OK - here goes....what if Pinney's first suggestion was to encourage (back, or get someone to back) a lawsuit in order to get all this fuzzy, inaccurate information in front of a judge in order to officially refute it, on the record?
Mitch Zeller's former GSK funded employer Pinney Associates switches loyalties to NJOY
- Thread starter Bill Godshall
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Good suggestion.
For our opponents - the "save the chiiiiidren so you must ban things for adults!" crowd - no idea is too twisted, no blathering is too nonsensical, no claim is too far-fetched, no study is too clear to be completely misinterpreted, no lie is too big to be plastered all over the media.
So why not fight fire with fire?
In my home country, the courts have put a stop to nonsensical prohibitions more than once.
And in the US, it was the courts that prohibited the FDA's nonsensical and unilateral classification of e-cigs as '"medicines'".
Last edited:
While lying awake last night, cogitating (TYVM pamdis ) I started to wonder about lobbyists and client confidentiality and how this might apply in this case. Pinney has been privvy to GSK's marketing and lobbying strategies and the corporate thinking/strategy behind them. Are they (Pinney) in any way constrained from communicating this knowledge and experience to their new client njoy? Is a non-disclosure agreement involved?
) I started to wonder about lobbyists and client confidentiality and how this might apply in this case. Pinney has been privvy to GSK's marketing and lobbying strategies and the corporate thinking/strategy behind them. Are they (Pinney) in any way constrained from communicating this knowledge and experience to their new client njoy? Is a non-disclosure agreement involved?
While lying awake last night, cogitating (TYVM pamdis
Quite likely there's an ironclad NDA in place. Also quite likely there's an internal firewall preventing the people who worked directly with GSK from working directly with njoy.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
