Important commentary by David Abrams: are the walks of the TC echo chamber starting to cave in?

[caramel]

I think he should have a psychiatric evaluation.

 

[DrMA]

I think he should have a psychiatric evaluation.

I think all ANTZ should have a psychiatric evaluation. We already know they're brain damaged, just don't know how much

 

[Jman8]

"Lethal cigarettes" - LOL. Lot of 90 year olds smoking those lethal things.

Were those predecessors never around they'd be calling these "lethal" cause, ya know, one day a vaper will surely pass away. And a connection can be made, via ANTZ rationale, that causation by eCigs is epidemiologically plausible in that death.

From the paper:

Our view is that ANDS represent a new set of tools with the potential to minimize harm related to combustible tobacco use but only if they are prudently managed and marketed to adult smokers and only if the public is accurately and truthfully informed about them and how best to use them to eliminate combustible cigarette use. It must be stressed, however, that traditional tobacco control strategies and tactics to make lethal cigarettes less appealing, accessible and more expensive should continue in full – and perhaps, greater force to deter progression from ANDS to lethal combustibles. Nothing in this commentary should be interpreted as undermining current tobacco control efforts. We propose that, because of the rapidly changing landscape, it is time to add a prudent and pragmatic harm minimization transformative framework to the traditional tobacco control views and interpretations of evidence used to guide practice and policy.

I don't think these harm minimalizationists would get along too well with a dual user (like myself). Their science be junky and their philosophy be too easy to defeat in a rational debate. I look forward to defeating them again, and again, and again.

 

[AndriaD]

"Lethal cigarettes" - LOL. Lot of 90 year olds smoking those lethal things.

Were those predecessors never around they'd be calling these "lethal" cause, ya know, one day a vaper will surely pass away. And a connection can be made, via ANTZ rationale, that causation by eCigs is epidemiologically plausible in that death.

From the paper:



I don't think these harm minimalizationists would get along too well with a dual user (like myself). Their science be junky and their philosophy be too easy to defeat in a rational debate. I look forward to defeating them again, and again, and again.

And as much as I personally cannot subscribe to dual use, these evil, hating fools make me really glad that there are those like you around, willing and able to debate them! Kudos!

Andria