E-cigarettes 10 times more cancerstuff than analog says Japan researcher

[tchavei]

Damm Internet freedom. Where is censorship when we need it?


Regards
Tony

Sent from my GT-I9195 through Tapatalk

 

[Jman8]

After seeing the recent release (and justification for now releasing) of the torture report by the Senate, it made me really want to see a Senate report on the tactics used by ANTZ over the last 5 to 50 years. Releasing that ASAP, or ideally a few months before final rule on eCigs. And a report that doesn't interview anyone on the ANTZ side of the aisle, plus is constructed by Republicans.

Man, would that be great, or what?

(Perhaps a topic worthy of it's own thread.)

 

[Tangaroav]

I certainly do not think to say ANTZ work against tobacco since the last 50 years was bad is a valid argument against vaping regulations. This only put vaping on the side of tobacco.

It is a bit like the illogical argument that torture is needed to protect democracy....

 

[Jman8]

I certainly do not think to say ANTZ work against tobacco since the last 50 years was bad is a valid argument against vaping regulations. This only put vaping on the side of tobacco.

It is a bit like the argument that torture is needed to protect democracy....

Going back 50 years would provide historical context for why ANTZ feel powerful and relevant to fighting eCigs with virtually the same tactics.

I imagine ANTZ in response to such a report would be arguing along similar lines to "torture is needed to protect democracy."

 

[Kent C]

This headline, although retracted, is still being spread all over the world. My sister-in-law, a clinical psychologist practicing in Philly, just forwarded an e-mail to me which she received from her friend in Poland. His email went out to over 100 of his contacts. They'll forward it to their contacts, and so on.

I emailed Salon - from their article - and gave them the full correction with link. Doubt that they'll 'correct' that particular author though.

 

[Cloud_Chaser]

So, without having to read through 19 pages lol. Can any of you break the conversations down, that were had in this thread? Such as: Was there anything that debunked this claim, Etc.

 

[Lessifer]

So, without having to read through 19 pages lol. Can any of you break the conversations down, that were had in this thread? Such as: Was there anything that debunked this claim, Etc.

Yes, I think Farsalinos was quoted with contradictory info, and there was a quote from the actual researcher saying this is still an unpublished study and the "10 times" sample most likely was due to faulty equipment. Or something like that.

See posts 3 and 4 for the relevant rebuttals, and #96 for background info on the researcher himself.

Also #175 for this bit:

check out the retraction recently posted at the end of the article.

Quote Originally Posted by DailyFail
* An earlier version of this article stated that Japanese research had found that e-cigarettes contain 10 times more carcinogens than tobacco cigarettes. While the research did find high levels of formaldehyde in one brand of electronic cigarette, we would like to clarify that not all e-cigarettes contain 10 times more carcinogens than tobacco cigarettes. The study supports existing evidence that e-cigarettes are much less dangerous than tobacco products.

 

[Jman8]

Was on a friend of a friend's Facebook page and saw this study (article) on their wall. Also on their wall was post after post about gun rights. Not trying to go off topic here, but I find it very disappointing that gun rights advocate would buy into this propaganda on eCigs when likely having dealt with lots of it on guns issues. I know of plenty of ECF members who are gun rights advocates and are not the least bit swayed by this eCig BS, which does give me some hope for humanity.