Vaporware: why we still don't know if e-cigarettes are safe - The Verge

[Petrodus]

Seems Aaron is no longer interested in our opinions or questions.

You can just imagine my surprise (sarcasm)

 

[DC2]

Seems Aaron is no longer interested in our opinions or questions.

Well, he's not really a vaper.

He's just a part-time vaper, who doesn't feel his life has been saved.
Saving your life kinda makes one feel a bit more "invested".

 

[aubergine]

The article was poorly conceived and very misinforming, but if we want to be forcefully persuasive rather than just polarizing it might be wise to counter politely with well-articulated facts (as Elaine and Rolygate and some others did) rather than with insults, sarcasm or emotional venting. THEN go punch the wall.
Very frustrating when you've been following this stuff for years and know a lot about both health issues and propaganda campaigns, and have a deep personal investment in outcome here, but the truth is, most people haven't and have little motivation to. I thought Aaron was trying to be receptive, and frankly I'd have stopped inviting comments, too. How is that helpful?

 

[Renolizzie]

The article was poorly conceived and very misinforming, but if we want to be forcefully persuasive rather than just polarizing it might be wise to counter politely with well-articulated facts (as Elaine and Rolygate and some others did) rather than with insults, sarcasm or emotional venting. THEN go punch the wall.
Very frustrating when you've been following this stuff for years and know a lot about both health issues and propaganda campaigns, and have a deep personal investment in outcome here, but the truth is, most people haven't and have little motivation to. I thought Aaron was trying to be receptive, and frankly I'd have stopped inviting comments, too. How is that helpful?

Aubergine - I was thinking that some encouragement would be good. He's trying to write something he thinks is well balanced. He just doesn't know that he is not doing good at that but he is trying and I think he could be pointed in the right direction.

 

[aaronsoup]

Apologies for the late reply; I've been travelling and busy with other projects.

@aaron

There are a whole bunch of problems with your article, but the most obvious faults are the headline and initial tone, which intend to scare or worry people about non-existent issues; and the repetition of the FDA fraudulent press release, which has caused us unending problems.

The facts of the FDA's lab tests are not in dispute - indeed, they point out just how safe e-cigarettes are.

1. They found that any carcinogens present are at exactly the same level as those in NRTs (if you don't know what these are, please look it up). These amounts are, in the words of Prof Rodu (the world authority on the oral pathology of tobacco consumption), a level which is "a million times lower than conceivably harmful to health". The FDA conveniently forgot to mention this.

Instead of pointing these facts out, the FDA lied about them by misrepresenting their importance in a press release which had little or no relation to the factual content of the lab tests. The FDA are liars, and to repeat their lies does not improve a journalist's reputation - it makes them look a fool.

Re: the FDA tests, I feel I was quite clear that the tests were insufficient in determining the safety of e-cigarettes — regardless of the actual results, to test a tiny, random selection of cartridges from a pair of manufacturers just isn't how you go about things.

In terms of the results / the presence of carcinogens in the cartridges, I state the FDA's results as the FDA reported them, and then quote CASAA as pointing out that the toxicity level given by the FDA is similar to regular nicotine replacement products. The facts are laid out in the text.

As I stated in a previous reply, I'm looking into the bigger picture of pharma / government relations with a view to writing a report in the future. A few users have sent me some very interesting links that I've looked through / will look through. Thanks very much for all of your opinions / advice regarding the article and future research — it's been a great help. I will carry on checking up on this thread periodically in addition to my general lurking around the forums.

 

[aaronsoup]

I'm not sure how these two answers to Aaron's questions (via email) were interpreted to mean that CASAA's agenda is to defend the e-cigarette industry.

The text was actually edited to better represent CASAA's aims shortly after publishing. The article now reads:

"An advocacy group called the "Consumer Advocates for Smoke-Free Alternatives Association" (CASAA) has tasked itself with educating the public on the benefits of e-cigarettes."

Hope that sits a little better with you.

 

[kristin]

The text was actually edited to better represent CASAA's aims shortly after publishing. The article now reads:

"An advocacy group called the "Consumer Advocates for Smoke-Free Alternatives Association" (CASAA) has tasked itself with educating the public on the benefits of e-cigarettes."

Hope that sits a little better with you.

MUCH, MUCH, MUCH better! Thank you!

Please note, for future reference, that CASAA was "born" in the e-cigarette community, but it quickly evolved into a tobacco harm reduction advocacy group, not just an "e-cigarette advocacy" group.

Our mission statement:
"Our mission is to ensure the availability of effective, affordable and reduced harm alternatives to smoking by increasing public awareness and education; to encourage the testing and development of products to achieve acceptable safety standards and reasonable regulation; and to promote the benefits of reduced harm alternatives."

So you will find that a lot of other tobacco alternatives are discussed and advocated on our web site and blog, as well.

 

[NorthOfAtlanta]

I think you can sum up CASAA's attitude about tobacco in three letters, ABC, anything but cigarettes. Any other form of tobacco use is safer than smoking and inhaling tobacco parts processed with added chemicals rolled up in a paper tube.

 

[Vocalek]

The text was actually edited to better represent CASAA's aims shortly after publishing. The article now reads:

"An advocacy group called the "Consumer Advocates for Smoke-Free Alternatives Association" (CASAA) has tasked itself with educating the public on the benefits of e-cigarettes."

Hope that sits a little better with you.

As Kristin said, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH better! Thank you!