Vaping vs Smoking

[Kent C]

Beyond comprehension, frustrating how gullible people can truly be. One of my professors (quite a long time ago) had produced a paper that actually proved that the effects of 2nd Hand Smoke were no more dangerous than breathing in other types of airborne 'non toxic' substances. Like anything else too much of anything is never a good thing and can become harmful. He had Doctor's testimonials, Scientists and others that supported his work. He was not allowed to publish it. It was contrary to the message the Government and Health Agencies were trying to deliver. I will always remember him saying, people can see the smoke, they can smell the smoke so it is easy for them to identify it as something harmful. Unfortunately the things that will kill you are not the ones you can see. Then we were discussing the toxins that will kill you such as those that lurk in recycled air systems many others and no you can't see them, or smell them .. but I digress. What is it about Propaganda that leads people so blindly? I heard the 3rd hand smoke non-sense for the first time on the radio driving home from work (about a year and half ago, maybe 2?) and literally started cursing at the idiots on the radio for even allowing it on air. Just boggles the mind.

The carcinogenic aspect of 2nd hand smoke was proved to be a hoax before and after the 1993 press release of Carol Browner's EPA, found false in court and in appeal. But it still exists as claiming some 3,000 lives yearly It's as false as the smoking related deaths stat, that gets repeated by 'our expert' THRers as well.

 

[nicnik]

The carcinogenic aspect of 2nd hand smoke was proved to be a hoax before and after the 1993 press release of Carol Browner's EPA, found false in court and in appeal. But it still exists as claiming some 3,000 lives yearly It's as false as the smoking related deaths stat, that gets repeated by 'our expert' THRers as well.

It's about time I look up that stuff and read it. I'll put it off a bit in hopes that someone posts a link....

(The court stuff, that is. I've read some of the other debunkings.)

 

[Lessifer]

It's about time I look up that stuff and read it. I'll put it off a bit in hopes that someone posts a link....

(The court stuff, that is. I've read some of the other debunkings.)

I'll try to find the actual ruling, but here's an article about it:
Federal Court Rejects EPA Secondhand Smoke Study | Heartlander Magazine

ETA: I believe this is the actual ruling:
FLUE-CURED TOBACCO CO-OP. STABIL. v. U.S. E.P.A. | Leagle.com.

 

[nicnik]

I'll try to find the actual ruling, but here's an article about it:
Federal Court Rejects EPA Secondhand Smoke Study | Heartlander Magazine

ETA: I believe this is the actual ruling:
FLUE-CURED TOBACCO CO-OP. STABIL. v. U.S. E.P.A. | Leagle.com.

Thanks, Lessifer! Oughta be fun to read...

 

[nicnik]

I'll try to find the actual ruling, but here's an article about it:
Federal Court Rejects EPA Secondhand Smoke Study | Heartlander Magazine

ETA: I believe this is the actual ruling:
FLUE-CURED TOBACCO CO-OP. STABIL. v. U.S. E.P.A. | Leagle.com.

Interesting that the ruling came down in September 1998, then the MSA was signed November 1998.

That 2nd link is the 1994 ruling that refused FDA's request to throw out the lawsuit.

 

[Lessifer]

Interesting that the ruling came down in September 1998, then the MSA was signed November 1998.

That 2nd link is the 1994 ruling that refused FDA's request to throw out the lawsuit.

oops, I didn't read the second one, it just looked right.

I read another article about it that said that the ruling likely wouldn't have any effect on existing indoor smoking bans, but would make it less likely that anyone would win a lawsuit against the tobacco companies for damages from SHS.

Wonderful example of our legal system. Laws are put on the books, based on false knowledge, but then it's near impossible to have them repealed so we just perpetuate the lies.

 

[nicnik]

Interesting that the ruling came down in September 1998, then the MSA was signed November 1998.

I guess the ruling was really in July, 1998.

It got overturned on appeal in 2002, apparently:

The EPA Report on Second Hand Smoke (SHS) - The Facts

Fact: The EPA fought to have Osteen's decision overturned on technical grounds. They succeeded in 2002 on the narrowest of technicalities. The fourth circuit court of appeals ruled that because the report was not an official policy document Osteen's court did not have jurisdiction.

Fact: In their appeal the EPA did not answer a single criticism on the 92 page report, nor challenge a single fact put forth by Judge Osteen. Not one.

Secondhand Smoke: Tobacco Industry Attacks - no-smoke.org

In December 2002, a three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals threw out the lawsuit against the EPA. The judges ruled that tobacco companies cannot sue the EPA over its secondhand smoke report, because the report was not a final agency action and hence not subject to court review

.

 

[Lessifer]

I guess the ruling was really in July, 1998.

It got overturned on appeal in 2002, apparently:

The EPA Report on Second Hand Smoke (SHS) - The Facts


Secondhand Smoke: Tobacco Industry Attacks - no-smoke.org
.

And here I thought it was just found to be false, and then that fact was promptly forgotten by the powers that be. No, it was found to be false, then they got that ruling overturned, not because it wasn't false, but because it wasn't official policy and therefore didn't actually need to be true? Fantastic.

 

[Kent C]

It got overturned on appeal in 2002, apparently:

Yes. 'On the narrowest of technicalities'.... the facts brought out in the Osteen decision - that they cherry picked the studies used in the EPA's "metastudy" and that they used non-standard statistical practices is still true. It's the only way they could have gotten to the 1.0+ eval that said it was carcinogenic. This gives the full story of that:

http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/regulation/1993/7/v16n3-5.pdf

Long but well worth having that information and how the EPA junked the science on it. Similar stuff is being done on ecigs.

 

[skoony]

I read another article about it that said that the ruling likely wouldn't have any effect on existing indoor smoking bans, but would make it less likely that anyone would win a lawsuit against the tobacco companies for damages from SHS.

It has been my contention that if in fact second hand smoke was as harmful as claimed
the tobacco companies need not worry about civil litigation but,criminal negligence in a
court of law. I use this a a litmus test when it comes to so many things deemed dangerous
to the public. Today it appears the law is starting to catch up as apparent in the prosecution
of involving peanut butter contamination I believe.
Regards
Mike

 

[dbr_vape]

Effectively they have created a precedent to create Bans or Governance based solely on perception. Apparently, actual Scientific study is no longer necessary. Misinformation and Propaganda is the way to manipulate a society into conforming. The most horrifying part is that they succeeded. Of course Vaping will be vilified, and now they do not need to do anything to substantiate it at all. The only glimmer of hope is that we have (at least for now) a means to communicate and share information. Too bad we can't create our own Internet News headlines.

Oops, almost forgot. Thank-you for posting the links. I wish I could post them all over everything and everywhere. It's so exasperating

 

[Robino1]

Effectively they have created a precedent to create Bans or Governance based solely on perception. Apparently, actual Scientific study is no longer necessary. Misinformation and Propaganda is the way to manipulate a society into conforming. The most horrifying part is that they succeeded. Of course Vaping will be vilified, and now they do not need to do anything to substantiate it at all. The only glimmer of hope is that we have (at least for now) a means to communicate and share information. Too bad we can't create our own Internet News headlines.

Oops, almost forgot. Thank-you for posting the links. I wish I could post them all over everything and everywhere. It's so exasperating

It is seriously exasperating.

Until vaping came into my life, I bought into all the propaganda. Why would I even consider that the 'Health organizations' would lie about something so serious?

Then I started reading, watching, listening to both sides, and then coming to the conclusion that they did exactly that. Now we not only have to fight those organizations but also open newcomers eyes to what has happened/is happening in the past, present and future.

Educating those that are new to the scene takes patience and a boatload of information that we have gathered through the years. We Must remember that they haven't had the benefit of seeing all this unfold....as it happened.

That's why these threads are so important. Calling people, that are new to this info, trolls is NOT helping to educate. It just looks like we have nothing to back up our argument. Instead of doubting the validity of a member, post factual links that counter their stance.

We cannot make them read but you can be certain that some newbie will.

 

[r77r7r]

Yeah, I do apologize about calling this thread Dumb earlier Exchaner, it's just that members here spent much effort sorting thru the info for the truth.

 

[rokyo87]

I want to believe that vaping is a miracle for smokers but Governments/BP/BT don't want this from me... They want me to light up tobacco cigarettes...

 

[dbr_vape]

It is seriously exasperating.

Until vaping came into my life, I bought into all the propaganda. Why would I even consider that the 'Health organizations' would lie about something so serious?

Then I started reading, watching, listening to both sides, and then coming to the conclusion that they did exactly that. Now we not only have to fight those organizations but also open newcomers eyes to what has happened/is happening in the past, present and future.

Educating those that are new to the scene takes patience and a boatload of information that we have gathered through the years. We Must remember that they haven't had the benefit of seeing all this unfold....as it happened.

That's why these threads are so important. Calling people, that are new to this info, trolls is NOT helping to educate. It just looks like we have nothing to back up our argument. Instead of doubting the validity of a member, post factual links that counter their stance.

We cannot make them read but you can be certain that some newbie will.

I completely and totally agree.

 

[dbr_vape]

I want to believe that vaping is a miracle for smokers but Governments/BP/BT don't want this from me... They want me to light up tobacco cigarettes...

It is perplexing when you think about it. They go to extreme lengths to turn people against one another <smokers vs non-smokers> and then try to make smoking look better than Vaping. The smoking industry is in rapid decline which means tax revenue is going along with it. All the people that bought into the "Smokers are pariahs" syndrome are going to be crying a river when the same Propaganda and attacks are used against them. And they will be, the lines have been crossed, they have busted down the door of individual rights and freedoms. It is highly improbable they will ever be able to close that door again. The best we can do to counter any of it is work hard to share the information.

 

[rokyo87]

"Smokers are pariahs" syndrome

I bought this as a smoker and i felt guilty because i was poisoning people around me with second-hand and third-hand smoke... I can't believe it this is a lie... A lie from a Government... A lie against smokers... :-(

 

[Robino1]

I bought this as a smoker and i felt guilty because i was poisoning people around me with second-hand and third-hand smoke... I can't believe it this is a lie... A lie from a Government... A lie against smokers... :-(

And you are where I was two years ago.

Oops, three years ago.

Hopefully you will question most anything that comes from those that 'have our best interest at heart'. It has certainly made me look at things from more skeptical eyes.

 

[Lessifer]

And you are where I was two years ago.

Oops, three years ago.

Hopefully you will question most anything that comes from those that 'have our best interest at heart'. It has certainly made me look at things from more skeptical eyes.

It's a bit like being pulled out of the matrix, you can't go back in, even if you wanted to.

It makes me furious that OUR government turned children against their parents, for the sake of tax revenues.

 

[Robino1]

It's a bit like being pulled out of the matrix, you can't go back in, even if you wanted to.

It makes me furious that OUR government turned children against their parents, for the sake of tax revenues.

Do you remember the D.A.R.E. program years ago? I think that's when they realized it was possible to use kids in a propaganda fashion. Never mind that it didn't work well to keep kids off of drugs, it sure motivated parents though.