Hold on to yer hats, here comes the BIG one...E-Cigs linked to C A N C E R !!!

[Jman8]

Cancer also goes well w/ poison, it's no accident that Newsy puts them together. The timing is masterful. By this time next week, 100 million Americans and perhaps at least that many peoplle all over the world will (think they) know that e-cigarettes cause cancer.

That will in turn create considerable pressure on elected officials to pass indoor/outdoor vaping bans (since tobacco cigarettes were first found to cause cancer in users, then allegedly in bystanders). It will also justify taxing vaping like cigarettes in order to discourage use, plus complensate society for future anticipated costs.

Some state A/Gs may even pre-emptively file suit, at least against the BT-owned vaping firms, in an effort to extract settlements (or at least political limelight).

We might also see a new round of taxes, doorway perimeter distance increases, multi-unit building usage bans, "smoke free" areas, etc.

E-cigarettes might turn out to be the Tobacco Control Industry's savior in terms of funding, prestige, and even a certain form of glamor (insofar as public health can be glamorous).

Tobacco control research and certification might have been getting a tad stale.

Now it's fresh, brand-new .... maybe "re-normalized." Adults won't feel a need to quit. And teens will want to do it.

I get all of what you're getting at, and is tough to sit here right now and dispute it.....

EXCEPT, to note the part I chose to bold and underline. Before this thread (and in at least one other thread on ECF), I have argued that tobacco cigs do not CAUSE cancer. Correlation? For sure. No doubt. Won't deny that. But cause? No. And now with what this thread has exposed as fallacious reasoning, which just so happens to get backed by "science" and I'm even more firmly in camp of cigs do not and have never caused cancer.

But, I realize I'm in an extreme minority with such thinking and the c-word is enough to send most people into a tizzy when it is perceived to be caused by something that is otherwise avoidable. Again, I fully anticipated this sort of thing to come about back in 2011. I would say it was inevitable. But, I really didn't think it would arrive with such minuscule credibility.

R.I.P Epistemic Integrity

 

[DaveP]

As far as I know, there's been no further published study by the FDA than this one from 2009. You'd think that there would be more to come.

I guess once you've detected DEG, any further testing would disqualify the one you like to quote.

http://www.fda.gov/downloads/drugs/scienceresearch/ucm173250.pdf

 

[Roger_Lafayette]

The Newsy.com video and story are travelling pretty well, just google this phrase:

E-cig vapor affects cells similarly to tobacco smoke

Scientific American has now republished the Nature blurb, and will likely serve as a principal source:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/
e-cigarettess-effect-on-cells-similar-to-that-of-tobacco-smoke/

Gary Cox has tried to "head this off at the pass" - Unreviewed, preliminary conference paper brightens prohibitionists' eyes - ECF InfoZone

... but I fear that the elements are already here for some enterprising science reporter to write a virulent piece from scratch.

Wouldn't take much, just a little googling of the fancy jargon, and perhaps some historical background on Avrum Spira, who has an impressive-sounding C.V. (because he's quoted in the original Nature blurb). Even Gary's article contains information which could be effective in the wrong hands.

These memes become more potent when the "genes" of the story get "recombined" by someone who knows how to mix in the most Google-effective keywords in both a story and a headline.

Cancer fears sparked by e-cig study - 'vapor' like tobacco smoke

Or how about this ... Health Science: Lung doctor shows e-cig's mutations not "benign"

So far the most credible mainstream news outlets that I can find are the AJC (Atlanta Journal-Constitution) and the St. Cloud (MN) Times, although Daily Mail is also going with it.

But then this is a very fresh story. If someone like Deborah Kotz of the Globe or (worse) Jane Brody of NYT picks it up, then things are going to get very bad, quite quickly. And this isn't like a disaster event, it won't get stale for weeks.

Frankly the required level of skill needed to engineer a devastating impact is none too daunting: all it takes is the right credentials and connections to get the ball rolling. The crucial work has already been done.

If you'll forgive the melodramatic metaphor, this is like a "loose nuke" just waiting for an astute terrorist organization to grab it. (Except that it's information, which is freely available to anyone.)

Just google "e-cig" with a search limit (last 24 hours), and you might be able to see this unfold, hour-by-hour.: it will be a bit like watching time-lapse photography of some natural process. Or perhaps a slow-motion video of a controlled demolition.

 

[DaveP]

At least 5 years of extensive real world testing by users reveals testimonies that health is better for almost all who vape. Maybe after 20 years of vaping our cells will show changes, but the consensus of most is that health is better with ecigs than previously with cigarettes.

Maybe they should examine cells taken from real world users who used to smoke.

 

[swampergene]

The problem is that we can refute this until we're blue in the face and it won't matter. In fact, this story is very likely a retaliatory effort in response to the fact that we had been making at least some progress in some areas. This is their way of saying "this whole thing is becoming a nuisance, let's kill it NOW."

I personally think the BP/BT conspiracy theories, while true in some aspects, pale to what this is really about. Smokers represent BILLIONS of dollars in cash money being paid to the government every year. The govt makes more money on tobacco and harm reduction than either BP or BT, I wouldn't doubt that they make more than both industries combined. And as that budget report I linked to shows, this money is no longer for dealing with the burden of tobacco-cause health costs. We are a generation past the implementation on govt control, and as suspected from the very start, this has become nothing more than a tax on select Americans and they are not going to let it get away.

The govt is in control of tobacco and via the FDA, harm reduction too. Technically, because of their financial interest in tobacco, they shouldn't even be allowed to inflict their regulations and BS laws on what is technically a competing product in the marketplace. At the end if the day, what they've demonstrated is that they have NO INTEREST IN TOBACCO HARM REDUCTION. Notice that NOT ONCE have they said "hey...this is a good start, let's work together to make this work". That's because they don't want it to work.

 

[Jman8]

How popular science works:

Circa 2009 thru 2013: eCigs are in their early stages and haven't been studied enough to determine their effects. We just don't know. This can't be over emphasized and needs to be reported as such at every turn.

Circa April 1 thru April 10, 2014: Very early work on an eCig vapor study that sees a pattern of gene expression to that of (big bad) tobacco users. This we know is connected to cancer. Please emphasize this and report it as often as possible.

 

[Dayglow]

I also like how they report on BS statistics about the number of reported medical incidences involving e-cigs. Who would have guessed that as they became more popular and common that more accidents might occur because people are careless. I guarantee you -from first hand experience- that there are far more people seeking emergency care for exposure to household cleaners than for e-cigs. You could say it's a numbers thing, more people use household cleaners than e-cigs but the point still remains. If you are careless with something dangerous unfortunate repercussions can result visa-vie driving while putting lipstick on or eating breakfast while driving...

 

[CaliforniaAromaManiac]

I don't trust any conspiracy theory. There doesn't need to be a conspiracy. Just bad puritanical philosophy, which is rampant in our culture. That BP/BT/Taxing Bodies benefit is just an extra to the puritanical mind.

 

[WhiteHighlights]

I don't trust any conspiracy theory. There doesn't need to be a conspiracy. Just bad puritanical philosophy, which is rampant in our culture. That BP/BT/Taxing Bodies benefit is just an extra to the puritanical mind.

Most of the time it's not a conspiracy - it could be media laziness (journalist and reader alike), political cronyism (money and influence), or a puritanical sense of doing good by making someone else do what you think is right - but conspiracy is not unknown. A former MA Speaker of the House is currently in federal prison for conspiracy among other things.

 

[montara]

Could not read everything above, but I do know, every AM I get up and head to the garage. Their I find my new car with a prop 65 sticker on the window. Then I risk my life in a 1 hour drive to work only to be greeted to another prop 65 sticker on the front door of my office. Yes, I take risks and everything I touch causes cancer.
Vaping... I'll take my chances.

For those of you outside California, OEHHA Proposition 65: Proposition 65 in Plain Language!

Look for the sticker in a vape shop near you. (and the gas station, grocery store, hair salon, dry cleaner, car dealer, auto mechanic...)

 

[Kent C]

If there's a conspiracy, it's in educational curricula and texts. After that, they don't have to 'conspire' because they all think the same way. And 'think' isn't particularly accurate - 'react' is better. If they actually thought rationally, we wouldn't be in this situation.

 

[redddog]

I think this is a great example of how smart our opponents are. People will RUN with this. It's the primary argument in our favor and the battle has taken on a massive shift. It doesn't have to be proven or even remotely accurrate. It has to be stated by credentialled scientists at a scientific convention and reported on in established publications. Check, check and check.

It is now encumbant upon us to provide refutable evidence that will turn popular opinion - and that's like convincing everyone that Darth Vader really was the hero.

This is the kind of media strategy that will sink this thing. It cannot be overstated. Real or not, data can say anything you want it to. Public opinion is maliable especially with predisposition and this has taken our one bullet away.

I feel like I'm in one of those teen movies when the hot babe goes off with the d-bag and the d-bag turns around and shoots the nice guy (slightly dorky) protagonist a mocking smile because he just fooled the babe into thinking he was a nice guy when we all know he's a d-bag. Except the d-bag never gets caught by the babe and they get married.

They don't have to prove anything. They have to, one by one, dismantle our argument by supposition, manipulation of data and plain fear. Any they have organizations with billions of dollars at stake and unlimited funds available for their cause. Not to mention, the most talented strategists, media people and marketing available.

This is bad.

 

[redddog]

I remember recently my wife told me "until they find out that vaping is dangerous, you can do it. But the minute they find out that it is, you have to stop." Of course I agreed to that figuring that they wouldn't ever come to that conclusion. as it turns out, they never had to.

My wife will read that headline, which in my opinion will be all over the place in a day or two, and demand that I stop. Nothing I will say will convince her. THAT's the battle we're fighting.

 

[AgentAnia]

Meanwhile, the number of vapers continues to grow, and vapers are NOT dropping like flies, nor are they inundating their doctors with vaping-related complaints. So keep fighting the fight and keep vaping.

The problem here is that as a result of this campaign by the zealots and fanatics, current smokers will be discouraged from switching to ecigs. *That* is the harm that must be laid squarely at the zealots' doorstep. Soon -- sadly -- we will be able to compile a new statistic: ANTZ-related deaths.

 

[patkin]

"ANTZ-related death" good one AgentAnia. I'm going to start using that. Sad thing is some of them will actually be proud of that. I remember reading the comment by one of them who openly admitted her joy in shaming... remember that one?

 

[Kent C]

Meanwhile, the number of vapers continues to grow, and vapers are NOT dropping like flies, nor are they inundating their doctors with vaping-related complaints. So keep fighting the fight and keep vaping.

The problem here is that as a result of this campaign by the zealots and fanatics, current smokers will be discouraged from switching to ecigs. *That* is the harm that must be laid squarely at the zealots' doorstep. Soon -- sadly -- we will be able to compile a new statistic: ANTZ-related deaths.

And ANTZ-related suicides (and homicides :- ) and ANTZ-related obesity.

 

[NorthOfAtlanta]

"ANTZ-related death"

To get a number on this, just compare Sweden's tobacco related death statistics to the US. Their lies over the last 30+ years about non-combustible tobacco is the difference.

 

[Anjaffm]

..
The problem here is that as a result of this campaign by the zealots and fanatics, current smokers will be discouraged from switching to ecigs. *That* is the harm that must be laid squarely at the zealots' doorstep. Soon -- sadly -- we will be able to compile a new statistic: ANTZ-related deaths.

Absolutely.
I wonder if future generations will count up the ANTZ-related deaths like enlightened generations did with the victims of the witchhunts during the Middle Ages. And I wonder if - to future generations - their lies and junk science will become as infamous as the Witch Hammer.

The main purpose of the Malleus was to systematically refute arguments claiming that witchcraft does not exist, to discredit those who expressed skepticism about its reality, ..., and to educate magistrates on the procedures ...

Does this sound familiar?

I would, of course, prefer for the liars to be de-masked and their lies to be exposed as lies during our generation. Before the death toll rises.

 

[Anjaffm]

"ANTZ-related death"

To get a number on this, just compare Sweden's tobacco related death statistics to the US. Their lies over the last 30+ years about non-combustible tobacco is the difference.

Well said indeed.
Yes. The difference can be laid at the ANTZ door. They have blood on their hands already.

 

[DrMA]

Meanwhile, the number of vapers continues to grow, and vapers are NOT dropping like flies, nor are they inundating their doctors with vaping-related complaints. So keep fighting the fight and keep vaping.

The problem here is that as a result of this campaign by the zealots and fanatics, current smokers will be discouraged from switching to ecigs. *That* is the harm that must be laid squarely at the zealots' doorstep. Soon -- sadly -- we will be able to compile a new statistic: ANTZ-related deaths.

We can probably make an estimate right now...

Let's call it "TCI-caused deaths" to highlight the fact that tobacco control is an industry that profits from death, just like their pretended adversary, BT itself.