To clarify. They were arrested and charged. There have been no convictions or guilty pleas.
CDC Finally Saying Stop Vaping THC
- Thread starter LadyAnabel
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
To clarify. They were arrested and charged. There have been no convictions or guilty pleas.
This whole thing brings back memories of the paraquat disaster in the 1970's where the US government sprayed crops in foreign countries with a pesticide that ended up making a bunch of hippies real sick.
Is Uncle Sam's alphabet soup of enforcement agencies back up their old tricks?
Hmmmm
Is Uncle Sam's alphabet soup of enforcement agencies back up their old tricks?
Hmmmm
Last edited:
I think this is the slippery slope. A lot of people like regulation until it prohibits something they like.
My opinion is that the only thing that should be regulated is the age of retail buyers. End of discussion. It's a difference between promoting public health and solving a crime. Killing or making people ill is already against the law. What we need is crime fighters to get past their lack of care and go solve this. Public health nannies are just using this as a stepping stone to justify their existence.
Exactly. It’s not illegal everywhere anymore though. All of a sudden different rules are applying. This may be part of the problem. Legal in some places illegal in others. Rules conflict depending on exact location amongst other things. It’s a mess. A mess sellers of bad product are taking advantage of. Dress your product up like it’s from someplace where there are controls when in fact there are no controls. Kids used to controls buy it thinking someone else has made sure it was safe when in fact no one has.
They are driven by power and money first. Two sides of the same coin. The more somebody gets of one, the more they get of the other and vice versa. Both ideology and public health serve that motivation.
The FDA and the CDC DO actually do a lot of things that promote public health. WHEN promoting public health ALSO serves their primary motivation of power and money for those above them who in turn keep them in their own position of power and money.
If championing vaping served their primary motivations of position, power and money (actually three sides of the same coin), then they would become relentless champions of all things vaping and, oh yeah, save millions of lives too.
In the present environment, destroying vaping serves their primary motivations of position, power and money. Saving lives is not part of the actual decision making equation. It's simply the propaganda strategy for promoting their primary motivations of position, power and money.
Does anybody REALLY believe that these highly educated medical bureaucrats actually do not know exactly what's going on here? Seriously? They're not stupid. They're evil. That's even worse.
Last edited:
Right. Seems like everyone has a list of things they would like other people to stop doing, especially politicians. It's only the items on the list that are different.
Well - and I didn't read this entire thread, so this may have already been pointed out - the CDC is still suggesting that we not vape anything at all.
From Time magazine online:
"The CDC continues to suggest that people consider not using e-cigarettes at all, especially ones that contain THC."
From Time magazine online:
"The CDC continues to suggest that people consider not using e-cigarettes at all, especially ones that contain THC."
that last sentence doesn’t make sense. It’s an assertion with no basis either before or behind it. That ideological ends can be assisted by or even require power and money is true. The more it is made a requirement, the more power and money trump ideology. The FDA and CDC are supposed to be insulated from power and money. For just this reason. Perhaps they need to be more insulated, or the insulation needs to be repaired.
agreed.
same assertion as before. It wasn’t completely proved the first time it isn’t completely proved now. It’s more aggressive this time though. Now it’s “primary motivation”. I think this last bit is flat false. A motivation? Perhaps, though it shouldn’t be. “Primary” though? We haven’t fallen that far yet I think. I hope.
now you’re just championing power and money
I would modify that myself. It serves the vested interests of some entities of power and money. Not all of them. Also “their “ is not well defined.
yet another accusation of complete irreparable failure. This is not what I saw. I saw an attempt by vested interests (which is the term usually used to describe power and money) to direct the desire to save lives in a particular direction useful to them personally. Not an absence though it is an abuse. Also explains why everything is moving so fast. Get everything in place while they’re still flummoxed.
that word “their” again. Same problem.
Yes. No one is omniscient. You can blindside anyone once. Will they STAY ignorant? probably not. If they seem to stay ignorant though your argument gains weight.
Also that particular appeal “who really thinks that...” is a known logical fallacy. A way of supporting without evidence. It’s not always automatically false, but Odure de BS hangs heavily on it. It always deserves extra cynical scrutiny at the very least
yes. That’s the way reality works
I reject the whole “BURN DOWN THE CDC AND FDA!!” Thing that seems to be being pushed here.
That there was a serious problem that damaged things is very apparent. That this seems to expose holes in the systems designed to keep power and money (vested interests) from bending truth is also very apparent. This argument for complete corruption though I do not see.
I asked:
How certain are you that the mainstream nicotine vaping products we use everyday are a far safer alternative to combustible tobacco, and that illicit off brand varieties are what is causing this outbreak?
To which you answered:
Let me ask you this.
How certain are you that the mainstream nicotine vaping products we use everyday are a far safer alternative to combustible tobacco, and that illicit off brand varieties are what is causing this outbreak?
Last edited:
a full paragraph much longer than a simple “yes”
Fairly. There were little to no health problems associated with vaping for ten year or so, then suddenly everything exploded. If traditional e-cigarettes were the problem this would have happened much sooner. Ten years ago. It’s not logical. The conflation of e-cigarettes and cannabis products did happen shortly before the problems started occurring though.
I would much rather be totally sure, but everyone seems to be avoiding research on the subject like the plague. Before Big Tobacco (BT) or Altria (who’s name used to be British Tobacco which is what the term BT is still used) got into the act a small amount of work was done in Britain. It found unprotonated nic e-cigarettes to be 95% safer than smoking. After BT did get into the act and start funding their own questionable research through the Italian cut out while blocking anyone else from doing it there were small, mostly negative, mostly badly flawed studies coming only from BT.
Last edited:
It's not logical, based upon your response immediately above...and that's all?
So how certain are you again? On a scale of one to ten let's say?
@bombastinator
You're a sharp guy. I'll give ya credit, because you know where this is going.
Go ahead and say on these forums that you're not really sure if "... the mainstream nicotine vaping products we use everyday are a far safer alternative to combustible tobacco, and that illicit off brand varieties are what is causing this outbreak?"
You're a sharp guy. I'll give ya credit, because you know where this is going.
Go ahead and say on these forums that you're not really sure if "... the mainstream nicotine vaping products we use everyday are a far safer alternative to combustible tobacco, and that illicit off brand varieties are what is causing this outbreak?"
8. Can’t go higher without actual complete research, very little of which has been done. BT has a habit of doing their own secret research they hide by doing studies, getting preliminary results, and then killing them before it can actually be published. BT has also shown a propensity for blocking any research not done and allowed out of the gate specifically by them. This makes most currently available studies badly suspect. Research CAN be done in a misleading fashion if one already knows the actual outcome of what a piece of research will show. I strongly suspect BT of knowing those outcomes.
The evidence is piling up that no deaths have been directly attributed to nicotine vaping. Nearly all the vaping deaths are being attributed to vaping black market THC. The CDC will never be able to say with 100% certainy that nicotine vaping is safe and all of the illnesses/deaths from vaping can be attributed to using black market THC. That's not a reasonable expectation for any investigation of this complexity.
In a lab test of 15 illegal weed vape carts, 13 contained a dangerous additive — and all 15 were contaminated with cyanide
The UK has said unequivatably that nicotine vape is 95% safer than smoking. They have also said there have been no harmful effects on the respiratory systems of those who vape for harm reduction.
No one is saying that vaping is totally "safe". It's "harm reduction".
Last edited:
BT is who is handling these cases of sickness and death?
Let's just stick with the second half of the question for a minute.
How certain are you that conventional mainstream vaping products like the ones YOU have been using since at least 2010 are NOT what is causing this outbreak? If you're not sure, why are you still using them?
@bombastinator
Ok, let's simplify this even further. Do you feel that the CDC should be more certain than we are? If so, why aren't they? If not, how is it even possible that peons like you and I are quite rightly more informed and certain than they are, as evinced by this very thread, dozens of others like it and an avalanche of other online resources?
The bottom line is, they are at bare minimum at least as certain as we are, which then of course makes my point entirely valid. Which is, WHATEVER their motivation is, it is NOT the truth and public health. Which makes them evil lying hypocrites.
Ok, let's simplify this even further. Do you feel that the CDC should be more certain than we are? If so, why aren't they? If not, how is it even possible that peons like you and I are quite rightly more informed and certain than they are, as evinced by this very thread, dozens of others like it and an avalanche of other online resources?
The bottom line is, they are at bare minimum at least as certain as we are, which then of course makes my point entirely valid. Which is, WHATEVER their motivation is, it is NOT the truth and public health. Which makes them evil lying hypocrites.
Last edited:
A urine test reveals THC use for a month or so after ceasing use. A very simple, cheap test, strips available on Ebay or Amazon for a basic yes/no result. A hair test can detect THC use for much longer.
So it's a big suprise to me that those who lied about THC use have only recently been outed, odd isn't it.
Right? Like they're going to just offer a confession that they've been breaking the law. Some will, but most won't. Simple testing tells the tale without dispute, BUT the CDC didn't even recommend such testing to the states. I wonder why?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
