Dr. Lawrence Deyton, award nominee

[Vocalek]

Lawrence Deyton, award nominee, heads FDA campaign against smoking - The Washington Post

As the first employee of the FDA’s new Center for tobacco Products, he leads the nationwide effort to reduce tobacco-related disease, which still causes 443,000 deaths each year, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Armed with a new law that gives the FDA the power to regulate the way tobacco is marketed, distributed and sold, the agency also requires that tobacco companies identify each of the 4,000-plus ingredients in cigarettes.

What is wrong with the quoted statements shown in this color?

 

[BardicDruid]

Well he claims to understand smoking and how addictive it is, but he's a never smoker.

 

[Vocalek]

And all he had to do to get his mother to quit is promise to cut off his ponytail.

 

[DC2]

Hopefully this is just a case of a brainwashed reporter.

I'd hate to think we have a brainwashed head of the new Center for Tobacco Products.
Or even worse, I hope it's not an actual brainwasher now heading the new Center for Tobacco Products.

 

[Vocalek]

I wrote the reporter an email, gently correcting the two gaffes. I went on to explain the concept of tobacco harm reduction and told her about the safety profile of alternatives. I ended the message with this;

Unfortunately for the health of 47 million American smokers, the concept of Tobacco Harm Reduction is controversial. Many of the alternatives named above are vigorously opposed by organizations that claim to be for public health and against smoking.

In “Framing Tobacco Control Efforts within an Ethical Context,” B. J. Fox argues that the tobacco control community should more proactively frame its actions and base that frame upon ethical principles. "The tobacco control community lacks a comprehensive understanding of ethics," he states. "In turn, this has allowed the tobacco control community to be defined by its desire to defeat the tobacco industry, at the expense of its desire to protect the public." http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1766190/pdf/v014p0ii38.pdf

I hope that you will take a closer look at these issues.

Thank you for your time.

 

[Thulium]

Unfortunately for the health of 47 million American smokers, the concept of Tobacco Harm Reduction is controversial. Many of the alternatives named above are vigorously opposed by organizations that claim to be for public health and against smoking.

In “Framing Tobacco Control Efforts within an Ethical Context,” B. J. Fox argues that the tobacco control community should more proactively frame its actions and base that frame upon ethical principles. "The tobacco control community lacks a comprehensive understanding of ethics," he states. "In turn, this has allowed the tobacco control community to be defined by its desire to defeat the tobacco industry, at the expense of its desire to protect the public." http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...v014p0ii38.pdf

I hope that you will take a closer look at these issues.

Thank you for your time.

So very well said! It is so sad that it is almost funny that there is any controversy over Tobacco Harm Reduction. Are they afraid of an epidemic of non-smoking and increased productivity? Would the world be such a terrible place if lots of smokers switch to smoke-free alternatives??

 

[Vocalek]

So very well said! It is so sad that it is almost funny that there is any controversy over Tobacco Harm Reduction. Are they afraid of an epidemic of non-smoking and increased productivity? Would the world be such a terrible place if lots of smokers switch to smoke-free alternatives??

Well, the TPSAC could start the ball rolling by deciding to base all its decisions on science instead of "Everybody Knows...." One problem that the ANTZ have with THR is all the "everybody knows" about dual user: that THR causes "dual use" and "everybody knows" that dual users escalate their intake of nicotine, and "everybody knows" that dual users eventually go back to smoking, and "everybody knows" that when the dual users go back to smoking, they will smoke more than they did before.

Until we can get these scientists to challenge their "everybody knows" ideas, they will continue to draw illogical conclusions.