The costs of running this huge site are paid for by ads. Please consider registering and becoming a Supporting Member for an ad-free experience. Thanks, ECF team.

Sleazy propaganda re diacetyl in e-cigs

Discussion in 'Media and General News' started by CarolT, Feb 17, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Image has been removed.
URL has been removed.
Email address has been removed.
Media has been removed.
  1. caramel

    caramel Vaping Master

    Dec 23, 2014
    How about sugars/fats/ etc? A prominent "force use" advocate was recently photographed featuring an oversized belly. Shall the government help him with a Soylent Green diet?

    Or maybe he could demonstrate us the virtues of the "cold turkey" approach and surprize us next month with a regular belly?
     
  2. Kent C

    Kent C ECF Guru Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Jun 12, 2009
    NW Ohio US
    The gov't is already feeding him.
     
  3. caramel

    caramel Vaping Master

    Dec 23, 2014
    Obviously they're overdoing it.
     
  4. AndriaD

    AndriaD Reviewer / Blogger Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Jan 24, 2014
    LawrencevilleGA
    Excellent analogy. The vast majority of people can drink moderately without risking their reason or other aspects of mental health -- alcoholics obviously cannot, since their alcoholism will always prompt them to "have another" even when they've already had a half dozen, and an alcoholic can generally be counted on to make judgments, however faulty, about the mental health of others. :D

    I think the entire decision re: diketones depends entirely on one's personal risk-aversion strategy and sensitivity, and how well one evaluates relative risk. I'd rather take a risk on something likely or even nearly certain to cause slight-to-moderate irritation, than on something that carries a VERY SLIM possibility of lethality, but that's my own personal evaluation of what risk I can tolerate and be comfortable with.

    Andria
     
  5. ST Dog

    ST Dog Super Member Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Nov 23, 2013
    Rocket City
    Relative risk and epidemiology is exactly what the book I mentioned earlier is about.

    They take a small absolute risk and compare it with an other small absolute risk, and suddenly you see big relative risk that is blow all out of proportion due to the overall low absolute risk.

    For some condition X, say group A has a risk of 0.02 and group B, that has a common activity C, has a risk of 0.09. Both are very small.
    But relative to A, B has a 4.5 higher risk.

    That then gets reported as participating in activity C is 4.5 times more likely to suffer from condition X.
    And activity C is call a major factor in condition X, so lets ban the activity.

    This is made even worse because activity C likely isn't the only difference in groups A and B.

    I wonder what the relative risk of a lightening strike is between being in a house or in an open field on a sunny day?
    I'd wager if that relative risk was handled like most health policy, we'd all be scared to go outside as I'm certain being outside is a major factor in being struck by lightening.
     
  6. AndriaD

    AndriaD Reviewer / Blogger Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Jan 24, 2014
    LawrencevilleGA
    Which gets back to the wisdom of moms in general, because no one would want it thought that their mother didn't teach them to come in from the rain. :D

    Andria
     
  7. Jman8

    Jman8 Vaping Master ECF Veteran

    Jan 15, 2013
    Wisconsin
    No strong disagreement, other than I would argue it is not so right to advocate for "should be avoided" given the nature of our opponent. Keep that opinion to yourself or be prepared to be touted by our opponents as aligned with their viewpoints, on vaping flavored eLiquid. It does strike me as potentially harmful to the cause for legal, open market vaping, to state this during a time of pending regulations.

    One can still publish their findings and assess risk without needing to say "should be avoided."
     
  8. ST Dog

    ST Dog Super Member Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Nov 23, 2013
    Rocket City
    Note, I said sunny day, nothing about rain.
     
  9. Kent C

    Kent C ECF Guru Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Jun 12, 2009
    NW Ohio US
    There's a difference in a personal suggestion to avoid what can be avoided and forcing regulation by gov't. Iow, the difference between 'should' and 'must'. That said, publishing findings for all to see, is best - then others can decide for themselves. If the evidence is clear, then the 'should' or 'should not' will be clear.
     
  10. Jman8

    Jman8 Vaping Master ECF Veteran

    Jan 15, 2013
    Wisconsin
    I still don't grasp this difference in wording that you point out. Dr. F. could just as well have said, "must be avoided" and meant exactly the same thing. If it is only personal suggestion, it would've come off the same. If Dr. F. were part of a scientific body seeking to rein in the industry, then words would carry equal weight as I understand both terms.

    And if it is personal suggestion, then just say, "I would suggest this be avoided by industry." Might not be seen as forceful, but that's the point I'm harping on.

    Not sure I agree here, and given the lack of long term studies on inhaling the alternative, I do not see the evidence as clear. Also, if going to publish findings, but not be completely forthright on which ones crossed the line and which ones didn't, then it does lead to what we have now where some consumers argue that all of them must now comply with the righteous position of "should be avoided."
     
  11. philoshop

    philoshop Ultra Member Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Sep 21, 2014
    geneva, ny, usa
    It's become quite apparent over these last 41 pages that the"'diacetyl issue" has in fact divided the vaping community to a certain degree. Regardless of how that wedge was started I can only imagine the antis and the naysayers grinning from ear to ear as they prepare to pound it deeper.
    It's important to remember that there is no longer any such thing as 'a little government regulation'. The government wants control over vaping so that they can either kill it or make a bunch of money from it, whichever they decide is better for them. Allowing them to 'help' in any way on this issue will end badly for those who truly want to decide for themselves.
     
  12. AndriaD

    AndriaD Reviewer / Blogger Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Jan 24, 2014
    LawrencevilleGA
    Excellent point. I would never tell anyone that they "should" avoid diketones and their ilk -- I say only that *I* avoid them, and why I do, even though the risk of hazard is so slim-to-unknown. Not everyone has to be so paranoid of their lungs as asthmatics and COPD sufferers.

    However, if I *am* speaking to someone who already suffers some reduction/restriction of their airways, I'd probably recommend avoidance, and those who struggle with this problem usually understand why it's a good idea; being unable to breathe is terrifying, but it's a theoretical construct to anyone who's never felt it; those familiar with the sensation are nearly always willing to do anything to prevent recurrence. Even if the worst-case scenario of lung destruction is so rare, reduction of lung capacity is no theoretical construct to those with asthma/COPD.

    Andria
     
  13. Kent C

    Kent C ECF Guru Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Jun 12, 2009
    NW Ohio US
    "Should" is a suggestion. "Must" is force - as in gov't regulation. As in, you must pay your taxes. You must make labels for your products. You're eliquid must be diketone-free.
     
  14. Jman8

    Jman8 Vaping Master ECF Veteran

    Jan 15, 2013
    Wisconsin
    Well now with the italics, I get how it works. (rolls eyes)

    Might want to check any dictionary definition on "should" because most (to really all) of what I have ever seen does not equal "suggestion." The only exception to this is when it is phrased as, "should you go to the store today, could you pick up some milk?" To which one might reply. "Must I go to the store?" And to which the response could be, "you should."
     
  15. Kent C

    Kent C ECF Guru Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Jun 12, 2009
    NW Ohio US
    Your out of context "examples" have no bearing on when someone says 'you should do something' vs. 'you must do something'.

    Should communicates a suggestion. Must communicates an order :facepalm:

    Difference Between Should and Must | Difference Between | Should vs Must

    “Should” is used to denote recommendations, advice..."

    “Must” is used to talk about an obligation or a necessity. It is used when people are compelled to do something."


    Examples:
    I can't believe the extent you must go to make yourself right.
    You should refrain from rolling your eyes at someone when it is you that is wrong on an issue.

    I should just put you back on ignore. :laugh:
     
  16. ST Dog

    ST Dog Super Member Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Nov 23, 2013
    Rocket City
    In the memos/responses I write on a daily basis at work, "should" is considered a suggestion/preference.
    "Must" and "shall" are required actions.

    From dictionary.com
     
  17. Jman8

    Jman8 Vaping Master ECF Veteran

    Jan 15, 2013
    Wisconsin
    My computer's dictionary:

    Look up on should: used to indicate obligation, duty, or correctness
    Look up on must: be obliged to; should

    If I type in "definition of should" in google, every dictionary on page 1 (i.e. all top hits) have the word obligation in there.
    If I type in "definition of must" in google, the ones that provide synonyms say "should" is synonymous to "must."

    If one truly wants to make a suggestion on a stated course of action, one goes with "could" or "may" or better yet, "I suggest."

    Dr. F. could have gone with, "The noted risks of using of diacetyl could be avoided by industry." I would see this as more aligned with science, and more authoritative. Leading to little dispute. "Should be avoided" is disputable and is the language of antis. I see this routinely from our adversaries.

    Dr. F. is not in a position to communicate an order. It is as if you are arguing that because Dr. F. didn't say, "I order the industry to avoid diacetyl" then his wording is only to be taken as a suggestion. While also ignoring all the disputes that have arisen since whereby fellow posters quote his wording (of should be avoided) and then either imply or state that 'according to science' (on our side) this is absolutely the correct approach going forward.

    "Should be avoided" sets him up as stating his opinion, and not adhering to scientific fact. Hence making the point less credible and the type of thing that one who wishes to be politically correct would state.
     
  18. AndriaD

    AndriaD Reviewer / Blogger Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Jan 24, 2014
    LawrencevilleGA
    Up till now, I was leaning toward the definition of should being a suggestion, but you have persuaded me. You're absolutely right; the 'should' in his construction does lead to all this hooraw -- here we are, after all. And how many of us responded well to the "suggestion" of "You should quit smoking"? My usual response was "you should mind your own business," even when it was my doctor making the "suggestion"; everyone else got something a bit less polite. :D

    It's one of those "weasel words," I think; it conveys the *idea* of must, without actually coming right out and saying it plainly.

    English can be so weird. :facepalm:

    Andria
     
  19. caramel

    caramel Vaping Master

    Dec 23, 2014
    The legalese word for something being mandatory is "shall".
     
  20. Kent C

    Kent C ECF Guru Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Jun 12, 2009
    NW Ohio US
    You're picking and choosing your definitions. Sure, they are similar according to use, which is why I posted the 'should vs. must' link to show what difference there actually is. That site says:

    "Both “should” and “must” are similar in meaning except that “must” is a much stronger word as compared to “should.”"

    "Similar" is not "the same as".

    I'm done here. Continue with your "dissertations".
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice