scaremongering in the guardian

[wilhelmsure]

www. guardian. co. uk/commentisfree/2013/apr/03/e-cigarette-smokers-inhaling-unknown"]http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/apr/03/e-cigarette-smokers-inhaling-unknown

 

[Petrodus]

Tipping my hat to other members ...
Should this link be broken ??

 

[rockymtnrobin]

www. guardian. co. uk/commentisfree/2013/apr/03/e-cigarette-smokers-inhaling-unknown]Watch out, e-cigarette smokers

Write them, call them out on the facts!

 

[Talyon]

Come on Uk let him know the facts. His writing is old incorrect knowledge, he never added the FDA lost its battle in court for lying.

 

[Aymoon]

Come on Uk let him know the facts. His writing is old incorrect knowledge, he never added the FDA lost its battle in court for lying.

I just read that article and that's exactly what I thought... I thought this guy must have gotten stuck in a time warp circa 2005 :/

 

[Petrodus]

I don't think he got caught in a time warp ...
Everyone knows where to find Google.
This guy had an agenda !!

 

[sonicdsl]

Careful with those links folks! We don't want to lend any credence to junk science & trash.

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...g-links-junk-science-other-rubbish-posts.html

 

[Elnroth]

Can't we submit this to that board in the UK that enforces truth in news reporting?

 

[Petrodus]

Can't we submit this to that board in the UK that enforces truth in news reporting?

There's a board in the UK that enforces truth in news reporting ??!!
We need one in the US !!

 

[Elnroth]

There's a board in the UK that enforces truth in news reporting ??!!
We need one in the US !!

Yes, and I'm fairly certain you don't need to live there to report about a news body reporting inaccurate or disingenuous information.

 

[Petrodus]

Careful with those links folks! We don't want to lend any credence to junk science & trash.

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...g-links-junk-science-other-rubbish-posts.html

Just noticed the duplicate post was deleted (and the link wasn't broken)
It's understood why members might not immediately realize articles
were previously posted because the Net is choked with republished
articles with different headlines.

However, we really do need to read articles closely before posting
and if the article pumps out anti ecig propaganda ... we need to
break the links if the article is posted.

Google archives our posts and discussions
We don't want to add more anti ecig back-links to these junk articles

 

[Aymoon]

FYI, The Guardian's Comment Is Free section (CIF) is not for 'reporting' per se, but is a commentary and analysis section... they host commentary from across the spectrum of political and other views. It is perfectly acceptable for someone to post a counter-view in response to this article for publishing on the website if anybody out there is articulate enough to state their case... anyone? Maybe this is something that could be forwarded to CASAA or the like?

 

[DC2]

Can't we submit this to that board in the UK that enforces truth in news reporting?

Complain to the PCC about the Mail on Sunday - easy to do

 

[Elnroth]

Complain to the PCC about the Mail on Sunday - easy to do

That's the one, thanks DC2

 

[Petrodus]

Start of the complaint with "I am OFFENDED" ...
That gets everyone's attention ...
and scares everyone in the US

 

[Mediaguy]

The proper link is

http: //www. guardian. co. uk/commentisfree/2013/apr/03/e-cigarette-smokers-inhaling-unknown

I did my bit and contributed a comment:

The FDA's is the only study of which found trace amounts of diethylene glycol. No study conducted since has done so.The study cited above has used questionable methods in their findings, and reached not inaccurate conclusions but rather misleading conclusions which, by virtue of omission, can be open to alarmist interpretation.
Omitted were relative comparisons to the same metal particulates found in government-approved nicotine replacement products and devices, such as gums, lozenges, inhalers and patches - which all contained equal or more of said toxins as the single unnamed (again, bad methodology) e-cigarette studied.
For commentary on the "study" referred to in the "article" above I would refer you to The Rest of the Story: Tobacco News Analysis and Commentary: New Study Sounds Alarm about Metals Detected in Electronic Cigarettes, But Fails to Inform Readers that Nicotine Inhalers Have Similar Levels of the Same Metals
For a more compleat and properly followed study, which unfortunately will not excite frightening headlines such as that above, please refer to Levels of selected carcinogens and toxicants in vapour from electronic cigarettes -- Goniewicz et al. -- Tobacco Control

 

[jamie]

I'm a little confused. There seemed to be a concerted effort in the first half of the thread to break the link, but when I go to Mediaguy's new link I land right on the story, not some other analysis page.

 

[Dusty_D]

I'm a little confused. There seemed to be a concerted effort in the first half of the thread to break the link, but when I go to Mediaguy's new link I land right on the story, not some other analysis page.

Nothing to be confused about. The links have to be manually broken by a moderator if not done by the person posting it.

Perhaps next time, you could try helping us by reporting the link, and it would get actioned sooner.

 

[jamie]

Ahhh, okay thank you. I've barely followed the "break the link" change here so appreciate the clarification.