The costs of running this huge site are paid for by ads. Please consider registering and becoming a Supporting Member for an ad-free experience. Thanks, ECF team.

Brace yourselves new Formaldehype junk study to be released Jan 21

Discussion in 'Media and General News' started by DrMA, Jan 20, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Image has been removed.
URL has been removed.
Email address has been removed.
Media has been removed.
  1. KurrptSenate

    KurrptSenate Vaping Master Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Oct 9, 2013

    my wife's grandmother dropped my son off last night and started spouting this crap. she never read the entire article (go figure)

    she also said "if it was on the TV it has to be true"
  2. philoshop

    philoshop Ultra Member Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Sep 21, 2014
    geneva, ny, usa
    This is essentially my point, (bold above). The citizens are 'worried', or even afraid at times, about what their government might be doing. That's not how how our government is supposed to work.
  3. Jman8

    Jman8 Vaping Master ECF Veteran

    Jan 15, 2013
    I think our guerrilla tactics are counter-propaganda efforts and can be successful. The SF Tweet blast being example of counter-propaganda effort working (well). ANTZ-leaning media can try and post a poll about something online and 3000 of us will make it seem like 95% of the respondents to that poll think ANTZ rhetoric is wrong approach. This tells me that average person who is non-vaper simply doesn't care and that ANTZ citizens are outnumbered, or at least their passion is outweighed.

    I think we lack cohesive wide-scale, well funded, counter propagandists because any central command would be not received well by all 100% of politically aware vapers. If BT were to launch that type of campaign, I reckon 50% of politically aware vapers would either remain on the sidelines or criticize it, even if they were saying "all the right things." Anything else I bring up in terms of entities that could get this done strike me as not well funded which would be criticism in and of itself and reason why some politically aware vapers would likely remain on the sidelines, skeptical. And as my earlier point was attempting to emphasize, if our THR leaders feel need to spout off about "smoking kills 400,000 people annually" when doing their version of counter propaganda, I'm going to take issue with that and call it out as I recently did with Greg C. (who I respect immensely). But my calling him out shows there is lack of cohesion in our overall message. And at times, it shows up to me as ANTZ lacks cohesion. There are people who I think of as not too far removed from ANTZ party line, and yet appear to fight for vapers. Thus ANTZ has divided itself, or split in a way that makes things confusing. And for me, this (all the propaganda) stems from notion that "smoking kills" and how able / willing are you to back that meme up. I observe not too many people are able to back that up (I'm actually yet to see anyone, but I do think they exist). Instead, ANTZ leaning people spout that off as reason for everything going forward. Reason why kids can't vape. Reason why vapers ought not to vape in public. Reason why vapers ought to wait until more studies are done regarding long term effects. Reason why flavors are not such a wonderful thing. Reason why BT ought not be allowed to enter or control the market. Reason why there is an MSA. Reason why sin taxes make sense.

    This is why I see us lacking cohesion. I don't feel so confused on this cause the basic principles of science and reason aren't all that challenging to adhere to. But the current situation seems insurmountable when "smoking kills" is touted as infallible position that anyone who dares to question it must be a lunatic and akin to someone who thinks the world is flat. Yet, from my perspective, especially given this propaganda battle as it is being waged right now, I think the lunatics among us are those who aren't thoroughly researching and questioning the meme of "smoking kills" and instead accept it as 'well that's what the authorities tell us is true, therefore it is truth. And should never ever be second guessed."

    If we aren't willing to attack on that front, then we will be playing defense while also telling ANTZ that on your one, rather indefensible, but highly touted claim, you are absolutely correct. Between this issue and the kids issue (which is laced with arbitrariness and doused with hypocrisy), I think we have set our own selves up for the fall that we kinda sorta recognize is inevitable. We have served ANTZ two core positions to the politicians on a silver platter and then want to argue other points when all ANTZ has to do is utter "won't anyone think of the children" or "do you not remember that smoking kills" and well the propaganda against us becomes that much easier.

    So, perhaps those on our side who are truly passionate don't have the courage to attack on the kids issue. I can go along with that as that item goes beyond smoking/vaping and is a much larger battle (IMO, the biggest of all current political battles). But the smoking kills battle is the one I can't sit back and just watch that float on by as if today is yet another day where we ought to never ever question that. I think if that was attacked from our side, it would put ANTZ on the defense. I reckon they'd think they have studies/science to back it up and have the argument be short. But in my investigations on this, it isn't that one has to deny "smoking has caused harm / can be harmful" but instead tear apart the rhetoric around annual deaths and how that is tallied. I don't think ANTZ can defend that if they were truly tested to do so. And I think it would put them on the defense in a way that could have them show up as amateurs of science and reason.

    When that pillar is put in a more proper, or different perspective (losing the infallibility aura it now has), it would stand to benefit vaping data. It would make ANTZ out to be great deceivers who have lied about smoking and thus are very likely lying to the public on health items around vaping. It would mean that down the road when a vaper dies, they aren't tallied up in a way where one might say "vaping kills 100,000 people annually." The passive smoking/vaping data would all likely be adjusted, even while some of it would surely still stand.

    Anyway, I say all this cause the counter propaganda that we could use vs. what would ultimately (truly) help us is the debate that we are currently having and that I don't see as all that far apart. Just that I'd rather attack ANTZ at the core of what they are purporting, and put them on the defense, rather than fend off latest attack via guerrilla tactics. But because I consistently observe reluctance to attack ANTZ on core issues, then I'm okay with guerrilla tactics. I think they will come in handy when the inevitable black market arises and us passionate politically aware vapers are (still) in it, to win it.
  4. caramel

    caramel Vaping Master

    Dec 23, 2014
  5. Moonbogg

    Moonbogg Super Member ECF Veteran

    Jun 18, 2014
    Whittier, CA, USA
    Worked it out with my wife pretty much. I explained why they found what they found, and showed her the fox video where they explain why the finding was fraudulent as well. Also, she admitted to not even reading the article. She simply saw the headline and assumed that "researchers" and WebMD had everyone's best interests in mind and performed their work honestly and accurately. I showed her in the article where they found ZERO formaldehyde when the thing wasn't being abused. Most people are headline believers and don't even take the time to read the damn article.
  6. DrMA

    DrMA Ultra Member ECF Veteran

    Jan 26, 2013
    Seattle area
    Exactly. That's why the damage done by this atrocious lie is enormous and nearly irreversible.
  7. philoshop

    philoshop Ultra Member Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Sep 21, 2014
    geneva, ny, usa
    It's similar to the "end of the world" headlines: Y2K, Mayan calendar, etc. People see the headlines and panic without any rational thought behind their beliefs. The only real difference is the lack of a deadline that will put a stop to the panic.
  8. Kent C

    Kent C ECF Guru Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Jun 12, 2009
    NW Ohio US
    It's closer to the global warming hoax because of the regulations and intrusion into lives and jobs involved - not quite as costly, but the harm in people's lives are there, and the lies, junk science, and demonization of opponents are quite similar.
  9. Stosh

    Stosh Vaping Master ECF Veteran

    Oct 2, 2010
    Climate or vaping....the "science" is settled. Guess that means...

    The earth is flat
    Female vapors are cured through masturbation
    Perfume will repel disease
    And there are only 4 elements, Air, Water, Fire and Earth
  10. Kent C

    Kent C ECF Guru Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Jun 12, 2009
    NW Ohio US
    .. and you can lose peer review and tenure too. But your predictions and forecasts might be better :facepalm: :laugh:
  11. mudram99

    mudram99 Ultra Member Verified Member ECF Veteran

  12. zoiDman

    zoiDman My -0^10 = Nothing at All* ECF Veteran

    Supporting member
    Apr 16, 2010
  13. Jman8

    Jman8 Vaping Master ECF Veteran

    Jan 15, 2013
    And don't forget "smoking kills."
  14. NebulaBrot

    NebulaBrot Ultra Member Verified Member ECF Veteran

    May 6, 2010
    in the NEBULA
    Moderators - This is a duplicate post originally posted in the "Fight fire with fire" thread:

    please see other thread:
  15. Jman8

    Jman8 Vaping Master ECF Veteran

    Jan 15, 2013
    How is the industry to justify hundreds of thousands of dollars for research and/or advocacy except for (much) higher costs to the consumer?

    - and -

    How is more research THE answer when the propaganda war (easily) pre-dates existence of eCigs, and more research historically has been dismissed as inherently biased?

    - and -

    Who decides when we have enough research?

    The last question isn't how I wish to ask that exactly, but the list of FDA inquiries (aka items needing further information) strikes me as stacked (loaded questions) and a trapping, of sorts. In general, it signals to consumers that 'we're going to need a whole lot of your money to answer these questions (and more questions which are currently TBD).' Specifically, the answers to each question, as I see it will be filtered by politically aware persons (on both sides) as favorable / independent / objective when done by 'our side' and biased / subjective / unfavorable when done by the other side. When it is deemed 'entirely unfavorable' then the other side, I believe, will argue 'more research is necessary.' Forever and ever. Or until one side is perceived as having won the propaganda battle.

    Very challenging for me to not filter this through history of smoking (science, and propaganda). I observe that propaganda battle is still open / not settled. But perception is that it is finished. Hence, I see extensive research as a trapping that is one of the key reasons why politically aware vapers loathe FDA regulations; we know we will be footing the bill.
  16. rolygate

    rolygate Forum Manager Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Supporting member
    Sep 24, 2009
    ECF Towers
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

  1. 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.
    Dismiss Notice