The most scathing post from Dr Siegel on new ALA position on vaping

[wv2win]

"One may find the answer in looking at where the American Lung Association funds are coming from. The American Lung Association lists on their website several significant donors to their organization, some of which include pharmaceutical powerhouse companies, like Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline and Novartis." BINGO

I found this article while searching donors to the ALA. It was titled Who is Funding the ALA. I wondered who was donating.................Once again it's the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$. To heck with our health. That ALA article above made me furious! So once again I sent a little note to them expressing my displeasure regarding their stance on e-cigs. It seems like "My way or the highway".

I believe it was Bill Godshaw (if I am wrong, I apologize to Bill upfront) who communicated that some of the large pharmaceutical companies several years back sent directives to the ALA and other non-profits they fund, strongly suggesting that they should oppose vaping and providing talking points on the topic. I have no doubt that this strong arming has been going on since 2009.

 

[wv2win]

I'm sure this quote has been reported before on ECF but since it is relevant to this thread, I thought I would provide it again and is from our well respected supporter, Dr. Michael Siegel of Boston University:

"In an almost inverse scenario, Michael Siegel a professor in the Department of Community Health Sciences at the Boston University School of Public Health and a well-known e-cigarette advocate, has accused a fellow professor of failing to disclose his financial ties to "Big Pharma" in a New York Times op/ed, which Siegel says is a conflict of interest. Both professors contributed essays for a "Room for Debate" editorial feature on whether "electronic cigarettes [are] really helping smokers quit or prolonging nicotine addiction."

Siegel said that Andrew A. Strasser, an associate professor in the department of psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania's Perelman School of Medicine, and Harold P. Wimmer, the national president and CEO of the American Lung Association denied readers the full story:

It turns out that the author of the commentary has received funding from a company which manufactures a competitive product to electronic cigarettes. Specifically, he has received research funding from Pfizer, the manufacturer of Chantix, a smoking cessation drug that stands to lose substantial sales if electronic cigarettes become increasingly popular. Therefore, this is a significant financial conflict of interest and I think it ought to have been disclosed in the article.

This is not the only commentary which failed to disclose a significant financial conflict of interest. The American Lung Association offered a commentary which urged smokers not to use electronic cigarettes to quit smoking. This is a devastating recommendation that, if followed, will result in increased smoking, disease, and death as thousands of smokers who would otherwise have quit smoking using e-cigarettes will instead continue smoking.

But the larger problem with the commentary is that it fails to disclose a significant financial conflict of interest: the American Lung Association has received millions of dollars of support from Big Pharma; specifically, from Pfizer."

 

[caramel]

They are both missing the point. Nicotine addiction (if such thing exists) has been proved to be significantly harmful only when the delivery of said nicotine is done via tobacco smoke. And the whole point about Tobacco Control is about reducing the prevalence of burning tobacco and inhaling the resulting smoke.