Prue Talbot conducts study on ECF posts, grossly misrepresents facts

[bombastinator]

It would seem that way. As the product already exists, you'd hope that one scientist vs another would not be enough to stop it's sale.

As george bush proved with the iraq warr, you don't need actual good data to ram somethingzzz through. The data won't hold up in the long run, but the decisions made using It usuallly stay.

It's sort of a coralary to the famous Lincoln quote:

"you cann fool some of the people all of the time, or all of the peoople some of the time, bit you can't fool all of the people all of the time"

The corallary is but if you can fool enough of them for long enough it doesn't matter.

Stevia has been around as a sweetener almost as long as refined sugar, but when the fda was founded our belegured, and now long dead sugar cane industry forced through a ban on stevia. It wasn't lifted until a decade or two ago. If it wasn't put into place, saccharin and similar things would never have been invented

 

[shoogdadi]

Reading through this thread has shown me how many believe that this propaganda BS will have no bearing on our community. YOU ARE DEAD WRONG!!! In the eyes of politicians, ANTZ, media, and the uninformed public this is a published scientific research study conducted by a "qualified doctor". Regardless of how asinine we know it to be, or that the ANTZ agenda is driving it; it is now documented evidence that THEY can use to support their claims. The results of this and at least one other of Talbot's studies were directly cited in the California SB 648 hearing this week.

It is my personal belief that this study was "commissioned" for exactly this purpose. Corbett and her cohorts had absolutely ZERO scientific evidence of current health issues caused by the use of EC, so they had some fabricated. Bear in mind that many of the states end up -at some point- following the lead of California laws.

I know the old saying, "Just because you are paranoid, doesn't mean 'they' aren't out to get you." But I believe this quote is a bit more fitting:
"It isn't paranoia after the other side declares war. It is Warranted Tactical Awareness."

 

[Katya]

Alas! I have to agree with you. What a shame!

 

[shoogdadi]

Given that it has now been used against us, they will continue to use it until those findings are discredited. And like Petro said, they will just make a new -- even more asinine -- study to quote.

 

[2coils]

Reading through this thread has shown me how many believe that this propaganda BS will have no bearing on our community. YOU ARE DEAD WRONG!!! In the eyes of politicians, ANTZ, media, and the uninformed public this is a published scientific research study conducted by a "qualified doctor". Regardless of how asinine we know it to be, or that the ANTZ agenda is driving it; it is now documented evidence that THEY can use to support their claims. The results of this and at least one other of Talbot's studies were directly cited in the California SB 648 hearing this week.

It is my personal belief that this study was "commissioned" for exactly this purpose. Corbett and her cohorts had absolutely ZERO scientific evidence of current health issues caused by the use of EC, so they had some fabricated. Bear in mind that many of the states end up -at some point- following the lead of California laws.

I know the old saying, "Just because you are paranoid, doesn't mean 'they' aren't out to get you." But I believe this quote is a bit more fitting:
"It isn't paranoia after the other side declares war. It is Warranted Tactical Awareness."

Good post. The ANTZ at their finest!

 

[Guild]

405 symptoms, really? That's laughable. Unfortunately, the outcome is serious.

 

[sbdivemaster]

FIFY

 

[pmos69]

Reading through this thread has shown me how many believe that this propaganda BS will have no bearing on our community. YOU ARE DEAD WRONG!!! In the eyes of politicians, ANTZ, media, and the uninformed public this is a published scientific research study conducted by a "qualified doctor". Regardless of how asinine we know it to be, or that the ANTZ agenda is driving it; it is now documented evidence that THEY can use to support their claims. The results of this and at least one other of Talbot's studies were directly cited in the California SB 648 hearing this week.

It is my personal belief that this study was "commissioned" for exactly this purpose. Corbett and her cohorts had absolutely ZERO scientific evidence of current health issues caused by the use of EC, so they had some fabricated. Bear in mind that many of the states end up -at some point- following the lead of California laws.

I know the old saying, "Just because you are paranoid, doesn't mean 'they' aren't out to get you." But I believe this quote is a bit more fitting:
"It isn't paranoia after the other side declares war. It is Warranted Tactical Awareness."

The, very suspect, particle study was already mentioned in the latest EU meeting discussing the new Tobacco Products Directive proposal.
(Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety TPD discussion starting at 16:43:00)
Should we be surprised? Foul, foul play.

 

[Lerxst]

People really consider this scientific? Really? To me it's nothing more than a study of peoples forum posting habits, and not even an accurate one at that. How could people posting of their negative/positive symptoms/experiences have any scientific validity. Even if it were an accurate count of negative side effects reported, it doesn't even take into account that the symptoms could be attributed to the same people quitting smoking. It's hearsay and completely subjective IMO. I just don't understand why someone would believe this garbage, and the ones that do probably believe everything they read on FB is true...

 

[Petrodus]

Talbot pulls these stunts from time to time ...
Then she gets "hammered" and laughed at by all those who knows the truth.
Then she crawls back into her hole ... waiting for more funding from Big Pharma.
I suggest we won't here from her again for a while.

 

[Faylool]

Oh brother.

 

[Talyon]

Wouldn't surprise me if the FDA and our infamous Dr Prue hired a whole whack of people to come on here over the last year or so just to complain about imaginary stuff that happened to them after Vapeing.

Can u say set up?

If u get a chance please join CASAA - The Consumer Advocates for Smoke-free Alternatives Association they do an awful lot for our right to Vape. Ty.

 

[jtpjc]

We need ugly people. They make us look good.

 

[AgentAnia]

We need ugly people. They make us look good.

Sorry I can't give you more than one like!!!

 

[Vocalek]

We need ugly people. They make us look good.

Well, then, I'd guess that we also need people who make us look intelligent.

 

[Petrodus]

Well, then, I'd guess that we also need people who make us look intelligent.

I suggest Talbot makes us look good AND Intelligent

 

[Uma]

The TRDRP meeting, on vimeo, recently posted, has a comment section on the last video. Talbot covered this same bull.
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...resentation-slides-trdrp-workshop-posted.html

 

[gwillings]

This looks like a report that was done back in 2011 and just published in 2013, which was conducted with those disposable e cigs like BLU and NJOY. Also, looks like they just copied and pasted a portion of the results, the test results are no more useful than toilet paper.

My wife works at certain Federal Government Research Center in San Diego, and has access to top level researches completed. She has sent me 4 at current time, and can obtain more. Also, she has suggested to her boss that they take on an e cig research as many in the military community have taken to vaping and quit the cancer sticks.

 

[Nermal]

Yeah, I figure if I call her she will want to know why I want to meet with her.

Listen for odd clicks and electronic noise on the line. She'll probably call security.

 

[Pyxus]

Isn't this kind of data gathering considered unethical among researchers? Could we sign something to be presented to the Society stating that we didn't give Ms. Talbot permission to do any research on us?

Researchers would not even call this junk 'Science' or even Research for that matter... this is appalling ......ism.

Sent from my SM-N900 using Tapatalk