If they know then its probably some potentiating interaction or synergistic interaction that either makes the Nicotine like 200X more addictive or is bad for your health (Or other such side effect) and the gubermental types would be down on them hard like a grand piano dropped off the Sears tower.... I don't buy into the notion that all tobacco execs are monsters or demons with so few scruples that they all don't care if their customers die young-- If they all were then none of them would have even tried to produce a reduced harm cig in the first place.
So - are we getting it or are we not - nicotine
- Thread starter trog100
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
If they know then its probably some potentiating interaction or synergistic interaction that either makes the Nicotine like 200X more addictive or is bad for your health (Or other such side effect) and the gubermental types would be down on them hard like a grand piano dropped off the Sears tower.... I don't buy into the notion that all tobacco execs are monsters or demons with so few scruples that they all don't care if their customers die young-- If they all were then none of them would have even tried to produce a reduced harm cig in the first place.
Dvap: Thank you so much for your research. I won't pretend to clearly understand everything you did, but I get the general idea and I really think you are onto something! It very well may be THE answer. I am concerned however, that the FDA will seek even tighter restrictions because they might deem the MOAIs left in as a drug. I would of course see this as I do nicotine, it is a drug, but a commonly used one. I think the antis would squeal to high heaven that we are now using the ecig as a drug delivery device! But, it is likely the only way to make the PV an effective device for many. I agree that this needs to be done in the beginning, because anything changed in the liquid is likely to meet even more opposition.
Does anyone think a liquid manufacturer may pick up on this idea? Or are you going into production, Dvap? LOL
Does anyone think a liquid manufacturer may pick up on this idea? Or are you going into production, Dvap? LOL
There are MAOIs in tea, and lots of plant foods in fact; and a normal part of brain chemistry. It's no big deal in terms of regulation, just what was in the tobacco, minus all the bad stuff.
There is something of the dihydrogen oxide, fear of long chemical names going on!
Even NRTs should be composed 'correctly' and will then be much more effective.
That's what we all want, isn't it?
Greater efficacy; works for more people, and nearly everyone feels they can vape less.
Let's not forget, one of the main concerns about e-cigs, besides are they safe, is do they work?
So, a change for the better? Absolutely!
There is something of the dihydrogen oxide, fear of long chemical names going on!
Even NRTs should be composed 'correctly' and will then be much more effective.
That's what we all want, isn't it?
Greater efficacy; works for more people, and nearly everyone feels they can vape less.
Let's not forget, one of the main concerns about e-cigs, besides are they safe, is do they work?
So, a change for the better? Absolutely!
Last edited:
Phillip Morris already did 
Anyhow a really good and mostly balanced article was published in 2005 by the LA Times... A google cached copy is here; The Mystery of Philip Morris' Nicotine Inhaler - Los Angeles Times
The ANTi's response to BT's development of cleaner nicotine was here GLOBALink: Philip Morris Develops Accord, A New "Low-Smoke" Cigarette Brand BTW this is also their stance on e-cigs. Bunch of horses rears if you ask me.
It's not that the tobacco companies want to feel more virtuous... Its more that they really do care through a combination of the fact that customers buried 6 feet deep in the ground can't purchase their products, some either personally use the product or have relatives whom do, and some really do actually give a hoot about thier customers.
Anyhow has anyone looked at the particle size of the Nicotine instead of the MOAIs?? The Health NZ study showed we were getting Nicotine into our blood- but only 10% of what we inhaled was getting tthere Vs. what was puffed from a traditional cig.
It could be a combination of that + another chemical, other than nicotine, in the tobacco that is the cause.
Warming straight tobacco soaked in glycerin or PG and inhaling it then measuring Nicotene levels (Eg; the Snus vaping) could give the answer....
Anyhow a really good and mostly balanced article was published in 2005 by the LA Times... A google cached copy is here; The Mystery of Philip Morris' Nicotine Inhaler - Los Angeles Times
The ANTi's response to BT's development of cleaner nicotine was here GLOBALink: Philip Morris Develops Accord, A New "Low-Smoke" Cigarette Brand BTW this is also their stance on e-cigs. Bunch of horses rears if you ask me.
It's not that the tobacco companies want to feel more virtuous... Its more that they really do care through a combination of the fact that customers buried 6 feet deep in the ground can't purchase their products, some either personally use the product or have relatives whom do, and some really do actually give a hoot about thier customers.
Anyhow has anyone looked at the particle size of the Nicotine instead of the MOAIs?? The Health NZ study showed we were getting Nicotine into our blood- but only 10% of what we inhaled was getting tthere Vs. what was puffed from a traditional cig.
It could be a combination of that + another chemical, other than nicotine, in the tobacco that is the cause.
Warming straight tobacco soaked in glycerin or PG and inhaling it then measuring Nicotene levels (Eg; the Snus vaping) could give the answer....
Ianan - too many things to pick up on here! So I hope you will quietly do some more reading
Just mention this one point (again): nicotine is one of many alkaloids; some alkoloids are (act as) MAOIs. Nicotine and the MAOIs in tobacco are not two completely different things, they are of the same family (alkaloids).
Just mention this one point (again): nicotine is one of many alkaloids; some alkoloids are (act as) MAOIs. Nicotine and the MAOIs in tobacco are not two completely different things, they are of the same family (alkaloids).
What's so funny about that is I fully recall when I started rolling my own some 15yrs back. I was thrilled that the things would go out if un-attended for a few minutes compared to the tailor-mades burning as though there was an accelerant in 'em. Would enjoy reading through a few reports re. the naturally occuring MAOI's if I could find something written for a layman.
Kin there are time your articles leave me so far behind it's nothing short of sad. This most recent one, pizza analogy is great, is a great read. The simple guy, me, followed what you presented.
I agree with IANAN that the execs aren't necessarily monsters, their just accomplished business people. As I'm reading through this morning and formulating my replies to ya'll it occurs to me that being the good business folks they are possibly explains BT's "success" with NRT's. They knew full well going that they wouldn't work, nicotine only, but hey public we're trying. And the analog sales keep on keepin' on. My turn for a light bulb over my head...
They already do frankie, those silly twits
Whatever works to keep me from smoking! I am finding an almost hedonistic pleasure from the snus though..... Macchiato, ahhhhh macchiato
Kin-- I bring this up, and I did read DVap's early reply to the 10% mark, as this is what was in this report; http://www.healthnz.co.nz/DublinEcigBenchtopHandout.pdf
They also have some publications on how fast the e-smoke hits us Vs. regular smoke and BP's product- the Nicotrol Inhalar... It is here; http://www.healthnz.co.nz/ecig_effect-2.pdf
The Health Nz Ruyan reports also hypothesis, as we are, that MOAI's may be part of the equation here... I am curious though why PM looked at particle size though and I don't think it's any mistake that the Eclipse gets that hot and has slightly elevated CO levels. There has to be a reason why the Marlbro has the tmax of 14.3 minutes but the E-cig has a tmax of 19.4 minutes...
Hmmmm.... Wonder if Kava (Easily obtained) and/or Passion Flower extract while vaping would curb the craving 100% so I could kick tobacco???
They also have some publications on how fast the e-smoke hits us Vs. regular smoke and BP's product- the Nicotrol Inhalar... It is here; http://www.healthnz.co.nz/ecig_effect-2.pdf
The Health Nz Ruyan reports also hypothesis, as we are, that MOAI's may be part of the equation here... I am curious though why PM looked at particle size though and I don't think it's any mistake that the Eclipse gets that hot and has slightly elevated CO levels. There has to be a reason why the Marlbro has the tmax of 14.3 minutes but the E-cig has a tmax of 19.4 minutes...
Hmmmm.... Wonder if Kava (Easily obtained) and/or Passion Flower extract while vaping would curb the craving 100% so I could kick tobacco???
Last edited:
Summary of FDA Analyses
Three different electronic cigarette cartridges with the same label were tested and each cartridge emitted a markedly different amount of nicotine with each puff. The nicotine levels per puff ranged from 26.8 to 43.2 mcg nicotine/100 mL puff.
One high-nicotine cartridge delivered twice as much nicotine to users when the vapor from that electronic cigarette brand was inhaled than was delivered by a sample of the nicotine inhalation product (used as a control) approved by FDA for use as a smoking cessation aid.
If FDA results are accurate then we are getting more nicotine that we realize.
Three different electronic cigarette cartridges with the same label were tested and each cartridge emitted a markedly different amount of nicotine with each puff. The nicotine levels per puff ranged from 26.8 to 43.2 mcg nicotine/100 mL puff.
One high-nicotine cartridge delivered twice as much nicotine to users when the vapor from that electronic cigarette brand was inhaled than was delivered by a sample of the nicotine inhalation product (used as a control) approved by FDA for use as a smoking cessation aid.
If FDA results are accurate then we are getting more nicotine that we realize.
Harmine for sure is in tobacco;
Naturale sources for this include; Passion Flowers, Harmal (Plant), Caapi, Syrian Bean-caper, Oca, and Puke weed (Indian Tobacco).
A relativity easy to come by source of natural MOAI however is in Kava- It contains Desmethoxyyangonin.
No doubt about it- there is nicotine in the vapor and in the carts... the question is how much is being absorbed into bloodstream....
Is there another substance in tobacco smoke that would increase absorption?
Does the particle size of the vapor effect absorption rates (Both speed and amount going into the blood)?
In addition what are the effects of the MOAIs as far as how the nicotine effects our bodies (eg; does it boost the effect, increase the addiction, etc etc).
I'll not sugar-coat my opinion here...
The anti's have their heads so far up their asses that they're seeing daylight.
They are right, to a point. Once they push beyond that point, as many of them do, they quickly degenerate into sanctimonious jerk-offs.
Ianan,
I'm not demonizing BT execs. lol BT is one of the largest in Washington bringing in way more $ to coffers (no pun intended) than most. Laws in the 1930's were envoked to protect BT. They were meant to be irreversable because our country was founded so greatly on tobacco. In the 1990's the FDA tried them on and almost won in court. A 5/4 decision.
BT is a very protected entity. How many companies are allowed to make human consumables without listing thier ingredients and are known to cause cancer?
They are in business to make money. Make a product people prefer, want or need more than another. They just don't have to tell how. Actually, once a yr to the gov under a high confidentiality agreement.
They admit to taloring the product for the best or certain desired effects. Some effects they want to eliminate. Smashed tomatoes on crackers with cheese whiz isn't the best pizza.
Kin is right, there is so much reading to do. I'm not sure anyone can read it all.
You mention new plants now which do have MAOI's and effects, some psychoactive.
IMO better to find what you really desire, need, before jumping around other plants with totally diff alkaloid combinations.
I'm not demonizing BT execs. lol BT is one of the largest in Washington bringing in way more $ to coffers (no pun intended) than most. Laws in the 1930's were envoked to protect BT. They were meant to be irreversable because our country was founded so greatly on tobacco. In the 1990's the FDA tried them on and almost won in court. A 5/4 decision.
BT is a very protected entity. How many companies are allowed to make human consumables without listing thier ingredients and are known to cause cancer?
They are in business to make money. Make a product people prefer, want or need more than another. They just don't have to tell how. Actually, once a yr to the gov under a high confidentiality agreement.
They admit to taloring the product for the best or certain desired effects. Some effects they want to eliminate. Smashed tomatoes on crackers with cheese whiz isn't the best pizza.
Kin is right, there is so much reading to do. I'm not sure anyone can read it all.
You mention new plants now which do have MAOI's and effects, some psychoactive.
IMO better to find what you really desire, need, before jumping around other plants with totally diff alkaloid combinations.
Anyhow - Dvap was asking earlier if they studied the MOA Inhibitors and Nicotine and there is quite a bit of research;
Monoamine Oxidase Inhibition Dramatically Increases the Motivation to Self-Administer Nicotine in Rats -- Guillem et al. 25 (38): 8593 -- Journal of Neuroscience
Inhibition of Monoamine Oxidases Desensitizes 5-HT1A Autoreceptors and Allows Nicotine to Induce a Neurochemical and Behavioral Sensitization -- Lanteri et al. 29 (4): 987 -- Journal of Neuroscience
Transient behavioral sensitization to nicotine bec... [Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 2003] - PubMed result
Quit a bit more actually...
Tobacco's MOA inhibitors are harmala alkaloids... They are found in the plants I mentioned except Kava (Kava has a different family of MOAI).... All of them can be found in US herbal supplement stores ... Kava and Indian Tobacco have the most documented risk of the supplements.
Oh yeah and tobacco, unadulterated, has MOAI and is psychoactive.
Monoamine Oxidase Inhibition Dramatically Increases the Motivation to Self-Administer Nicotine in Rats -- Guillem et al. 25 (38): 8593 -- Journal of Neuroscience
Inhibition of Monoamine Oxidases Desensitizes 5-HT1A Autoreceptors and Allows Nicotine to Induce a Neurochemical and Behavioral Sensitization -- Lanteri et al. 29 (4): 987 -- Journal of Neuroscience
Transient behavioral sensitization to nicotine bec... [Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 2003] - PubMed result
Quit a bit more actually...
Tobacco's MOA inhibitors are harmala alkaloids... They are found in the plants I mentioned except Kava (Kava has a different family of MOAI).... All of them can be found in US herbal supplement stores ... Kava and Indian Tobacco have the most documented risk of the supplements.
Oh yeah and tobacco, unadulterated, has MOAI and is psychoactive.
Last edited:
I agree, frankie1 and Kin, that if Dvap's finding is the true missing link and manufactures can see the logic in revising their liquids or, at least, adding a line of "enhanced" liquids, it would be wise to get to market before the ecig becomes any more mainstream, due to higher scrutiny from FDA if added after the fact ( as we all know will come). The biggest problem I see here is how it would be presented. At present the ecig, while not marketed as an NRT, really is the most effective NRT out there. On the other hand, with alkaloids present to reproduce the psychological effect of analogs the addictive nature prevails and therefore probably forever retain it's listing in the "Banned" arena. I hope I don't sound nervous. I'm not, I just seem to flinch more these days. Hey olderthandirt, I'm glad you got a picture of those black helicopters, they only circle my house at night.
And, IANAN, Dvap, Vape and Kin, I forgot to post this earlier, but I am also taking 25mg/day Passion Flower. Can't say it's hurt. I feel a little more enthusiasm for breathing, but still no drive, don't wanna get out of bed, still can't poop.
Amazing how just not smoking a cigarette can effect a guy. I'd give those BT and FDA boys a piece of my mind, but I just don't feel like it right now. 
Maybe tomorrow. 
Back on topic...I care less if I am getting any nicotine from e-cigs or not since it allowed me to leave analogs behind. For me, that is the bottom line. If anyone trying to quit analogs cannot do so with the e-cig, there is a series of videos by premier forum member Tropical Bob who shows how you can satisfy your nicotine cravings for pennies on the dollar. Vaping, snus, nasal snuff and other nicotine sources are potential schemes you can use to kill your tobacco habit.
Another MOA Article NIDA NOTES - Tobacco Smoke May Contain a Psychoactive Ingredient Other Than Nicotine
Looks like they were also looking at this in 1996 ... quit odd as the patches and gums were approved in 97... I wonder if they knew in 97 that the products they were turning out would have been ineffective? That would be real nasty now wouldn't it...
Looks like they were also looking at this in 1996 ... quit odd as the patches and gums were approved in 97... I wonder if they knew in 97 that the products they were turning out would have been ineffective? That would be real nasty now wouldn't it...
Just back from a space flight?
While a drum solo is ok for a while, give me the whole band. And without the packaging.
Last edited:
There;s the old saying that the regulators say not to get in the liferaft in case it has a hole. That's not the only absurdity; there are just as many boneheads addicted to the idea of nicotine as the be all and end all, don't want to fix the hole with the plug sitting right next to it. Head. Brick wall.
Last edited:
I'd feel overall better if the alkaloid extract was characterized by a good GC/MS analysis. What I've done only represents what a competent (I hope) chemist can achieve with extremely modest means and a will to try to do something that makes a positive difference.
When I mixed up the extract, I mixed it up 400 mg to 14.4 mL final volume in PG/VG. This gave 14.4 mL of presumably 27.8 mg/mL alkaloids in 50:50 PG/VG. I know this because I made physical measurements, I weighed the extract and I measured the volumes.
This presumed concentration gives me a means to evaluate how much of the extract is actually alkaloids. Using a nicotine titration, and assuming that the other alkaloids will behave like nicotine in the titration (they won't individually, but on average, they should), the closer the determination comes to 27.8 mg/mL, the less likely any non-alkaloid is present.
Let's say the extract is half alkaloids and half non-alkaloid junk that I really don't want. I weighed out for 27.8 mg/mL. If the titration says only 13.9 mg/mL, then I have a serious problem in that half of the extract is something other than tobacco alkaloids. I purified for alkaloids, and I don't want anything else. Fortunately, as you'll see in a moment, this 50% nightmare screw-up scenario did not happen.
Since the amount I have is so little, I only determined 1 mL of the finished e-liquid, and used all the precision I could muster. The result of the titration is that the liquid determined to 27.4 mg/mL. Due to the uncertainty of measurement, this makes it indistinguishable from the concentration (27.8 mg/mL) predicted by weights and volumes. So the liquid, on average, behaves like a a mono-alkaloid base with a molecular weight right around 162. The extract I obtained is essentially pure tobacco alkaloids, the majority (perhaps 90%) being nicotine.
Here's what it looks like when tobacco alkaloids are separated from the rest of the tobacco. I would describe this tobacco alkaloid mix as a copper brown liquid of exceptional clarity (I.E. no cloudiness whatsoever). You're looking at 0.42 mL in an approximately 2 mL vial. This is the material that was mixed with USP PG and VG to produce the ~28 mg/mL whole tobacco alkaloid (WTA, if you require an acronym) e-liquid.
One needs to be careful with this stuff. Undiluted, as pictured here, it could kill a full-grown person perhaps 8 times over, not a sport for amateurs:
My thanks to Exo for hosting this image for me.
Pictured here, I believe, is why we smoke and why the plain nicotine foisted upon us by big pharma to the tune of billions? in sales for patches, gums, lozenges, dissolvables, you name it are such miserable failures. We don't smoke for nicotine alone, we smoke for this. It happens to be largely (~90%) nicotine, but not entirely nicotine.
Is this liquid harmless? Of course not. But not pictured in this vial is most everything in tobacco that kills people when burned and inhaled.
Pictured below is everything in tobacco that does kill people. This is the amount of tobacco required to produce the 0.42 mL of purified alkaloids pictured above. This is 25 grams, around 25 cigarettes worth. Now since analogs only deliver 10%, it would take around 10 times the amount pictured here, 250 grams (~12 packs) of tobacco smoked to actually get the alkaloids pictured above into your system.
Repeat thanks to exo for hosting.
So Anti's, what do you say? If somebody is absolutely unable to break the tobacco alkaloid addiction (you heard me, tobacco alkaloid addiction, not just nicotine!), what would you have us do? Quit or die? How about something between with a significant harm-reduction versus inhaling tobacco combustion products? This tiny amount of liquid, properly diluted in USP propylene glycol, USP glycerin, or a mixture of the two and delivered via a personal vaporizer, can likely keep a hopelessly addicted smoker from turning to cigarettes for perhaps 7 to 14 days. What do you say? Don't start with what you think "ought to be" in your idealized world, we've heard that nonsense, and it doesn't help anything but your sense of self-righteousness. Start with what "is".
Here's the problem, the worst of you are puritanical radicals. You cannot be reasoned with. It's not about harm reduction, it's about your quest to impose your will on others and stamp out tobacco use at any cost. "Don't do it or anything that looks remotely like it, you weak, character-flawed smokers!", you say.
Perfectly rational policy such as harm reduction is unacceptable, in your view it makes the totally unacceptable more acceptable. It makes your little brains explode, and you'll twist logic and facts to your agenda, spouting noble words out of one side of your mouths, while spreading lies out the other side hoping that well-intentioned policy makers will be too lazy, politically cowardly, or scientifically ignorant to see your wrong-headed disrespect for science and bizarre pseudo-scientific claims for what they are: Unsupportable lies marketed for consumption by the lazy policy-makers you hope to influence to uncritically repeat your lies with "force of authority". You market lie upon lie, with the intention that if one lie doesn't get traction, maybe another will. Ultimately you fail because what you are selling is bull****. Policy-makers and the public are not quite, as lazy, ignorant, and callous as you need them to be. In short, you are doomed to fail, and you'll just have to be content to condemn as many people as you can to an early death.
It's a good thing you people don't have it in for automobiles. Seat belts, air-bags, and crash-test safety ratings would really piss you guys off. You'd market the assertion that the only acceptable means of transportation is walking (oh, and you've have your charts, graphs, and data to "prove" it). But short of a total prohibition on automobiles (along with anything that might get a person from point A to point B without having to walk), only a car that explodes into a hellish fireball on the slightest impact would be grudgingly tolerated.
You people are, in short, a piece of work. Not only would you forbid people on a sinking ship access to the life-boats, you would shoot the lifeboats full of holes to force them to remain on the sinking ship.
Hell needs a special place for .......s like you.
We do need to engage those among the anti's who are not resistant to reason, and we've seen examples of anti's who are not blindly opposed to harm-reduction. We still must realize that the radical kooks aren't sitting still, and probably have it in for the non reason-resistant anti's.
.
When I mixed up the extract, I mixed it up 400 mg to 14.4 mL final volume in PG/VG. This gave 14.4 mL of presumably 27.8 mg/mL alkaloids in 50:50 PG/VG. I know this because I made physical measurements, I weighed the extract and I measured the volumes.
This presumed concentration gives me a means to evaluate how much of the extract is actually alkaloids. Using a nicotine titration, and assuming that the other alkaloids will behave like nicotine in the titration (they won't individually, but on average, they should), the closer the determination comes to 27.8 mg/mL, the less likely any non-alkaloid is present.
Let's say the extract is half alkaloids and half non-alkaloid junk that I really don't want. I weighed out for 27.8 mg/mL. If the titration says only 13.9 mg/mL, then I have a serious problem in that half of the extract is something other than tobacco alkaloids. I purified for alkaloids, and I don't want anything else. Fortunately, as you'll see in a moment, this 50% nightmare screw-up scenario did not happen.
Since the amount I have is so little, I only determined 1 mL of the finished e-liquid, and used all the precision I could muster. The result of the titration is that the liquid determined to 27.4 mg/mL. Due to the uncertainty of measurement, this makes it indistinguishable from the concentration (27.8 mg/mL) predicted by weights and volumes. So the liquid, on average, behaves like a a mono-alkaloid base with a molecular weight right around 162. The extract I obtained is essentially pure tobacco alkaloids, the majority (perhaps 90%) being nicotine.
Here's what it looks like when tobacco alkaloids are separated from the rest of the tobacco. I would describe this tobacco alkaloid mix as a copper brown liquid of exceptional clarity (I.E. no cloudiness whatsoever). You're looking at 0.42 mL in an approximately 2 mL vial. This is the material that was mixed with USP PG and VG to produce the ~28 mg/mL whole tobacco alkaloid (WTA, if you require an acronym) e-liquid.
One needs to be careful with this stuff. Undiluted, as pictured here, it could kill a full-grown person perhaps 8 times over, not a sport for amateurs:
My thanks to Exo for hosting this image for me.
Pictured here, I believe, is why we smoke and why the plain nicotine foisted upon us by big pharma to the tune of billions? in sales for patches, gums, lozenges, dissolvables, you name it are such miserable failures. We don't smoke for nicotine alone, we smoke for this. It happens to be largely (~90%) nicotine, but not entirely nicotine.
Is this liquid harmless? Of course not. But not pictured in this vial is most everything in tobacco that kills people when burned and inhaled.
Pictured below is everything in tobacco that does kill people. This is the amount of tobacco required to produce the 0.42 mL of purified alkaloids pictured above. This is 25 grams, around 25 cigarettes worth. Now since analogs only deliver 10%, it would take around 10 times the amount pictured here, 250 grams (~12 packs) of tobacco smoked to actually get the alkaloids pictured above into your system.
Repeat thanks to exo for hosting.
So Anti's, what do you say? If somebody is absolutely unable to break the tobacco alkaloid addiction (you heard me, tobacco alkaloid addiction, not just nicotine!), what would you have us do? Quit or die? How about something between with a significant harm-reduction versus inhaling tobacco combustion products? This tiny amount of liquid, properly diluted in USP propylene glycol, USP glycerin, or a mixture of the two and delivered via a personal vaporizer, can likely keep a hopelessly addicted smoker from turning to cigarettes for perhaps 7 to 14 days. What do you say? Don't start with what you think "ought to be" in your idealized world, we've heard that nonsense, and it doesn't help anything but your sense of self-righteousness. Start with what "is".
Here's the problem, the worst of you are puritanical radicals. You cannot be reasoned with. It's not about harm reduction, it's about your quest to impose your will on others and stamp out tobacco use at any cost. "Don't do it or anything that looks remotely like it, you weak, character-flawed smokers!", you say.
Perfectly rational policy such as harm reduction is unacceptable, in your view it makes the totally unacceptable more acceptable. It makes your little brains explode, and you'll twist logic and facts to your agenda, spouting noble words out of one side of your mouths, while spreading lies out the other side hoping that well-intentioned policy makers will be too lazy, politically cowardly, or scientifically ignorant to see your wrong-headed disrespect for science and bizarre pseudo-scientific claims for what they are: Unsupportable lies marketed for consumption by the lazy policy-makers you hope to influence to uncritically repeat your lies with "force of authority". You market lie upon lie, with the intention that if one lie doesn't get traction, maybe another will. Ultimately you fail because what you are selling is bull****. Policy-makers and the public are not quite, as lazy, ignorant, and callous as you need them to be. In short, you are doomed to fail, and you'll just have to be content to condemn as many people as you can to an early death.
It's a good thing you people don't have it in for automobiles. Seat belts, air-bags, and crash-test safety ratings would really piss you guys off. You'd market the assertion that the only acceptable means of transportation is walking (oh, and you've have your charts, graphs, and data to "prove" it). But short of a total prohibition on automobiles (along with anything that might get a person from point A to point B without having to walk), only a car that explodes into a hellish fireball on the slightest impact would be grudgingly tolerated.
You people are, in short, a piece of work. Not only would you forbid people on a sinking ship access to the life-boats, you would shoot the lifeboats full of holes to force them to remain on the sinking ship.
Hell needs a special place for .......s like you.
We do need to engage those among the anti's who are not resistant to reason, and we've seen examples of anti's who are not blindly opposed to harm-reduction. We still must realize that the radical kooks aren't sitting still, and probably have it in for the non reason-resistant anti's.
.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
