Article in New Scientist?

[Alto101]

I was reading Clive Bate's latest posting (fantastic as usual) and one of the comments mentioned an article in New Scientist that I would like to read. I have not been able to find the article without paying for a subscription. Has anyone seen this article or a good summary?

Scientific sleight of hand: constructing concern about ‘particulates’ from e-cigarettes « The counterfactual

 

[Kent C]

I was reading Clive Bate's latest posting (fantastic as usual) and one of the comments mentioned an article in New Scientist that I would like to read. I have not been able to find the article without paying for a subscription. Has anyone seen this article or a good summary?

Scientific sleight of hand: constructing concern about ‘particulates’ from e-cigarettes « The counterfactual

The link on the New Scientist works for me without pay....

http://www.newscientist.com/article...r-half-a-century-a-bad-move.html#.VGzRRbbwtOQ

 

[Alto101]

Thanks for the link Kent. The article I think they are referencing is found here and requires a subscription:

http://www.newscientist.com/article...hout-fire-whats-the-truth-on-ecigarettes.html

 

[Nate760]

I've been noticing more and more ANTZ using the term "ultrafine particles" as though it's some sort of synonym for "deadly stuff that will give you cancer."

There must be some central repository of "false equivalencies designed to mislead the ignorant" that they use; it's probably kept under lock and key somewhere on the UCSF campus.

 

[Maytwin]

Alto101 - I think this may be the article you're after.

 

[Alto101]

Alto101 - I think this may be the article you're after.

That is it, thanks!

On a side note, I am getting so sick of reading quotes from Glantz. Is anything that he says at least somewhat accurate? I wish someone in the industry had the standing and ability to sue him.

 

[Kent C]

Thanks for the link Kent. The article I think they are referencing is found here and requires a subscription:

http://www.newscientist.com/article...hout-fire-whats-the-truth-on-ecigarettes.html

Must be Thanks Alto...

 

[Nate760]

On a side note, I am getting so sick of reading quotes from Glantz. Is anything that he says at least somewhat accurate?

Yes. One time I heard him say "My name is Stanton Glantz. I am a professor at the University of California, San Francisco." But that's were the accuracy ended.

 

[KODIAK (TM)]

On a side note, I am getting so sick of reading quotes from Glantz.

I just tune him out now. (Since Al Gore refused my request to have him banned from the innerwebs).

Seriously. I peruse this forum carefully. My blood pressure just can't take it at times.

 

[sofarsogood]

The page is sponsored by "new scientist" but there's not a word of science in the article. Some otherwise intelligent people are saying some really stupid things that only undermine their credibility. The critics don't deny that vaping instead of smoking improves my health but they ignore that and reach frantically for any flimsy possibility that vaping must be such a danger to the health of people who don't do it that I should be denied what is good for my health. I'm sure I have the same concern for their health as they have for mine.

 

[Lessifer]

Alto101 - I think this may be the article you're after.

My favorite part of this is, the author who is an ex-smoker, decided he didn't want to risk it for now and just "put the e-cig away."

There's your anti-gateway argument right there.