An interesting mix of dogmatic drivel and genuine science (heavily biased to the former). Worth skimming thru:
Table of Contents — October 2015, 17 (10)
Thought-provoking article
«Abstract: This paper explores the ascendancy of electronic cigarettes as part of a wider set of processes
involving the “civilising” of tobacco use. I centrally argue that the growing popularity of e-cigarettes can
only properly be understood when placed in the...
More rapid responses added: many of them excellent, a couple typical genocidal denialist drivel. Worth a read.
Evidence about electronic cigarettes: a foundation built on rock or sand? | The BMJ
Actually, I believe the correct statement is "There's a 50% chance that 42% of all stats are made up" :p
Many scientific studies can’t be replicated. That’s a problem. - The Washington Post
Check out John Britton's response (same link as OP). My favorite part (emphasis added):
«10. I agree that electronic cigarettes should be regulated to ensure that they are safe, and effective, and have in the past supported the view that light touch medicines regulation may be the best way to...
That may be technically accurate, Kent, but you're missing the point. The message of that PR was a personal one directed at the infamous UK deniers, McKee & Capewell. It was a resounding "Shut the F*** up!" from all the heavyweight PH organizations in UK, including FPH (where McKee is VP)...
Other world-class experts chime in
expert reaction to article questioning the evidence on the safety and efficacy underpinning PHE’s recommendation of e-cigarettes as an aid to quitting smoking | Science Media Centre
«All of the evidence suggests that the health risks posed by e-cigarettes are relatively small by comparison [...] There is no circumstance in which it is better for a smoker to continue smoking»
E-cigarettes: an emerging public health consensus - Press releases - GOV.UK
Correction: It's 11...
I'm not going to link the abysmal atrocity written by those clowns, but I'll lead you to the eloquent and stern response from Prof. Ann McNeill. Here's a taste:
«In contrast, McKee and Capewell are not experts in this field – they have carried out no tobacco dependence, smoking cessation, or EC...
The sustained campaign of disinformation waged by sanctimonious parasites against vaping in the US appears to be quite effective: #KeepSmokingWeNeedTheMoney
U.S. GAO - Electronic Cigarettes: Effect on Federal Excise Taxes Collected on Traditional Cigarettes Is Not Currently Evident
Yes, I wanted to emphasize the fact that ANTZ are really the industry that puts the Con & the Troll in #TobaccoConTrol. There's no question anymore that we must abolish these greedy, heinous parasites for #vaping to achieve its full public health potential.
Contrary to long-standing, dangerous, and absurd claims from the #TobaccoConTrol industry, reducing the number of cigarettes smoked has a meaningful and easily detectable impact on health. As the authors put it:
«In dual users, EC use significantly reduced exposure to CO and acrolein because of...
«This is an important public health issue because of the confusion and misinformation created by the NEJM research letter, and the widespread misleading headlines in the news-media which had important implications in the message communicated to the society, especially smokers, about the relative...
What? That's only thing you found wrong with that fundamentalist manifesto? What about the part that says to remove the fun stuff from cigarettes but keep the death & disease?
«First, reduce nicotine levels in regular cigarettes.»
And the part that thinks smokers should be further defrauded by...
«There is ample room within the portfolios of the CDC, the California Department of Health, the WHO and other respected health agencies to make life safer for both smokers and drug users. Their failure to champion tobacco harm reduction the way they have opiate harm reduction is a glaring...
I just posted this again. Sorry, didn't see your thread first.
A worthy linkback to this is warranted I think:
Development of an in vitro cytotoxicity model for aerosol exposure using 3D reconstructed human airway tissue; application for assessment of e-cigarette aerosol
Thus we have science...
«A new study was published today in Journal of Chromatography A. The study was performed by the Spanish Council of Scientific Research. They measured the levels of several volatile organic compounds (VOC, they measured 156 compounds) in indoor air, normal exhaled breath, smoke of tobacco...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.