This comment rightly points out that the consumer confusion FDA is worried about was caused by FDA itself.
Regulations.gov
Regulations.gov
FDA Outstanding comment addressing 'consumer confusion'
- Thread starter pamdis
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Priceless!!
"Doctor Mike Siegel's work came out of Boston University in 2011 and further analysis of
FDA’s study and press release become available that I decided I had better do my own
research. I am thankful that I did because had I relied on FDA, I would still be smoking
tobacco today."
"Doctor Mike Siegel's work came out of Boston University in 2011 and further analysis of
FDA’s study and press release become available that I decided I had better do my own
research. I am thankful that I did because had I relied on FDA, I would still be smoking
tobacco today."
Excellent, excellent, excellent! What a great find. This is a HIGHLY recommended read. And I'm buying lunch for this commenter.
Has the FDA ever came out and corrected any of it's findings on this matter? This is a masterful piece of work.
excellent comment indeed. Thanks for posting!
I liked the "name and shame" approach, but also the moderate tone, which, while making accusations of misconduct, fraud, and malpractice, is not rude or exceedingly abrasive. Also, using FDA's own words against the deeming is priceless!
I liked the "name and shame" approach, but also the moderate tone, which, while making accusations of misconduct, fraud, and malpractice, is not rude or exceedingly abrasive. Also, using FDA's own words against the deeming is priceless!
To the point. The FDA must distinguish between "tobacco" and "nicotine". This has been an issue for me for a long time. There is a difference. In my mind a tobacco product is one that burns and produces smoke. The author makes this quite clear. The governmental hysteria in America's towns and cities is alarming and dangerous for current smokers, who, like the author, will continue to smoke traditional cigarettes because the negative propaganda tells them there is no difference. Shameful.
They don't care about smokers' health & lives..
They only care about their (declining) tobacco tax revenue, which they've become quite addicted to...
Shameful, indeed..
Then again, they have no shame...
This is a PG-13 rated forum, so I best stop here..
Much thanks OP for an outstanding read.
IMHO, their is something so very very special when an individual documents how the deplorable actions of the FDA in 2009 directly effected she/he. I will admit to a certain amount of "almost tearing up" as I worked my way through this comment. I kept asking myself how I would feel if I had endured the same set of circumstances as the author.
IMHO, their is something so very very special when an individual documents how the deplorable actions of the FDA in 2009 directly effected she/he. I will admit to a certain amount of "almost tearing up" as I worked my way through this comment. I kept asking myself how I would feel if I had endured the same set of circumstances as the author.
This is a very, very well-written comment. I appreciate the author taking the time to write such a profound and heartfelt comment 
well done!
It is a very painful read. As I go through the paragraphs I can't shake the thought that was this author went through, continuing to smoke for years after discovering e-cigarettes due to misinformation, is something whose true impact can only be realized by multiplying it by the millions of people who have gone through, and will go through, the same thing.
The amount of pain and suffering the FDA and its supporters have inflicted on the public thus far due to their campaign of misinformation about vaping can never be quantified, and it can never, ever, be justified.
I don't know what else to say... this whole thing just... sucks
well done!It is a very painful read. As I go through the paragraphs I can't shake the thought that was this author went through, continuing to smoke for years after discovering e-cigarettes due to misinformation, is something whose true impact can only be realized by multiplying it by the millions of people who have gone through, and will go through, the same thing.
The amount of pain and suffering the FDA and its supporters have inflicted on the public thus far due to their campaign of misinformation about vaping can never be quantified, and it can never, ever, be justified.
I don't know what else to say... this whole thing just... sucks
That's why we must find a way to hold these desk-murderers accountable for their actions.
I would love to see this splendid comment on the editorial page of every major (and minor) newspaper!
Yes, and we shouldn't hesitate to call them murderers, because that's exactly what they are. It is a moral abomination, under any circumstances, to disseminate false information that results in people dying needless deaths. But, when those falsehoods are disseminated under the banner of "public health," by agencies on which the citizenry is supposed to be able to rely for a true and accurate accounting of such matters, that is an altogether different and more insipid form of pure evil.
Indeed. A recent publication provides some help in estimating the number of premature deaths attributable to misguided tobacco control policy and lies about the low risk of smoke-free alternatives. I wrote about this elsewhere in the context of addressing a particularly egregious comment on the FDA deeming.
Calls to suppress, restrict, or ban electronic vaporizers are tantamount to the cold, calculated, and systematic murder of 44 million current American smokers, and 1.22 billion world-wide (Hanley 2014). Evidence presented by Nitzkin (2014b) suggests that propaganda, lies, and misinformation regarding tobacco harm reduction (THR) perpetrated by TCI and disseminated by so-called "health" groups and public departments have already caused nearly 10 million unnecessary deaths related to smoking in the past 20 years alone (480,000 deaths per year × 20 years). Even under conservative assumptions regarding the success of THR initiatives using ecigs, Nitzkin (2014b) estimates that up to 4.8 million American lives could be saved over the next 20 years. Nitkin (2014b) concludes «[a] carefully structured Tobacco Harm Reduction (THR) initiative, with e-cigarettes as a prominent THR modality, added to current tobacco control programming, is the most feasible policy option likely to substantially reduce tobacco-attributable illness and death in the United States over the next 20 years.»
Hanley (2014): http://www.independent.ie/opinion/stubbing-out-ecigarettes-will-condemn-smokers-to-death-30545658.html
Nitzkin (2014b): http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4078589/
Calls to suppress, restrict, or ban electronic vaporizers are tantamount to the cold, calculated, and systematic murder of 44 million current American smokers, and 1.22 billion world-wide (Hanley 2014). Evidence presented by Nitzkin (2014b) suggests that propaganda, lies, and misinformation regarding tobacco harm reduction (THR) perpetrated by TCI and disseminated by so-called "health" groups and public departments have already caused nearly 10 million unnecessary deaths related to smoking in the past 20 years alone (480,000 deaths per year × 20 years). Even under conservative assumptions regarding the success of THR initiatives using ecigs, Nitzkin (2014b) estimates that up to 4.8 million American lives could be saved over the next 20 years. Nitkin (2014b) concludes «[a] carefully structured Tobacco Harm Reduction (THR) initiative, with e-cigarettes as a prominent THR modality, added to current tobacco control programming, is the most feasible policy option likely to substantially reduce tobacco-attributable illness and death in the United States over the next 20 years.»
Hanley (2014): http://www.independent.ie/opinion/stubbing-out-ecigarettes-will-condemn-smokers-to-death-30545658.html
Nitzkin (2014b): http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4078589/
Last edited:
Of course the FDA is directly to blame for not correcting their flawed science when it came to the testing mentioned in this uniquely positioned comment.
The media is equally to blame for reporting the FDA study blindly, without looking closely at the facts, and continuing to fail at reporting studies or findings that are positive to vaping. Even today, the media focuses on the negative instead of the positive with regards to e-cigarettes. I know there is an element of "it bleeds it leads" very much present in mainstream news, but their bias shows IMHO.
I know this to be fact, because my wife (who doesn't 100% agree with my vaping, but hated smoking worse) mentions these reports all the time when she reads or hears about them on the news or in her magazines. "Did you hear, I heard that vaping causes babies to be born naked?" "Yes dear, but the study was flawed..."
The media is equally to blame for reporting the FDA study blindly, without looking closely at the facts, and continuing to fail at reporting studies or findings that are positive to vaping. Even today, the media focuses on the negative instead of the positive with regards to e-cigarettes. I know there is an element of "it bleeds it leads" very much present in mainstream news, but their bias shows IMHO.
I know this to be fact, because my wife (who doesn't 100% agree with my vaping, but hated smoking worse) mentions these reports all the time when she reads or hears about them on the news or in her magazines. "Did you hear, I heard that vaping causes babies to be born naked?" "Yes dear, but the study was flawed..."
And, if you can find a way to combine "it bleeds it leads" with "your kids are in danger," that's local news ratings gold. There's no moral panic in the last 50 years that didn't owe its existence to sensationalized coverage on local TV news.
I should know better at my age, but it still amazes and infuriates me to see over and over what suckers the media are.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
