2016
“Reports of 195 separate e-cigarette fire and explosion incidents in the U.S. were found, dating from January 2009 to Dec 31, 2016. In 68 percent of these incidents, 133 acute injuries were reported. No deaths were reported during the study period.”
Over the course of time, I’ve made my share of amateur graphics, “memes”. In the spirit and need for ALL of us to change the conversation, I asked Chris Hughes if I could use his photos for this blog in 2016, and again below.
Thanks to you who’ve shared it. It seems to have hit a nerve.
Vaping In The News covers media
stories on smoking, vaping, snus, heat not burn, e-cigarettes, exposing
tobacco control, public health, government, regulations, policies and
more worldwide.
“The largest threat to Public Health is an informed consumer.”
E-cigarettes OK to Quit Smoking ~ Vaping is Much Safer Than Smoking ~ NYU: “Substantially Less Harmful Than Cigarettes”. ~ Vaping and the Mic ~ A Harm Reduction Guide for Parents of Teens Who Vape ~ What do cigarette smokers think of vapers who are against tobacco? ~ Solution Announced for Vaping Cessation ~ Alternative Nicotine Delivery Options ~ Health, Science, & Technology Requests for Proposals ~ Clowns ~ Let’s Change The Conversation
E-Cigarettes OK to Quit Smoking
Imagine my surprise when our friend Ed West linked this from 2018. Inside it says “researcher Thomas Brandon, Ph.D., director of Moffitt’s Tobacco Research and Intervention Program” says the fear of vaping being as harmful as smoking is a “broadly held misconception”.
Ask your public health and elected officials why this has been buried for almost a year.
NYU Publishes Article Supporting Vaping As “Substantially Less Harmful Than Cigarettes”.
Dr. David Abrams of New York University agrees with Public Health England’s 2015 report. According to this article, he knows vaping products are “substantially less harmful than cigarettes“:
This blog is sponsored by LUNAR ROVER|Premium eLiquid. They not only produce cocktail and fruit flavors, they also have a range of tobacco flavors ranging from 0-18 strength.
Here’s a great deal from Lunar Rover!
Simply use “vapinglinks” at checkout for 15% off your entire cart!
I was proudly a guest on Vaping and the Mic with Mike Peterson on Smoke-Free Radio. We had a little chat about… things…
A Harm Reduction Guide for Parents of Teens Who Vape
I did an inquisition of sorts of the ‘epidemic’ of teen vaping with the fraudulent claim the Surgeon General has approved here.
Helen Redmond has this to say:
“The survey produced large-seeming percentages by asking teens if they’d vaped in the past month, the past year, or ever, but omitted to ask about the most frequent use, which you’d think would be the cause of most concern.”
Definitive Agreement Marks Milestone for Alternative Nicotine Delivery Options
I can almost hear the slapping of palms on foreheads in California. Either way, tobacco companies are progressing forward with less harm in spite, or… well.
Let’s change the conversation about the myths surrounding nicotine and vaping.
The government resists ignores the opportunity to correct myths surrounding nicotine, vaping, and snus. Most things shared in mainstream media is full of multi-layered bias. There are difficultiesexplaining admitting vaping products and nicotine (and snus) are a safer, less harmful alternative to smoking, and the government continues to mislead the public.
Let’s change the conversation.
Myth:
Vaping does not work.
Truth:
Vaping does work.
Current nicotine cessation products show smoking cessation rates below 7% at 1 year.
Dr. Gottlieb knows the 93% failure rate is accurate.
However, what you’re not being told they won’t admit: Without question, e-cigarettes have shown extremely high success rates. A survey conducted by the Moffitt Cancer Center funded by the National Institute of Health (NIH) and National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) showed as far back as 2013: 79% had completely quit smoking cigarettes
An immediate transition
42% quit switched in one day. 75%stopped smokingswitched within a month in (my) global survey of 7,238 participants. While some ‘experts’ believe this is bias because vapers participated, this shows ‘real world’ beneficial bias. I found their experience similar to mine and wanted the world to know. So did they.
Flavors: This United States survey, the largest survey ever performed on e-cigarette use in terms of sample size with 69,233, shows flavors was associated with significantlyhigher odds of adults having quit switched with vaping products and was submitted to the Food and Drug Administration.
The FDA has not published or utilized these findings to my knowledge.
“They want to regulate, restrict, tax and ban less smoking.”
Consider this:
Did you know “it may take 30 or more quit attempts before being successful” They DO.
56 more demonstrating vaping products are less harmful than cigarettes or are effective to switchcan be found here.
Dr. Farsalinos “has been conducting laboratory and clinical research on e-cigarettes as a principal investigator since 2011” has his research found here.
Point To Ponder:
The FDA experimented with Chantix on 12-16-year-olds. “The study failed to meet the main goal”. You read that right. It’s here.
Fun Fact: They are encouraging more smoking.
According to this press release: “Agencies of the U.S. federal government have invested more than $100 million in independent clinical research with SPECTRUM cigarettes”
Dr. Gottlieb, along with the majority of non-profit “health” organizations are excited to support more combustible cigarettes (with “lower nicotine“) entering the market.
There’s More:
This February 2018article from Moffit Cancer Center, where Thomas H. Brandon, Moffit’s Director of Tobacco Research and Intervention Program is in the middle of “a large national study” and states “my perspective that e-cigarettes represent the most important change in the landscape of tobacco use during my 36 years in this field. We need to harness this change to maximize the public health benefit“.
Dr. Brandon acknowledges quitting takes “several serious attempts” and smokers should make use of the seven products approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and adds: “And yes, e-cigarettes, whatever works!” (Article.)
Let’s change the conversation.
It’s time for public health and politicians to
make a decision:
You want less smoking, or you don’t.
You want less harm, or you don’t.
Not the only one wanting to change the conversation with public perception, Dr. David Abrams of New York University agrees with Public Health England’s 2015 report.
According to this article, he knows vaping products are “substantially less harmful than cigarettes“.
Again, changing the conversation is paramount to “reframe societal views of nicotine use” and stressed the need to “get out the latest accurate information about reduced harm”, along with the need for “ethics and integrity in responsibly interpreting the scientific evidence with rigor” is a necessity in this Annual Reviews of Public Health.
Consider this:
YOU are CASAA. The Consumer Advocates for Smoke-Free Alternatives has been changing the conversation since 2009. There are thousands of real-world testimonials here, and it is free to be a member and I encourage you to join here.
Tobacco Harm Reduction 4 Life (THR4Life) is another consumer group. THR4Life wants to change the conversation by supporting and educating consumers.
WHY are government officials withholding information on legal consumer nicotine/tobacco products from the public?
Simply use “vapinglinks” at checkout for 15% off your entire cart!
Please visit my proud sponsor
Myth:
E-liquid is a tobacco product
Truth:
As of August 8th, 2016, e-liquid (with or without nicotine) and vaping products are “deemed” (looked on, or to regard or consider in a specified way) tobacco products for the sole purpose of then regulating, restricting, taxing (like cigarettes) and even banning them.
Milk is not beef. Syrupis not wood. Grapes and hops are not alcohol. Almonds are not milk. Nicotine is not tobacco.
Sources for nicotine patches, gums, inhalers, and e-liquid all come from the same source. While some e-liquids do contain nicotine extracted from the tobacco plant, it can also be synthetic.
Exempt? Nicotine patches, gums, inhalers
It’s the same nicotine. “Nicotine can also be purchased in many other forms including patches, chewing gum, and liquid extract formula.” That’s here.
Vaping products and nicotine replacements like patches contain nicotine, I’m trading one addiction for another. Vaping is just like smoking.
Truth:
No. These products are different and the likelihood of addiction is very low.
While the nicotineitself is the same nicotine, these products deliver nicotine differently and have a much lower risk of addiction than cigarettes.
“To debate a comparison of e-cigarettes to combustible tobacco is gross negligence or voluntary incompetence.”
There are other chemicals in cigarettes, like ammonia, for enhancing nicotine delivery. There is much more to it. “Research is showing that nicotine may not be the only ingredient in tobacco that affects its addictive potential” and “…likely caused by some as-yet-unidentified ingredient in tobacco smoke other than nicotine.”
You can see more about this hidden at the bottom of the page in purple from drugfacts.org here.
There’s More:
I understand your skepticism about nicotine. In fact, despite what you’ve heard since the 1988 Surgeon General’s report, there is no proof nicotine addiction exists.
This, from Hanan Frenk and Reuven Dar, says claiming nicotine addiction “could only be sustained by systematically ignoring all contradictory evidence” and “is remarkably biased and misleading.”.
Still not convinced? I still understand your skepticism.
Consider this:
This is ground-breaking research on Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease. Dr. Paul Newhouse is director of Vanderbilt University’s Center for Cognitive Medicine.
“…and nobody started smoking cigarettes.”
“It seems very safe even in nonsmokers,” he said. “In our studies we find it actually reduces blood pressure chronically. And there were no addiction or withdrawal problems, and nobody started smoking cigarettes. The risk of addiction to nicotine alone is virtually nil.”
The effects of nicotine itself are similar to that other popular drug, caffeine. There is no evidence that nicotine causes any substantial risk for cancer, and the research shows that the risk for cardiovascular disease is minimal. The confusion about nicotine comes from anti-smoking activists talking about nicotine and smoking as if they were the same.
This website also has information about smokeless tobaccoincluding snus.
In Florida, Dr. Lee, faced with a five-year-old (at the time) experiencing “20 seizures a night” with a rare form of epilepsy decided to administer nicotine via a patch. Dr. Lee also “found evidence that a nicotine patch helped stopped seizures in an adult”.
No one has proven themselves right with criteria provided in my “Nicotine Addiction: An Open 30-Day Public Health Challenge“.
Myth:
There are no side effects from vaping products.
Truth:
An important point for someone considering vaping as an alternative, Vaping 360 has some astounding information on their website. One example is ‘The Potential Side Effects from Vaping“.
Also, some have experienced allergic reactions to propylene glycol.
Myth:
If I use vaping products, I will experience no withdrawal symptoms or cravings quitting smoking during my transition.
Truth:
Vaping products reduce withdrawal symptoms associated with cigarette smoking.
In fact, many (mentioned in the survey linked above) experienced little or no withdrawal symptoms during their transition. Nicotine strength is essential.
Let’s change the conversation in the next myth below.
Myth:
If I start vaping, nicotine strength should be reduced as soon as possible.
Truth:
You should not limit your nicotine strength.
During your transition, the strength of nicotine you choose mimics the throat hit you experienced while smoking. It’s your pleasure. If you decide to switch, it is recommended nicotine strength matches to make the transition easier. There are also nicotine calculators to estimate your nicotine strength.
As an example, if you smoke heavily, your nicotine strength should be 12, 16, 18, or 24mg. Strengths do go higher, (36, 54 and even as high as 72mg). If you are a light smoker, it may only be 0, 3, 6 or 9mg nicotine strength you would be satisfied with. Start higher, and over time you can lower your nicotine if you feel you should. Your local vape shop should be able to determine your needs.
Since myths of nicotine have been ingrained into the public and culture so long, finding this study showing higher nicotine strengths was intriguing.
Myth:
Nicotine causes cancer.
Truth:
Nicotine does NOT cause cancer.
There’s More:
World renowned cardiologist Dr. Farsalinos explains in this article: “Nicotine does not cause cancer“, he goes on to say “All medical experts around the world know this to be a true fact. And yet, many continue making the mistake of associating nicotine with cancer.”
Only healthy people can use Nicotine Replacement Therapy (NRT), or nicotine.
Truth:
The effects of NRT and vaping products on the body is not “fully known”, but these products are safer than cigarettes. By using vaping products to switch from smoking, “you reduce your exposure to many chemicals found in tobacco smoke.”
In fact, 85% of the medical professionals in this survey said they are safer than combustible cigarettes.
If you have any concerns, talk to your doctor before doing so. Some find as patients, they are educating their doctors.
Under the direction of your doctor, most people can use NRT. Generally, NRT and vaping products can be safely used by people with diabetes or high blood pressure and does not increase the risk of heart attacks.
No, there is no “epidemic”. With bold being my emphasis, It may surprise you to see this via Clive Bates:
“Applying this proportion to the 2018 data would suggest about 4% of high school students are daily users (this compares to the headline 20.8% use in the past 30-days).”
It is illegal to purchase these products for anyone under 18 21. (Trump amended the law in December of 2019).
That fact is on page 13 of the 499 page document found here.
Did you know?
Since 1992, retailers must “achieve a noncompliance rate of no more than 20%” selling tobacco to minors (80% is acceptable in accordance with the Synar Amendment)
Surely you can answer for yourself if you like flavors (coffee, cake, cookies, candy, Grandma’s pies, etc.). While the myth of flavors being a ‘gateway‘ to smoking for teens (it is not), it is noted flavors like fruit and desserts, pastry and other flavors areextremely important in your transition.
Myth:
E-cigarettes are a “gateway” to smoking.
Truth:
More truthful information across the board = less harm.
“If our primary concern is population-level trends in youth and young adult smoking, which we believe is appropriate, then vaping has not shown to be a serious cause for concern”.
Two other studies, one here, and one from Yale shows “as a result of these bans, more teenagers are using conventional cigarettes than otherwise would have done so“, here.
There’s “anti-freeze” in e-cigarettes, and I’ve heard about “popcorn lung”.
Truth:
Blatantly lying, there is no “anti-freeze” in e-liquid. This statement is simply manipulative and absurd. As of the publishing of this post, the well respected American Academy of Pediatrics is still alluding to ‘anti-freeze’ as an ingredient in their ‘quick facts’ section here.
A twist of words on an ingredient, “facts” by various health groups and professionals. This article from Lee Johnson will ease your mind about this subject:
A valid concern. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health took that quite a bit further in a vape shop, where more than one person would be using these products.
“We evaluated concerns about exposure to vaping-related chemicals in a vape shop. Exposure to flavoring chemicals (diacetyl, 2,3-pentanedione, acetaldehyde), formaldehyde, nicotine, and propylene glycol were all below occupational exposure limits.”
Also see: “Results indicate e-cigarette secondhand exposures are sources of elevated nicotine and propylene glycol exposures. Secondhand exposures to e-cigarettes did not contain consistently elevated concentrations of formaldehyde or acetaldehyde.” That’s here:
Linda Bauld: “despite the lack of data of safety in pregnancy, we can be relatively confident that if the choice is between continued smoking and use of an e-cigarette (‘vaping’) then vaping is the safer option.”
“E-cigarette users with 3 or more years of use were found to have a 96% reduction in reported adverse health events after initiation use, and a resolution of 61.8% of the measured existing health problems that developed while smoking.”
“You can smoke and vape. In fact, I encourage it.”
If you are a smoker choosing to switch to vaping products, do it for your own reasons. If you smoke and vape – just to try it, that’s called “dual use“.
Should vaping products be designated as a “medical device”? Swedish courts found: “the product must have the function of preventing or treating an ailment” and are not medical devices.
Nicotine “addiction” is blamed solely on “nicotine”. Why are teens not using patches and gums to hide their addiction?
At what age is a smoker considered a smoker?
Immature Manipulative Data
While smoking among teens has reached it’s lowest levels in history, The 2018 “Monitoring The Future” survey shows teens are using e-cigarettes at ‘epidemic’ levels at 26.7%, yet fails to showdaily use (habitual).
Daily use was not asked. It did not have data showing:
What users were of legal age
What users did not use nicotine
How many were smoking and switched
Why marijuana is included with “any vaping“
Why is “use” defined as in the past thirty days, not daily
Why?
Why would anyone in the government or public health field purposely mislead the public?
When #data collected fails to generate daily data to analysis and assess information, which bias is utilized best? Is it:
Fun Fact: For the record, they want to eliminate 18, 19, and 20-year-old adults from accessing products by including vapor products with “Tobacco 21.
There’s more
They want to restrict access to cigarettes and e-cigarettes. For adults.
They already are well aware it doesn’t work. In fact, it makes no sense here. Creates more smoking, and didn’t make sense here. It also doesn’t make sense here.
The movement to raise the age to 21 for tobacco is not going to work. According to the Centers for Disease Control, underage drinking is still continuing to be a problem.
Switching and the Pleasure Principle
In the very important video below, fellow consumer David Dorn says in less than five minutes what most tobacco control expertsnever took the time to understand. He talks about switching and the pleasure principle.
It is highly recommended for smokers being pressuredand families of smokers. This should be required for anyone in the professional crowd to listen to.
Ultimately, it is about choice and pleasure. David talks about switching. Pleasure. Choice.
From the Global Forum on Nicotine (GFN2016): The Pleasure Principle – David Dorn
Why?
Why would anyone in the government or public health field purposely and knowingly mislead the public?
WHYare government officials withholding information on legal consumer nicotine/tobacco products from the public?
Let’s CHANGE The Conversation.
Along with e-cigarettes, I must point you to this important link from Dr. Brad Rodu about Mitch Zeller making false statements about smokeless tobacco needing to be part of the conversation as well. Dr. Rodu also talks about snus, and here where Mitch Zeller quietly answers Bengt Wiberg and absolutely admits snus is another alternative in the world, but no one hears that.
If the time, energy and money it took to convince the public otherwise been spent over the last ten+ years e-cigarettes have been available to educate, not manipulate, they may have achieved their goal of less smoking in the United States. I applaud the few who have stepped up despite the pressure of professional peers, and I encourage the others to do the same.
On one hand, when if authorities, legislator and public health officials swallow their pride and see the need, en mass, to listen and to change the conversation completely, they will be very embarrassed.
On the other hand, changing the conversation, for most, isn’t their goal.
Let’s change the conversation about myths surrounding nicotine and vaping.
This blog was derived, in part, from a previous post featuring James Jarvis, and “Dispelling Myths about Nicotine Replacement Therapy”: Myths about Nicotine
Vaping Links And More 