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.
Can Nicotine Actually Have A Good Side? ~ Snus and Parkinson’s ~ Swedish Snus Is Safer than Smoking ~ An Upside to Nicotine ~ Switching from Smoking to Juul ~ Anti-vaping activists pitch unscientific fringe ~ FDA chief hands the WH his plan to restrict flavored e-cigs ~ A Moose poking a bear ~ Buffalo, New York
Can Nicotine Actually Have A Good Side?
Fig tagged this for a completely different reason snippet… then I got to sniffing around…
“The interest in nicotine’s therapeutic potential started in the 1980s.”
“Researchers have been talking about nicotine-related drugs for decades, but none are on the market yet. Part of the problem is reputation.
I’ll let you decide what the real problem has been for decades:
FDA chief hands the WH his plan to restrict flavored e-cigs
“The FDA would stand on shaky legal ground if it imposed an outright ban on the sales of flavored e-cigarettes in convenience stores. But what the agency is doing amounts to an effective ban, with less legal exposure.”
“It does not take a majority to prevail … but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.” ― Samuel Adams
The LOUDER section
There’s a Moose poking the bear. Listen for yourselves…
“Our new ad, playing on 107.1 & 107.9. We’re kind of poking the bear here…but that is a recording of FDA Director, Scott Gottlieb, talking about vaping. The rest is ours. :)”
Buffalo, New York
With a flavor ban in the works, this started with a live post from Vic Canastraro here.
In less than 24 hours, it went from a thought, to a rally with signed petitions – and people from out of state joining in – to more than 28,000 views worldwide and more than 1000 shares… to news coverage – I think four separate channels conducted interviews.
When school buses went by, signs went DOWN.
“There’s only one solution – Unity and aggression.” ― Oliver Kershaw, ECF
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.
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 “backwardsbackwoodsman 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’.
Imagine how confused the public must be.
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.
“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.
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.
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.)
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.”
Data Driven Meta-Analysis: E-cigarettes cause less smoking. Imagine you’re a tobacco control “expert”, a professor, in fact. There is notoriety, fame even. You’re not a scientist, but while bumbling through your meta-analysis, you elude to being one for decades. Ahhh the life.
While walking upright, there’s a noticeable amount of doughnut powder in your beard (to show your expertise) in almost any sterile artificial setting — where everyone will nod their heads in agreement…
Since I have the formalities out of the way, I will meta-analyse the chart below for before Professor Puff-N-Stuff gets his grubby paws on it.
I’ll submit my findings for all you math / data / science /statistitians for peer review below!
(or whatever they put at the top of important studies)
E-cigarettes cause less smoking.
E-cigarette use was tracked by the FDA & CDC – from 2011 – 2016.
It went up, peaked in 2015 and went back down.
I suppose I should explain myself like they all do, but I won’t, I’ll do it my way.
To have determination a deliberate (Thanks Fig!) and honest assessment of whether e-cigarettes cause more smoking (or not) in youth without using words like “may, might, could” or any phrases like “more studies will be needed to determine” (with or without nicotine).
This could be difficult, and I’m not an “expert” so I certainly hope you’re rooting for me.
Data: More Stuff
Cigarette use in the same time frame – went down. (Check my math, this is important).
Most children around adults not smoking has caused the children to not smoke. The adults choosing to use (e-cigarettes) vaping equipment instead of purchasing cigarettes, so the children can’t steal cigarettes from parents who are not smoking.
E-cigarettes cause less smoking in children, and adults.
(Being informative is exhausting!)
Since 2011, adults smoked less, making cigarettes less available to kids. 8% of children will still try cigarettes.
You can purchase my metanalysis for a billion dollars once I put it behind a paywall.
Conflicts Of Interest:
Like this matters, but I’ll play along. None, consumer.
Big Ole’ long sentence assesment warning!
It is in my opinion that around 8 percent of the children in the United States are the core group of rebels who, despite any half-hearted efforts by tobacco control organizations or esteemed professors like Puff-N-Stuff, will try smoking, skip school and daredevil and adventure off into other activities deemed dangerous or delinquent-like.
Less than that will continue try cigars, hookah, pipes and smokeless tobacco.
It happens. That will give more time for experts (uninterested in blaming themselves or rebellion) to have something to do, like blame Hollywood for the remaining 8%.