NBC Brings ins a Dr. to Debunk E-Cigarette Myths but Fails

[sherwood865]

I wonder how big the checks have to be for these doctors to sell their soul .

I find myself wondering the same thing. I hope it was worth it to her.

 

[EleanorR]

One thing is for sure, if they ever lose their jobs as journalists/broadcasters they will have a hell of a career writing Fiction novels.

Nah, writing fiction actually requires talent.

 

[ut1205]

Those doctors hung up their stethoscopes long ago. Snyderman, Oz, Siegal, Stork are nothing more than entertainers tasked with holding an audience. What if they were speaking of salt, eggs, red meat, or vaping and said "No problem, do it all you want". Who would watch.

 

[Jman8]

I'm serious, we need to do this sort of stuff to them. Infiltrate ANTZ or pose as ANTZ and pass off entirely over-the-top erroneous information. Yes, we could have 'fun' with this and make it silly, but I think it would be more effective if it were done under guise of being serious, while knowingly being false.

Given where the propaganda war is, I say we simply have someone claim to be Dr. Glantz (um, you know, Dr. Marvin Glantz) who wants to update the public about 'problems of eCigs.' And then does interview that says things Dr. G. might say, but with a whole bunch of added flair designed to show just how ridiculous ANTZ are with their rhetoric.

Bringing up topics like in the Fight Fire With Fire thread

Or stuff like, interviewer asks how we scientists know these things are dangerous, and response is given, "well, in our recent study with five, seven and nine year olds, we learned that they didn't handle the 45 mg nicotine all that well. And oddly they preferred the tobacco flavors over all sweet flavors, even when we bumped the sweet flavors up to 70 mg doses."

Man, would I love to see our side up to these sort of tactics.

 

[Kent C]

I'm serious, we need to do this sort of stuff to them. Infiltrate ANTZ or pose as ANTZ and pass off entirely over-the-top erroneous information. Yes, we could have 'fun' with this and make it silly, but I think it would be more effective if it were done under guise of being serious, while knowingly being false.

Given where the propaganda war is, I say we simply have someone claim to be Dr. Glantz (um, you know, Dr. Marvin Glantz) who wants to update the public about 'problems of eCigs.' And then does interview that says things Dr. G. might say, but with a whole bunch of added flair designed to show just how ridiculous ANTZ are with their rhetoric.

Bringing up topics like in the Fight Fire With Fire thread

Or stuff like, interviewer asks how we scientists know these things are dangerous, and response is given, "well, in our recent study with five, seven and nine year olds, we learned that they didn't handle the 45 mg nicotine all that well. And oddly they preferred the tobacco flavors over all sweet flavors, even when we bumped the sweet flavors up to 70 mg doses."

Man, would I love to see our side up to these sort of tactics.

"The Onion" ecig edition

 

[Kent C]

Or stuff like, interviewer asks how we scientists know these things are dangerous, and response is given, "well, in our recent study with five, seven and nine year olds, we learned that they didn't handle the 45 mg nicotine all that well. And oddly they preferred the tobacco flavors over all sweet flavors, when we bumped the sweet flavors up to 70 mg doses......"

"when we bumped the sweet flavors up to 70 mg doses...... all they did was this:"