• Survey: Let us know what you think about ECF!

    Hey everyone, we wanted to do a check-in and see how everyone is enjoying the site! Any thoughts you have, bugs you see, or new features you want us to add, let us know and we'll take a look!

    Take the survey

3/24/14 - Media tsunamiS re: poison stories AND junk cessation study; Ire., Ca., US states: NY,FL,LA,TN,MN,IN,NE,UT,CA

Not open for further replies.
Jan 19, 2014
Moved On
[ Just paste broken links shown in purple directly into your browser - the extra line doesn't matter. Pls. PM me if you have more recent info. about proposed/actual legislation, if you think I've missed an important story, or if you want more tweaks to the formatting program. ]

If you've been watching the media over the last two days, you'll know that a new junk "study" involving cessation rates among tiny number of smokers has been churned out in the form of a JAMA letter by the Tobacco Control Institute at UCSF (Gana, Popava & Ling).

If the media weren't already so busy writing stories about the poison control center call meme that's been superheated by a NYT story and press releases from the MN and UT health dept's, we'd probably be seeing more stories on Gana et al. However most outlets that have chosen to write their own pieces have preferred the poison control center calls stories. Some have combined the Dutra & Glantz minor-gateway-to-tobacco junk statistics with the poison control center calls meme, others have combined the junk cessation letter with it.

Tomorrow, Your Correspondent anticipates that we'll see all three memes combined in some stories/editorials - i.e.: (1) vaping is responsible for poisoning small children who drink the e-liquid which is designed to appeal to them with kid-friendly flavors; (2) it turns older teens into tobacco smokers (because BT is targeting them with advertising and those flavors); and finally (3) vaping has no cessation/THR value for adults. It's not hard to predict that some of the editorials will call for emergency Federal legislation to ban vaping.

Both the stories on Gana et al.'s letter (junk cessation study), and the poison meme have been moved to collections at the end, since they have little geographic-specific significance, and are being covered abroad as well.

In other developments ...

1) Lawsuit filed against NYC for vaping=smoking ord.

2) Indoor vapiug banned in Ireland - Dublin airport and Aviva stadium.

3) Indoor/outdoor vaping ban considered by Santa Cruz CA city council.

4) Simple minor sale/possession bans advance in FL (house passes bill, sen. already has) and LA (passed by sen).

5) Vaping=smoking ord. passed by St. Peter MN, and (effectively) already passed by Johnson Co. NE.

6) Sen. Ray of UT uses poison control center call frenzy as basis to call for re-introduction of HB 112 (which would ban internet sales). UT legislature will be back in session later this year to consider Medicaid.

Coverage: Ireland, Canada, US States: NY, FL, LA, TN, MN, IN, NE, UT, CA

Also: See collections 1 and 2 below for blogs by C.V. Phillips, Clive Bates, and Dr. Seigel on the two main stories of the day (poision control calls and bogus cessation study); plus pro-vaping letter from Canadian physicians in the Ca. section.





3) COLLECTION 3: SMOKE AND MIRRORS (yes, this three-week old piece seems to be getting syndicated again, perhaps as a result of the poison control center call frenzy, etc. - it's possible that some editors got mislead by the article's title, because the content isn't particularly anti-vaping).



Title: Airport and Aviva to join ban on e-cigs
(Dublin Ire. local paper)
Privately-owned stadium smokesperson says their policy "covers all forms of smoking." Airport spokesperson said that vaping is considered smoking because it's unregulated. However the Airport Authority will "keep this position under rewview." Both the stadium and the airport currently have dedicated outdoor smoking areas. (Note the word "currently.") No junk, other than the general assertion that vaping is smoking.

Title: US academic calls on State to regulate e-cigarettes
(Ireland Nat'l Paper)
(Evidently he doesn't trust smokers to quit on their own, and would like to ensure that the cessation process is under BP's control ...
"Prof Gregory Connolly, director of the Center for Global Tobacco Control at Harvard, argues that if unregulated, e-cigarettes could be the 'panacea' for the tobacco industry's woes by discouraging quitting and encouraging children to take up smoking. However, if regulated, e-cigarettes could offer a 'miracle' for getting people to quit smoking. 'The reason why I came here is to tell this nation - you need to go in and show leadership within the EU. You've got to pass a law here regulating [e-cigarettes] as medical devices,' he told The Irish Times. [...]
E-cigarettes can help to 'retain addiction' through dual use and the problem is not about how many cigarettes people smoke, but for how many years. 'If I smoke 20 cigarettes a day and quit at 35, I'm going to be as healthy as a horse and may have no disease. If I cut down to 10 cigarettes [with the use of e-cigarettes] and continue smoking, it's no different than if I was smoking 20,' he said. If unregulated, e-cigarettes could recruit a new generation of cigarette smokers for the industry. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]
(There's plenty of other junk in this article.)



{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Opinion: It’s time to authorize the sale of electronic cigarettes
(Montreal QC Ca. local paper) http://www.montrealgazette

This otherwise-excellent pro-vaping letter conflates the use of nicotine with the use of tobacco in one particular sentence "Unfortunately, it is wishful thinking that one day we will completely eradicate nicotine use," but is otherwise excellent and apparently junk-free. Sadly, the type of regulation they seem to desire appears to be out of reach in virtually all jurisdictions:
"Electronic cigarettes need to be appropriately regulated so that good manufacturing practices are followed to protect consumers and that sales to minors are forbidden. However, any excessive regulations that could make it too difficult to communicate about the reduced risks of these products or to access them should be avoided.".



{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Lethal Liquid Nicotine
(MYT - which upped the ante considerably yesterday)
[More stories are collected at the end. This one also cites the bogus case of the Israeli 2 y.o.:]
'As little as a teaspoon of liquid nicotine -- the key ingredient in electronic cigarettes -- can kill a small child and less than a tablespoon, at high concentrations, can kill an adult. Yet some vendors are offering to sell the lethal product over the Internet by the gallon or barrel, with little control over how it is handled, as reported by Matt Richtel in The Times on Monday. [...] The European Parliament limits the amount of nicotine in e-cigarettes to 20 milligrams per milliliter, or a 2 percent concentration, which can cause sickness but is rarely fatal in children. It also requires childproof and tamper-proof packaging and graphic health warnings. [...] With evidence of this public health hazard mounting, the administration needs to get moving before more people are harmed. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]
Thankfully, this editorial omits many ANTZ memes that it could've included. Here's the original story which vastly increased the level of frenzy:

Title: Selling a Poison by the Barrel: Liquid Nicotine for E-Cigarettes



Title: Group sues NYC, seeks to overturn e-cigarette ban
(AP) http://mynorthwest

This AP story was widely syndicated. It contains no junk, and merely notes that the case was filed on the grounds of the "'One Subject Rule' of the city's charter." Most of the stories I've scanned today are syndications or summaries of this AP note, but I'll try to review some of the more detailed ones tomorrow.
[ NY has a vaping=smoking bill indoor ban now in the legislature. See: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ng-e-cigs-contain-tobacco-all-workplaces.html also tax bill: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-tax-e-cig-cartridges-75-wholesale-price.html ]



Title: Bill banning e-cigarette sales to minors moves through House
(Jacksonville FL US Cox affiliate) http://www.wokv

HB 169 passed by house, this appears to be the counterpart of SB 224, which has passed the senate. No junk.



Title: e-Cigarette ban OK’d by Senate
(Baton Rouge LA US local paper) http://theadvocate

LA's SB 12, a simple minor sales/possession ban, was unanimously approved by the sen. No junk in this brief note.



Title: Health, taxation concerns envelop fast-growing e-cigarette industry
(Chattanooga TN US local paper) http://timesfreepress

In today's press climate, this piece is relatively tame. It doesn't contain any outrageous ANTZ claims, and even the local Tobacco Free Coalition chair doesn't have any tremendously incendiary things to say. At the same time, it suggests that the research on cessation benefits, user effects and bystander effects is ambiguous. Some of the claims about regulation are dated or inaccurate (for ex., it incorrectly suggests that AL has defined vaping as involving an "alternative nicotine product"). Your Correspondent was also stunned to see "cetaldehyde, acrolein, formaldehyde" listed amont the ingredients of e-liquid - apparently from the bogus WHO report.
[ Minor ban in place. CASAA supports HB 1461 which would exempt vaping from indoor clean air act: CASAA: Call to Action! (UPDATED) SUPPORT Tennessee Bill that Excludes E-Cigarettes from Smoking Bans and Tobacco Taxes ]



Title: Senate & St. Peter On E-Cigarettes
(St. Peter MN US ind. radio station) http://www.knuj

City council bans vaping w/i 10 ft. of municipal buildings, requires tobacco licenses for stores that sell PVs, mandates that they be stored "behind the counter." St. Peter is in the area SW of the Twin Cities that contains New Ulm, Manketo, N. Manketo, Sleepy Eye, and Austin - a recent hotbed of ANTZ activity. Story says that the ord was passed after "months of deliberation." Why the ord. didn't include a ban on vaping in private businesses is unclear. The story also notes (as this space reported yesterday) that MN's SF 2027 - which would ban vaping wherever smoking cigarettes is prohibited - is out of cmte and ready for the sen. floor. No junk.
[ Threats in MN are: HF 1974: Minor sales ban and extends clean indoor act to cover vaping, still in 1st house cmte (health & human svcs), and may have ammended to remove the indoor clean air act ext (?).
SF SF 2027: Same as HF 1974, except indoor clean air act extension is still there. Out of sen. local gov't cmte, now in sen. commerce cmte. (last: 3/13)
For MN vapers updates, see: Minnesota Vapers Advocacy |Minnesota Vapers Advocacy
and the MN Vapers FB page for organizing: http://www.facebook.com/groups/MNVapersAdvocacy/
And: CASAA: Call to Action! Minnesota E-Cigarette Usage Ban



{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: E-cig smokers may inhale metal, investigation reveals
(Evansville IN US local paper) http://www.courierpress

General survey of ANTZ arguments, extensive quotes from Glantz. Author apparently forgot to include the Talbot (UCR) "investigation" which mentions "tin nanoparticles." However this is not a pressional ANTZ hit job, so (for example) it doesn't contain the usual advice to avoid trying vaping as a cessation/THR method, or allege that vaping leads to "more smoking, not less."
[ Indiana passed a simple minor sales ban last year. Indiana's HB 1174 proposes to tax vaping in the same way as tobacco (24% of wholesale), it's still in Ways & Means. See: HB 1174: Taxation of electronic cigarettes. Amends the definition of “tobacco product” to include electronic cigarettes for purposes of the tobacco products tax. – Hoosier Vapers and http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...5-hb-1174-taxation-electronic-cigarettes.html ]



{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Johnson County supervisors discuss use of e-cigarettes
(Lincoln NE US local paper) http://thegazette

Some of the "discussion" appears to be about how vaping should be most accurately described in order to implement the co.'s "zero tolerance" policy for use of "tobacco products." [No one has evidently told them that some e-liquids lack nicotine, but this will doubtless be brushed aside on the grounds that there's no way to tell the difference - i.e. it "looks like nicotine," instead of it "looks like smoking."] One small glimmer of hope for something other than a unanimous vote:
'Supervisor John Etheridge focused on the possible benefits the electronic smoking device can provide to those looking to quit the habit of smoking. 'I personally do not smoke cigarettes, but I know it's an expensive habit and this is a way to help them give it up,' he said. 'It still has carcinogens but it's reduced, so it helps people more or less [give up smoking,] and this would allow them to do that. It could allow county employees or people permitted to reduce their carcinogen intake.'n using the electronic devices to reduce or quite smoking. [...] 'Having a confined space, I'm fine with not allowing that at all,' he said. 'But there's not a lot of research out there about secondhand smoke [from e-cigarettes] and outside, you have carcinogens that can be more easily dispersed, and there are already carcinogens in the air. I think we could look at ways to be a little more flexible.' [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"

[ LB 861, a simple minor sales ban is ready for Gov.'s sig. http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...n-self-service-displays-hearing-jan-27-a.html ]



{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Further crackdown on e-cigarettes abuse urged by Davis health director
(Ogden UT US local paper)
This report begins with the usual alarmist poison control statistics (confusing calls with results, of course). Davis Co. health dir. claims that "'These things are getting more popular all the time,' Garrett said. 'The bottles are often prone to leaking, and the (e-juice) flavors are enticing to children.'" Story then goes on to describe the steps taken by Aaron Frazier and UT Vapers to begin age verification and establish signage to warns adult purchasers of the potential hazards. Health Dir. wants the Davis Co. labelling and childproofing regulations to become nationwide practice, and Rep. Ray says that he will attempt to get the legislature to reconsider HB 112 with its internet sales ban when the legislature briefly reconvenes to discuss Medicaid later this spring or early summer. Report claims that UT has a huge problem with teens reporting usage, and "the concern is" that they'll become tobacco cigarette smokers.
''It is so dangerous and so prevalent,' Ray said of the electronic cigarettes, 'we don't have an option.' In the meantime, the county health department is including e-cigarettes in its tobacco education programs, [Davis Co. Health Dir.] Garrett said, and is hoping to get other health boards across the state to consider adopting similar regulations. But in fairness to the Utah Vapers Association, Garrett said, there are heavy smokers who have been successful in using the electronic devices to reduce or quite smoking. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"



{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Santa Cruz may join regulatory trend for e-cigarettes
(Santa Cruz CA US local paper) http://www.santacruzsentinel

This is yet another vaping=smoking prohbition on indoor and outdoor vaping wherever smoking is banned. Also requires a "buffer zone" distance between schools and "high risk" alcohol outlets and requiring a tobacco retail license.
"Citing studies from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, the Food and Drug Administration, US Health and Lung Association, the council agenda's city staff report raises concerns of e-cigarettes increasing social acceptability of traditional smoking, possessing carcinogens in its vapor, and serving as a 'gateway' to increase youth nicotine use and addiction. Reportedly, Santa Cruz joins nearly 50 California cities and counties addressing e-cigarette use locally, most of which have approved some new regulations."
No report on the likelihood of passage, but it's not difficult to guess the result.

[ CA is under threat from a wide variety of legislation, such as an internet sales ban: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-shipment-e-cigarettes-anyone-california.html ]

{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Santa Cruz considers e-cigarette ban in public spaces
(Monterey CA US NBC&ABC affiliate) http://www.ksbw

(See above story for description of the proposed ord.)
'We've seen a prolific use of e-cigarettes in public locations including downtown, (in) restaurants, bars and places where tobacco is illegal. So it's creating confusion for patrons going downtown. It's making it difficult for us to enforce existing no-smoking laws.' said Assistant to Santa Cruz City Manger, Scott Collins. [..]
'A lot is unknown about these new products. What we do know is that they're not regulated. They're not a proven device even though they're being marketed as such,' said Andrea Silva Solano, with the Santa Cruz County Health Services Agency. 'So some preliminary studies have shown that the vapors do contain cancer-causing chemicals that can be dangerous to life standards.' [para breaks omitted]

Title: E-Cigarette Controversy: Should They Be Taxed Like Cigarettes?
(Fresno CA US Fox affiliate)
This story has no junk, and no content - it's pure media "filler."



Study followed the online postings of 949 adult smokers for a year. Of these, 88 were known to have tried vaping at least once during the prior month at the beginning of the study. Of the 88, over 60% reported at the beginning of the study that they had no intention of quitting over the next six months. Based on their cessation rates at the end of the study, the authors conclude that "our data add to the current evidence that e-cigarettes may not increase rates of smoking cessation."

Title: New Study on Electronic Cigarettes by UCSF Researchers is Not Only Bogus Science, But is Also Dishonest
(Dr. Siegel's blog)
Note: the link in doesn't go to the original paper, but to an index page. Here's as much as I can get: http://archinte.jamanetwork

Title: More anti-THR junk science from UCSF, the new Karolinska
(C.V. Phillips' blog)
More anti-THR junk science from UCSF, the new Karolinska | Anti-THR Lies and related topics

Title: Rogue research group opens the slurry gusher again
(Clive Bates' site)
Rogue research group opens the slurry gusher again « The counterfactual



Title: E-cigarette users no more likely to quit smoking than other smokers, study finds
(Ca. nat'l news site) http://www.ctvnews

Kudos to CTV for actually contacting one of the study's authors, and pressing them on the small sample size. Note the last quote, which Your correspondent finds remarkable: what's the difference between "some data" and "anectdote?"
'You'll hear lots of stories from people that say that e-cigarettes help them quit, but what we found was when we actually studied that systematically, we didn't see a significant effect on cessation,' study co-author Dr. Pamela Ling told CTV News.[..] The authors acknowledge that with only 88 e-cigarette users in the study, their study was small. But they say their data add to the debate and back up previous studies that e-cigarettes don't help smokers quit. 'I feel having some data is better than no data. And many of the claims about e-cigarettes are based on no data,' said Ling. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]

Title: Electronic cigarettes ‘don’t aid quitting’, study says
(US science mag. Nature) http://www.nature

Highlights the small sample size and other defects.

Title: E-Cigarettes Won't Help You Quit, Study Finds
(Philadelpha PA US based ind. web site) http://www.philly

Contains comments from Dr. Siegal.

Title: E-cigarettes may not help smokers quit, says study
(Original Reuters story) http://www.foxnews

Contains comments from Dr. Siegal.

Title: Electronic cigarettes may not help people stop smoking: Study
(Original Reuters story) http://www.financialexpress

Title: E-Cigs May Not Help Quit Smoking
(Links to Reuters story) http://www.thedailybeast

Summary at least providees the small sample size.

{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: E-cigarettes don't help smokers kick the habit, study says
(Original Reuters story) http://www.ajc

{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: E-cigarettes cannot help you quit smoking: Study
(Looks like a paraphrased version of the Reuters piece) http://www.techtimes



Most stories here glossed over the caveats and presented the "study" as validation of the idea that vaping has no cessation value. Few even mentioned the sample size or any of the other defects, and most provide this conclusion via the headline. There are many more of these stories. The most virulent of them link the Dutra & Glantz paper (minor-gateway-to-tobacco). There are probably even more similar stories being churned out as you read this, I gave up trying to list them all after a while.

{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Do e-cigarettes help people quit smoking? New study raises doubts
(US Nat'l paper) http://www.washingtonpost

The writer links the minor-gateway-to-tobacco argument into this piece, and buries any critiques of both Dutra & Glanta as well as this paper in links. Apparently any caveats on these "studies" are to be mentioned only in passing. Despicable.

{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Electronic cigarettes won't help smokers quit, study claims
(US Nat'l network) http://www.cbsnews

SImilar to above.

{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Study: E-Cigarettes Do Not Help People Quit Smoking
(US nat'l news mag.) http://time

{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Study: E-Cigarettes Don’t Help Smokers Quit
(Atlanta GA US CBS affiliate) http://atlanta.cbslocal

{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: E-cigarettes don't help smokers kick the habit, study says
(Atlanta GA US Cox affiliate) http://www.wsbtv

{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: E-cigarettes 'don't help people quit'
(nat'l US consumer health site) http://www.webmd

{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Study: E-cigs don't help smokers quit
(Long Island NY US local paper) http://www.newsday

{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Study casts doubt on whether e-cigarettes help smokers quit
(NYC local paper) http://www.nydailynews

{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Study raises questions about if e-cigarettes help smokers quit
(Boston MA US local paper) http://www.bostonglobe

This one mixes in the poison control center call frenzy.

{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Do E-Cigarettes Help Smokers Quit? What a New Study Says
(Manketo MN US CBS affiliate) http://www.keyc

{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Study Looking To See If E-Cigs Curb Smoking Habits
(Twin Cities MN US CBS affiliate) http://minnesota.cbslocal

{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: E-Cig Equal E Z-Quit?
(Denver CO US CBS affiliate) http://denver.cbslocal

{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: E-cigarettes don't help smokers kick the habit, study says
(Palm Beach FL US local paper) http://www.palmbeachpost

Title: E-cigarettes not helping smokers quit
(India nat'l paper) http://timesofindia.indiatimes

{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: E-cigarette use not linked to quitting smoking
(Sydney Australia Ind news collection site) http://www.news

Title: E-cigarette use not linked to quitting smoking: study
(AP/France [AFP]) http://www.timeslive

Title: Researchers: Only 13 percent of ‘e-cigarette’ users quit smoking within a year
(AP/France [AFP]) http://www.rawstory

Appears to be a slightly different version of the above.



The latest round begin in MN, with a press release from the MN health dep't.

Title: Poisoning by e-cigarette fluid up sharply among kids, Minn. report says
(Twin Cities MN US local paper) http://www.startribune

Title: Poison control center says cases involving e-cigarette juice rise sharply in 2013
(AP via Twin Cities MN US local paper) http://www.startribune

This was followed up by incendiary pieces in the NYT and a press release by the UT health dept:

Title: Selling a Poison by the Barrel: Liquid Nicotine for E-Cigarettes
(US nat'l paper) http://www.nytimes

{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: E-cigarettes sending more Utah kids to the hospital
(AP via Ogden UT US local paper) http://www.standard

Here are some good analyses:

Title: New York Times goes "more at 11:00" with story on ecigs and poisoning
(C.V. Phillips' blog)
New York Times goes “more at 11:00″ with story on ecigs and poisoning | Anti-THR Lies and related topics

Title: Standards Slip at the Times
(ECF's InfoZone)
Standards Slip at the Times - ECF InfoZone

Title: The New York Times Warns That Drinking E-Cigarette Fluid Could Become a Fatal Fad Among Toddlers
(Nat'l US conservative blog site)
The New York Times Warns That Drinking E-Cigarette Fluid Could Become a Fatal Fad Among Toddlers - Hit & Run : Reason.com
Jacob Sullum provides comparative statistics provided here for poison control center calls (etc.) from FDA-approved medications, as well as other analysis.

Title: E-Cigarettes' Nicotine Liquid Triggers ...... Madness in the New York Times
(LA CA US local alternative weekly) E-Cigarettes' Nicotine Liquid Triggers ...... Madness in the New York Times | The Informer | Los Angeles | Los Angeles News and Events | LA Weekly
This one is a particularly good deconstruction.



Title: E-cigarette industry fumes over report
(Santa Ana/Orange Co. local paper) http://www.ocregister

Title: E-Cigarette industry being unfairly attacked over availability of E-Liquid
(Nat'l Ind US web site owned by Anshultz which also owns Clarity) http://www.examiner

Title: The NY Times is blowing smoke: Toothpaste poisons more people than vaping liquid
(Portland OR US based ind. tech. site) http://www.digitaltrends



{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: The Real Dangers Of Liquid Nicotine
(US Nat'l Business) http://www.forbes

One had hoped for something better from Forbes, which has previously published at least a few pro-vaping articles. Although this story is written by an MD, he clearly doesn't know anything more about the manner in which liquid nicotine is handled than the writer of the original NYT piece. It seems that putting an "MD" after a writer's name is enough to convince even a national news magazine editor that the writer knows what they're talking about. The usual mistakes are made here: confusing calls to poision control centers with actual negative outcomes (an MD should know better), misunderstanding that high-concentration nicotine is almost never sold in flavored form, and the bogus implication that serious dangers inhere in minor skin exposure from small amounts of vape-ready e-liquid (2.4% or less). Of all the dreadful poison control stories, this one calls rather loudly for comments and so forth.

{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Poisonings related to e-cigarettes here
(Pittsburgh PA US local paper) http://www.post-gazette

This one is particularly atrocious:
'Reports of poisonings have been cropping up all over -- Minnesota, Missouri, Utah, Nebraska, Kentucky, Oklahoma, even Sweden. In Britain, a Staffordshire bull terrier puppy in February died within hours of chewing a bottle of nicotine-laced juice used to fuel the new rage: electronic cigarettes. [...] There have already been seven reports [in Pittsburgh] so far this year -- putting 2014 on track to exceed last year's total. Throughout the country the number of poisoning cases mentioning e-cigarettes has skyrocketed. The American Association of Poison Control Centers found a 307 percent increase from 2012 to 2013, but could not provide last year's total until its annual reports were completed. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]

{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Government Moving to Regulate Fast-Growing Liquid Nicotine Industry
(AOL's local news service) http://trumbull.patch
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Are E-Cigarettes Fueled by Liquid Nicotine Safe?

This piece appears to have been snipped together in a hurry by the author out of random anti-vaping statements. Of course there's the usual conflation of poison control center calls to actual outcomes. But for good measure, both parts of the minor-gateway-to-tobacco argument are emphasized: alleged marketing to children and the junk statistics on actual tobacco smoking by teens. Alarmist quotes from politicians and "experts" are synthesized seamlessly into an incendiary rhetorical stew of rhetoric. Since I first saw it, I've noticed that other local AOL "patch" sites are running it under different titles.

{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Misuse of ‘e-juice’ for electronic cigarettes can be deadly
(KC MO US local paper) http://www.kansascity

"Many U.S. retailers also are worried about other e-liquid ingredients, including propylene glycol, polyethylene glycol and vegetable glycerin. [...] Experts say the nicotine content in e-juice generally ranges between a concentration of 1.8 percent and 2.4 percent, enough to cause illness in children. But higher concentrations -- up to 10 percent -- can be bought online. A lethal dose at such levels would take 'less than a tablespoon,' Lee Cantrell, a professor of pharmacy at the University of California, San Francisco, told The New York Times. 'Not just a kid. One tablespoon could kill an adult.'" [para breaks omitted, boldface added][/I]

{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Liquid nicotine: Just a teaspoon could kill
(Newser - via Detroit MI US local paper) http://www.freep

While homegrown, this article contains snips of the original poison control center calls story run by the Star-Trib (Twin Cities MN) based on a MN health dep't press release, the NYT piece, and an alarmist article run by Fox which alleges that teens are drinking e-liquid to get high.

{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Editorial: FDA must regulate e-cigarettes, liquid nicotine [Editorial]
(New Haven CT US local paper)
This editorial denies that there's any evidence of cessation value, and as usual conflates poison control center calls with results.
'But a report in Monday's New York Times makes this issue even more of an imminent threat to health and safety. The liquid nicotine that is vaporized and inhaled is in fact a strong neurotoxin that can lead to serious and even lethal poisoning if ingested through the skin. The Times quoted a poison control director in California as saying, 'It's not a matter of if a child will be seriously poisoned or killed. It's a matter of when.' . Poisonings from liquid nicotine rose 300 percent between 2012 and 2013, reported the Times, based on information from the National Poison Data System. Even small amounts can lead to serious poisoning. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]



(I haven't bothered to provide detail on these, because they're all fairly similar to the original story in the NYT. Some have a little local content, and/or cite the MN/UT pieces.) Needless to say, virtually all of these would benefit from comments - if you live in the area, an e-mail to the editor or feedback of any kind to the site publisher would be helpful too.

Title: E-Cigarette Danger: Nicotine Poisonings Of Children
(Tulsa OK US ind? TV station) http://www.newson6

Title: E-cigarettes’ liquid drug can also kill
(Dubai-based English daily) http://gulfnews.com/news/world/usa/e-cigarettes-liquid-drug-can-also-kill-1

Title: Accidental poisonings from e-cig liquid becoming more common
(NY-based Vox Media web site) http://www.theverge

Title: Sweet smelling liquid used in e-cigarettes lethal to kids
(Richmond VA US CBS affiliate) http://wtvr

Title: Liquid nicotine: Teaspoon of liquid nicotine can kill a child, poisonings soar
(Nat'l Ind US web site owned by Anshultz which also owns Clarity) http://www.examiner

Title: Nicotine 'e-liquids' pose serious health threat
(Questionable medical news site) http://medicalxpress.com/news/2014-03-nicotine-e-liquids-pose-health-threat

Title: E-Cigarettes: A Reliable Smoking Alternative Or Vials Of Toxic Poison?
(Consumer Reports' alternate site) http://consumerist

Title: New York Times Says Electronic Cigarette Industry "Selling Poison by the Barrel"
(Portland OR free weekly) http://www.wweek

Your Correspondent had hoped to see more balance from this outlet.

Title: Experts Say Liquid in E-Cigarettes Could Be Deadly
(I have no idea how to describe this pop-culture site based in NYC) http://www.complex

Title: Liquid Nicotine: Teaspoon of E-Cig Substance Could Kill a Child
(Newsmax - US Infomercial 'zine) http://www.newsmax



[This AP story, which was first published last month, continues to get resyndicated. In fact it's been running for so long that some of the original syndications have been pulled down - evidently the copyright license expired.]

Title: E-cigarettes: fresh air or smoke and mirrors?
(Austin TX US ABC affiliate) http://www.kvue

When I read the title of this story I expected another "hidden dangers of e-cigarettes" piece - until I saw the AP byline. To my utter astonishment, there isn't one single paragraph in this story which quotes a rep. from any of the standards ANTZ orgs, or even a local MD. The closest it comes is to quoting CT Sen. Blumenthal who points out that "it's still smoking" (regardless, I suppose, of what's in the juice). In fact the first half of the article focuses on the cost of vaping, which doesn't necessarily compare all that favorably to smoking tobacco cigarettes (according to the author). The rest of the piece focuses on two vape shop owners' journey into vaping. A very refreshing break from all the usual garbage in the media.

Title: Unhealthy or hip?: As popularity of e-cigarettes grows, some worry about risks
(Detroit MI US local paper) http://www.freep

Title: E-cigarettes: fresh air or smoke and mirrors?
(Houston TX US CBS affiliate) http://www.khou


Google Tips

to see whether there are bad things happening where you live, try this Google search (example for Rhode Island) -
rhode site:casaa.org
(Replace rhode with a single word that describes your city, county, or state. For ex., if you live in Eau Claire, WI - you might use "Claire" to see if something is being proposed at the city level. Don't forget the : (colon), and be sure that there's nothing before or after the colon (not even spaces or tabs.)

You can also try replacing site:casaa.org with e-cigarette to find out what the media is reporting in your area. This is usually most helpful if you use the search tools to search by date. (CASAA doesn't generally issue calls or alerts until a bill is out of a state legislative committee, or is scheduled for a local city or county hearing.)
Last edited:
Jan 19, 2014
Moved On
Thx. Really helpful for spotting nat'l trends.

I'm not a big believer in conspiracy theories, but it certainly is amazing how much the US situation has changed in the last month, since PCECAA was introduced on Feb 26.

When I read the "vape pens" story in NYT ( http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/05/
business/e-cigarettes-under-aliases-elude-the-authorities.html ) I figured that we were going to be bracing for the impact of the CDC survey of 20,000 schoolchildren and the California state survey of 400,000 teens. My sense was that the results would be released just after Labor Day, for a fall national legislative push.

Now I'm not so sure ... I think either we are looking at a trial run which has succeeded beyond all expectations, or perhaps a spring national effort was always in the works. Glantz controls the Tobacco Control Institutes, and probably can determine when things get published in JAMA. He may also be working with the state Health Depts to coordinate their press releases. But I doubt he or BP or anyone else is paying off the US media ... perhaps he and his Tobacco Control Industry friends may not have anticipated such a favorable response.

Anyway it looks like Glantz has the country eating out of his hand right now on this issue.

How far can they go, and how quickly? Will the media and the public tire of the War on Vaping, and effectively force the Tobacco Control Industry to regroup for a more disciplined attack on a weakened front?

Or will the Tobacco Control Industry launch a devastating "blitzkrieg" in the next few weeks, and get Congress to pass something before Memoral Day? Frankly I can't think of any deep-pocketed lobby that would oppose a ban on retail sales of e-liquid, a F2F sales requirement, and a ban on refillable cartridges. It's easy enough legislation to write, and I think they may have overwhelming public support for it now.

Private polling may already be in progress.


Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Feb 2, 2013
These are organizations and corporations that are experts in messaging, planning, connections and marketing. They get paid to do it and they do it well. I wouldn't call that a conspiracy but coordination. They have legislation and regulations prewritten and ready to go. They are not fools.

But "the kids"? That's a pretty weak message. I can't think of anytime that's worked. You have to remember, this is top down campaign. The public is not asking for vaping bans. I think if a general survey were taken, most people wouldn't have a clue what "vape" was or care.

I don't think Antz was expecting a push back from vapers which is why they took it to the states. The reasoning supporting the bans locally is all over the place, much of it not making much sense. It's hard to fight crazy.
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread