Dr. Siegal's blog - Child custody and THS (third hand smoke) + vaping study of "THS"

[Roger_Lafayette]

Child custody and "THS" (third-hand smoke, i.e. residue on walls, etc. from smoking): http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2014/02/are-you-smoker-who-has-been-awarded.html

Also see Dr. Siegal's comments on the $400K UC Riverside study which is at the bottom of this: http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2014/02/uc-riverside-scientists-release-results.html

So-o, you think this can't happen to vapers who have quit analogs? Think again ... the ANTZ are already on to this angle: https://www.roswellpark.org/
media/news/roswell-park-researchers-present-findings-2-e-cigarette-studies-srnt-meeting

BTW if anyone can figure out where the money came from on this UCR study, I'd be very curious to know. It appears to have been funneled through a UCR Inst., which in turn receives money from both the gov't and the MSA. But since money is fungible, it's murky.

 

[pamdis]

This Rosewell Park is something else. They did a study about the attraction of the consumers attention to the Power Wall of tobacco. Really? They needed to spend time and money to discover that I will look at whatever is directly behind the cashier when I make a purchase?

“This novel research allows scientists to examine the impact and influence of tobacco marketing inside the retail environment from the point of view of the smoker and nonsmoker,” said Dr. Bansal-Travers. “The findings demonstrate the effectiveness of the eye-catching tobacco marketing and pack displays found in the retail environment, which make tobacco appear normal, interesting and accessible.”

And how can they possibly assume what the consumer is thinking about it? How do they just assume I'm thinking "How lovely, tobacco is a normal, interesting, and accessible product." and not "Those (*#$)#$)(# things killed my grandpa and almost killed me!"

www. roswellpark. org/media/news/%E2%80%98power-walls%E2%80%99-tobacco-products-ads-attract-both-smokers-and-nonsmokers

 

[Uma]

BTW if anyone can figure out where the money came from on this UCR study, I'd be very curious to know. It appears to have been funneled through a UCR Inst., which in turn receives money from both the gov't and the MSA. But since money is fungible, it's murky.

My guess would be from the eff dee eh. If I remember correctly, they awarded a bunch of ANTZ labs millions of dollars to come up with nonsense. I'm sure the prude was one such facility, either directly or indirectly via the funds given to Slantzz for "research". It's in the legislature forum somewhere.

 

[Roger_Lafayette]

<snip>

<snip>

"Your tax dollars at work."

 

[NorthOfAtlanta]

BTW if anyone can figure out where the money came from on this UCR study, I'd be very curious to know. It appears to have been funneled through a UCR Inst., which in turn receives money from both the gov't and the MSA. But since money is fungible, it's murky.

Probably from this $273 million.

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/media-general-news/470497-fda-nih-create-14-centers-do-tobacco-research-ap.html

 

[AgentAnia]

Who says there's no such thing as the slippery slope? Not John ("give him an inch and he'll take a mile") Banzhaf!

 

[Kent C]

Who says there's no such thing as the slippery slope? Not John ("give him an inch and he'll take a mile") Banzhaf!

There's a lot of people who don't believe in the slippery slope It's why were in the 'valley' on many issues.

 

[Roger_Lafayette]

Probably from this $273 million.
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...create-14-centers-do-tobacco-research-ap.html

I'm not seeing UCR on the list (see link in post).

On another subject - I thought I was just "free associating" when I mentioned RPCI. But apparently not. I just re-read Banzhaf's press release, and noticed that he does lump vaping in with analogs - very briefly in passing:

Indeed, another study found that the nicotine in secondhand smoke - and also found on surfaces following the use of e-cigarettes - while not generally regarded as capable of causing cancer by itself, changes chemically over time to become a deadly carcinogen when the residue from a tobacco product or e-cigarette is exposed to another common chemical in the air.

He doesn't provide any other details about vaping, so I'm guessing that he's citing RPCI. Or is he merely speculating? Hard to tell.

So far, RPCI doesn't appear to have much in the way of "legs" w.r.t. the mainstream media. That can't last.

 

[Uma]

I'm not seeing UCR on the list (see link in post).

On another subject - I thought I was just "free associating" when I mentioned RPCI. But apparently not. I just re-read Banzhaf's press release, and noticed that he does lump vaping in with analogs - very briefly in passing:



He doesn't provide any other details about vaping, so I'm guessing that he's citing RPCI. Or is he merely speculating? Hard to tell.

So far, RPCI doesn't appear to have much in the way of "legs" w.r.t. the mainstream media. That can't last.

The list unfolds throughout the thread.
Good find NOA!

 

[Fulgurant]

I'm not seeing UCR on the list (see link in post).

On another subject - I thought I was just "free associating" when I mentioned RPCI. But apparently not. I just re-read Banzhaf's press release, and noticed that he does lump vaping in with analogs - very briefly in passing:

He doesn't provide any other details about vaping, so I'm guessing that he's citing RPCI. Or is he merely speculating? Hard to tell.

So far, RPCI doesn't appear to have much in the way of "legs" w.r.t. the mainstream media. That can't last.

Good catch. By skipping straight to a debate about third-hand vapor, the public health cabal can force us implicitly to concede that second-hand vapor is a legitimate concern. It's likely no accident, by way of example, that we're hearing more about third-hand smoke now that second-hand smoke's recently been called into question.

Expect more coverage on the RPCI report as our would-be tyrants grow more desperate.

 

[AgentAnia]

Good catch. By skipping straight to a debate about third-hand vapor, the public health cabal can force us implicitly to concede that second-hand vapor is a legitimate concern. It's likely no accident, by way of example, that we're hearing more about third-hand smoke now that second-hand smoke's recently been called into question.

Expect more coverage on the RPCI report as our would-be tyrants grow more desperate.

By no means is it forcing us to concede anything, IMO! In fact, they give us the perfect opportunity to debunk not just thirdhand vapor, but secondhand vapor as well. As in: "I find it extraordinary that any reputable scientist would be concerned about thirdhand vapor, when no risks have been proven even for secondhand vapor."

 

[Fulgurant]

By no means is it forcing us to concede anything, IMO! In fact, they give us the perfect opportunity to debunk not just thirdhand vapor, but secondhand vapor as well. As in: "I find it extraordinary that any reputable scientist would be concerned about thirdhand vapor, when no risks have been proven even for secondhand vapor."

Yes, but constant press releases about third-hand vapor suggest to the public that the danger posed by SHV is beyond dispute. Any pro-vape expert responding on that topic must be very careful, as you say. It would be very easy for a careless/corrupt interviewer to discard any sensible disclaimers about second-hand vapor on the basis that they aren't relevant.

We see the same thing on a smaller scale every day on ECF: people routinely get caught up in debates about the dangers posed by second-hand vapor, a subject which, of course, neatly glosses over the fact that there isn't any compelling evidence that first-hand vapor poses a noteworthy or even measurable health risk.

Largely because of the tone and content of the smoking debate over the last 10-20 years, people come to vaping simply assuming that e-cigs harm the user, and most likely harm bystanders.

 

[Uma]

Well said, I agree, Fulgarant, they're setting the fear stage. Sad, evil & horrific.

Dr. Farsalinos explains the THS in the show tonight. TeamTalk with Dr Farsalinos - YouTube
Not much of any, plus as we know, it's not a problem because it's non toxic and non addictive.