"Public Health consensus" on ecigs signed by PHE & 11 other agencies
- Thread starter DrMA
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
That sounds like banning advertising in the press, and further regulating of ownership of media outlets, among other cutting of strings. Not sure how advisable some of that would be. I doubt that's the kind of stuff you're referring to.
How are you envisioning cutting strings?
It is superficial to use kids the way that TC and THC do, to undermine adult choices. Evidently you've bought into it as being at some level above that. Sorry to hear about that.
Sorry you've bought into notion that this is only about adult choices. I pity such a worldview.
Actually I was just having some fun with the analogy.. but... money isn't the puppet master - those who use it are. And part of 'cutting the strings' would be to stop the lobbying - not in a 'amend the first amendment on political speech (money)' but in getting people in office who simply lock their doors to lobbyists. IOW, someone who tells Trump (as a businessman) to 'get lost', as Trump is doing as a "politician". Whether he'd do that if he didn't have $10 billion is another question but my answer is the same - don't accept bribes - accept money if people are willing to give but with a clear understanding that they won't get a nickel of it in some quid pro quo. If they like your general political philosophy - then fine, but nothing specific 'in return'.
As for the media, they should be as you would like - (and me) - objective - but the fact is, they never have been. There was the perception that they were at one time but that was a perception that was driven by them - Cronkite and Murrow were just as liberal as the anchors at CNN, MSNBC, ABC and CBS, people just didn't know it like they do now, when there is actual competition/different viewpoints of Rush, Fox, libertarian sites and the internet.
And go back to Adams and Jefferson and their supporting publications, esp. during the period when Adams signed the alien and Sedition acts - a direct violation of the First Amendment (among others) that was upheld by a Federalist court that was appointed by Washington and Adams. The 'divide' was just as much as it is today - maybe more.
If it were just about the kids, they'd pass bans to minors and be done with it. I'm guessing that most would say, it's more than that since they've already done that in most states and they haven't quit with their drive for regulations. sigh...
I'm not saying it's just about kids, but am saying the youthful/recreational aspect of the debate permeates all areas, at a fundamental level.
That adults are convinced children shouldn't be using / able to purchase makes all other points around safety / health far far easier to move forward and essentially sell everyone on idea that it is not an appropriate recreational choice, but instead an activity that brings harm to the user and likely harm to all those near the user.
Thus your freedom to use ends where a child is present or may one day be present. And if that sort of rhetoric works for any vaper, then suddenly vapers can be on board for use bans that have nothing to do with children being present, but just the aspect of "someone could be harmed."
Use bans are but one aspect I could've chosen among many. Name an aspect and I'll be glad to tie in the youthful / recreational viewpoint in case it is not clear how it relates.
You're basically talking about 2nd hand vapor which even some ANTZ studies, and all of ours, have shown not to be the case - where a person's breath or outside air could be more harmful.
No - the 'kids argument' is merely a ruse to attack adult use.
But we don't know the long term effects.....
lol... I'd rate that at a higher level argument (for them) than 'kids' although 'wild west' is close :- )
Well, perhaps we can agree on this point, though I wouldn't say merely. It is a ruse and it is the one point that drives all other (proposed) regulations.
Regulation today is used primarily to consolidate wealth and power.
An unregulated or (even a lightly regulated) fledgling industry such as vaping means that 10,000 little businesses own and control the market, and those little businesses don't write the 7-figure checks required to curry favor from the rulers.
The ruling class is not sitting around their boardrooms and offices thinking about how to help people, or to save people, or to make them safer. They're trying to figure out how to extract maximum profit from an industry that was developed and has grown without them. They're feeling left out.
An unregulated or (even a lightly regulated) fledgling industry such as vaping means that 10,000 little businesses own and control the market, and those little businesses don't write the 7-figure checks required to curry favor from the rulers.
The ruling class is not sitting around their boardrooms and offices thinking about how to help people, or to save people, or to make them safer. They're trying to figure out how to extract maximum profit from an industry that was developed and has grown without them. They're feeling left out.
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 67
Seems like several THR advocates are more interested in criticizing Public Health England than in achieving a scientific and public health consensus in support of vaping (for cigarette smokers).
The only reason PHE cited the advertising ban was because it is being imposed by the EU TPD on ALL EU countries.
The reasons PHE endorsed an e-cig sales ban to minors is exactly the same reasons I (and many others) have been urging states to ban the sale of e-cigs to minors. While many/most US state laws also ban proxy purchases of tobacco and e-cigs (by adults) for minors, the vast majority of vapers (and the entire vaping industry) have endorsed those laws since 2009.
Also please note that in 30 years of campaigning for laws banning cigarette sales to minors, I've never heard of a parent being charged with purchasing a tobacco product (or an e-cig) for their minor child.
Although the scientific and empirical evidence indicate that vaping is 99% less harmful than cigarette smoking (since several dozen batteries or rechargers have exploded, and one child purportedly died from drinking e-liquid), I'm still very pleased that PHE has stated the vaping is 95% less harmful than cigarette smoking (although I wish PHE would have stated vaping is at least 95% less harmful than cigarette smoking).
We now have a situation in the UK (which is considered the second most influential country next to the US for scientific, medical and public health expertise) where a growing majority of the public health community now supports vaping.
Interestingly, it took a repeat of false and defamatory allegations by McKee and Capewill in a second medical journal to convince some of these UK public health groups to publicly defend PHE and publicly support vaping.
The only reason PHE cited the advertising ban was because it is being imposed by the EU TPD on ALL EU countries.
The reasons PHE endorsed an e-cig sales ban to minors is exactly the same reasons I (and many others) have been urging states to ban the sale of e-cigs to minors. While many/most US state laws also ban proxy purchases of tobacco and e-cigs (by adults) for minors, the vast majority of vapers (and the entire vaping industry) have endorsed those laws since 2009.
Also please note that in 30 years of campaigning for laws banning cigarette sales to minors, I've never heard of a parent being charged with purchasing a tobacco product (or an e-cig) for their minor child.
Although the scientific and empirical evidence indicate that vaping is 99% less harmful than cigarette smoking (since several dozen batteries or rechargers have exploded, and one child purportedly died from drinking e-liquid), I'm still very pleased that PHE has stated the vaping is 95% less harmful than cigarette smoking (although I wish PHE would have stated vaping is at least 95% less harmful than cigarette smoking).
We now have a situation in the UK (which is considered the second most influential country next to the US for scientific, medical and public health expertise) where a growing majority of the public health community now supports vaping.
Interestingly, it took a repeat of false and defamatory allegations by McKee and Capewill in a second medical journal to convince some of these UK public health groups to publicly defend PHE and publicly support vaping.
Now if we could only get a few of the PH organizations in the U.S. to follow suit and support vaping, what a wonderful world it would be!
I was referring to England's socialized medicine, in the spirit of Moonbogg's post I quoted and was replying to. I was going along with the joke. Judging by who hit the like button, I figure I was misunderstood to mean pretty much the opposite of the point I was trying to make.
Fortunately for the three likers, there is an unlike button. I won't be offended, and will continue to value their contributions in the subforums I read and post in. Then again, if they've drifted politically, well, I welcome them to the Left (wishful thinking).
What's a good emoticon to signify joking?
nic, I took Moonbogg's post and your post to be joking. I appreciate humor, hence my "like" for the posts by both of you. Judging by your judgment of who hit the "like" button on your post, I figure you may have misunderstood why I "liked" both the posts. No worries.
LOL!
OK then, we're good.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked