A Billion Lives teaser-trailer

Status
Not open for further replies.

DCBD

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Aug 21, 2014
355
666
USA
    Watch it. Watch it again. Share it with everyone you possibly can. Tell them to watch and share it. Smokers, vapers and especially people who do neither. Because this documentary is not really about vaping, it's about corruption. The corruption of big governments and big companies who are putting money before public health.

     

    pennysmalls

    Squonkmeister
    ECF Veteran
    Verified Member
    Jul 26, 2013
    3,138
    8,382
    50
    Indiana
      Wow, good vid, like it alot. I do agree a bit with Jman though. I don't know any hard facts as far as smoking is concerned, bad/not so bad. I only know what I've read/heard here on ECF. If there is hard evidence that smoking isn't as harmful as we've been led to believe I'm sure the evidence is buried so deep that it may never come to light. As far as the general population goes though, smoking kills and there's no way, at this time, to convince them otherwise. So in that context this vid will probably do a lot of good toward showing people what's going on with vaping/corruption and tobacco will have to be the villain, I don't see a way around that. Maybe in 100 years we'll be able to look back and say that everything happened the way it should have/needed to. :unsure:
       
      • Like
      Reactions: Jman8

      DCBD

      Super Member
      ECF Veteran
      Verified Member
      Aug 21, 2014
      355
      666
      USA
        The "billion" number comes from the WHO (number of people predicted to die from smoking this century) and is completely made up. The number (or any number) doesn't matter. The point is, a lot of people will die from smoking and will live longer if they vape. And there's a lot of money at stake to keep people smoking. IMO, this is beyond corruption, it's criminal.
         

        Jman8

        Vaping Master
        ECF Veteran
        Jan 15, 2013
        6,419
        12,885
        Wisconsin
          I believe Clive Bates has said that when we agree with adversaries on smoking propaganda, it makes it hard to say they are wrong about vaping propaganda. I have actually said this before I read CB saying it. If they are 100% right about smoking items and 100% wrong about vaping items, then that seems entirely confusing. I think defense of public health would simply reply with, give us time and we'll show that we are at least a little bit right about vaping items. And by that, they mean just mean let us smear the heck out of vaping items. We've already seen what they've gotten to stick in the last 1 to 3 years with regards vaping. So, if you think the smoking propaganda is not something we can change (ever), then won't be too long for that to be the case wrt to anti-vaping propaganda.

          Seriously, just do your own research on the smoking stuff. If only researching CDC and the like, then hope you do the same with vaping and stay consistent.

          ETA: It wasn't Clive Bates that said what I purported but Carl Phillips. I corrected this is post #11 below.
           
          Last edited:
          • Like
          Reactions: AndriaD

          Jman8

          Vaping Master
          ECF Veteran
          Jan 15, 2013
          6,419
          12,885
          Wisconsin
            The "billion" number comes from the WHO (number of people predicted to die from smoking this century) and is completely made up. The number (or any number) doesn't matter. The point is, a lot of people will die from smoking and will live longer if they vape. And there's a lot of money at stake to keep people smoking. IMO, this is beyond corruption, it's criminal.

            So, shall we quote / support WHO on their position with regards to vaping? To me, it doesn't matter what WHO says on smoking data. To the degree it matters to any of us, then I think we ought to stay consistent and consider their wonderful words of wisdom (sarcasm) for what they have to say about vaping.
             
            • Like
            Reactions: AndriaD

            Oliver

            ECF Founder, formerly SmokeyJoe
            Admin
            Verified Member
              I'd say forget about it, Jman - this film is going to do our side an awful lot of good. It's put together by a truly dispassionate group of filmmakers who are trying to get an accurate picture of ALL the actors (good and bad) in the story.

              And I hope vapers can forgive them for accepting some of the entrenched stuff - it's literally impossible for them to wade through everything and be 100% accurate. I mean, just from that intro presentation, you should be able to see how the story is being cast.
               

              Kent C

              ECF Guru
              ECF Veteran
              Verified Member
              Jun 12, 2009
              26,547
              59,875
              NW Ohio US
                I believe Clive Bates has said that when we agree with adversaries on smoking propaganda, it makes it hard to say they are wrong about vaping propaganda.

                You may be right - I tried to find it but found more of Bates parroting the anti-cigarette line as many THR'ers do. Although I think a lot of them have to realize what they did is affecting what they're up against today with vaping. Perhaps it was Jacob Sullum or Brad Rodu, but didn't give them a search.
                 

                Jman8

                Vaping Master
                ECF Veteran
                Jan 15, 2013
                6,419
                12,885
                Wisconsin
                  I'd say forget about it, Jman - this film is going to do our side an awful lot of good. It's put together by a truly dispassionate group of filmmakers who are trying to get an accurate picture of ALL the actors (good and bad) in the story.

                  And I hope vapers can forgive them for accepting some of the entrenched stuff - it's literally impossible for them to wade through everything and be 100% accurate. I mean, just from that intro presentation, you should be able to see how the story is being cast.

                  Agreed, which is why I decided to like post that started this thread and why I will likely be seeing this film / supporting it first chance I get.

                  Just as likely someone could use the meme "smoking kills" and spin things the other way (anti-vaping). Rather support those who spin it pro-vaping.
                   

                  Jman8

                  Vaping Master
                  ECF Veteran
                  Jan 15, 2013
                  6,419
                  12,885
                  Wisconsin
                    You may be right - I tried to find it but found more of Bates parroting the anti-cigarette line as many THR'ers do. Although I think a lot of them have to realize what they did is affecting what they're up against today with vaping. Perhaps it was Jacob Sullum or Brad Rodu, but didn't give them a search.

                    My mistake, it wasn't Clive but Carl Phillips that said this.

                    I think he has said it on more than one occasion. Here is post I found that says it. And paragraph quote to back up what I was saying:

                    Every endorsement of an ANTZ claim increases their credibility across the board. Cite them as definitive authorities on one point, and it is difficult to suggest that they are completely wrong about a similar claim about another product. This would create a dilemma if they really were providing good and useful scientific information about smoking while lying about THR products, but they are not. Their claims about smoking are as full of lies and junk science as their claims about THR products.
                     

                    bigdancehawk

                    Ultra Member
                    ECF Veteran
                    Verified Member
                    Jan 27, 2010
                    1,462
                    5,436
                    Kansas City, Missouri
                      My mistake, it wasn't Clive but Carl Phillips that said this.

                      I think he has said it on more than one occasion. Here is post I found that says it. And paragraph quote to back up what I was saying:
                      I must agree with you and Phillips. As tempting as it may be to maximize the contrast between the health effects of smoking vs. vaping, we should consistently rely on good science. And there's plenty of it to show that vaping is a helluva lot less harmful.

                      I also believe that it's pointless for us to attack BPH for their exaggerated claims regarding second-hand smoke. That's not our fight, and it's so firmly entrenched in the mind of the public that it would be a virtually impossible task.
                       

                      Kent C

                      ECF Guru
                      ECF Veteran
                      Verified Member
                      Jun 12, 2009
                      26,547
                      59,875
                      NW Ohio US
                        That's not our fight, and it's so firmly entrenched in the mind of the public that it would be a virtually impossible task.

                        I mildly disagree in that debunking something that is 'entrenched' may stop something else from being entrenched. Esp. when the ANTZ try to promote 2nd and 3rd hand vapor.
                         
                        • Like
                        Reactions: bigdancehawk

                        Jman8

                        Vaping Master
                        ECF Veteran
                        Jan 15, 2013
                        6,419
                        12,885
                        Wisconsin
                          I must agree with you and Phillips. As tempting as it may be to maximize the contrast between the health effects of smoking vs. vaping, we should consistently rely on good science. And there's plenty of it to show that vaping is a helluva lot less harmful.

                          I also believe that it's pointless for us to attack BPH for their exaggerated claims regarding second-hand smoke. That's not our fight, and it's so firmly entrenched in the mind of the public that it would be a virtually impossible task.

                          As pointless as it may be, I think it is something to attack them on, and to put them on the defensive. Not like they can gain any more ground from it, and thus does stand a chance to expose it as yet another example of junk science. People can still be annoyed by SHS, but that is a far cry from the meme of "SHS kills" which stems from "smoking kills." As those two are entrenched, and as there are allegedly "dangerous chemicals" in vapor, it won't be too long before a) a vaper dies, b) the meme "vaping kills" starts to gain steam and c) SHV kills is accepted as, 'ya know, they were right about SHS, so they're probably right about SHV.'

                          Going now to like your post cause the first paragraph is to me the more important consideration.
                           

                          bigdancehawk

                          Ultra Member
                          ECF Veteran
                          Verified Member
                          Jan 27, 2010
                          1,462
                          5,436
                          Kansas City, Missouri
                            I mildly disagree in that debunking something that is 'entrenched' may stop something else from being entrenched. Esp. when the ANTZ try to promote 2nd and 3rd hand vapor.
                            I certainly see your point, and in a perfect world I would agree. However, if I can't convince any city council members in my own town to vote against a vaping ban, I doubt it's possible to convince them that second-hand smoke is harmless. These bans seem to be occurring in most cities of any size and in some states as well, and I don't think it can be stopped. There are not enough articulate, well organized and motivated opponents.

                            Maybe one day some of these laws will be repealed, but that would be most unusual, as government gets more and more intrusive and controlling with the passage of time. It will not happen in my lifetime.
                             

                            bigdancehawk

                            Ultra Member
                            ECF Veteran
                            Verified Member
                            Jan 27, 2010
                            1,462
                            5,436
                            Kansas City, Missouri
                              As pointless as it may be, I think it is something to attack them on, and to put them on the defensive.
                              First you have to get your foot in the door and get somebody to listen with a somewhat open mind. You are working against a host of cognitive biases, e.g., confirmation bias, illusory correlation, Semmelweis bias*, subjective validation, availability cascade (repeat a lie often enough, etc.), bandwagon effect, conservatism bias (discounting the value of new information).

                              *Named after the doctor who discovered that the incidence of child bed fever infections could be dramatically reduced by doctors washing their hands. Nobody believed him and he was roundly condemned by the medical community. Eventually, he was confined against his will in a mental asylum, where he was severely beaten by guards and died not long afterward from, ironically, an infection.
                               

                              AndriaD

                              Reviewer / Blogger
                              ECF Veteran
                              Verified Member
                              Jan 24, 2014
                              21,253
                              50,519
                              61
                              LawrencevilleGA
                              angryvaper.crypticsites.com
                                So, shall we quote / support WHO on their position with regards to vaping? To me, it doesn't matter what WHO says on smoking data. To the degree it matters to any of us, then I think we ought to stay consistent and consider their wonderful words of wisdom (sarcasm) for what they have to say about vaping.

                                An identical point I just made about the CDC -- they've sacrificed their integrity to Big Money, and now EVERYTHING they say must be taken with a VERY LARGE grain of salt. Which is both sad and alarming, considering the role that CDC should play in public health.

                                Andria
                                 
                                • Like
                                Reactions: EBates
                                Status
                                Not open for further replies.

                                Users who are viewing this thread

                                  ')