Who do the WHO think they are?

[PapaBloog]

Anyone remember Michael Moore's movie about the riots in Seattle because of the corruption of World Health Organization? Get a load of this crap - I think I've found out what's causing my elevated blood pressure!

Wednesday, December 01, 2010

World Health Organization Wants Electronic Cigarettes Taken Off the Market; Does Not Consider Them Legitimate Tool for Smoking Cessation


The Conference of the Parties to the World Health Organization's Framework Convention on tobacco Control does not believe there is evidence that smoking cigarettes is any more dangerous than using electronic cigarettes, wants these devices taken off the market, and does not consider them to be a legitimate way to quit smoking, according to its report on electronic nicotine delivery systems.

The report concluded that "Claims that these products have health benefits, reduce harm, or can be used to aid smoking cessation should be prohibited until they are scientifically proven." This means the World Health Organization does not believe there is evidence at the present time that electronic cigarettes are any safer than regular cigarettes. Which is another way of saying that WHO does not believe there is evidence to support the assertion that smoking is any more dangerous than vaping.

The report also demanded that e-cigarette manufacturers prove the safety and efficacy of these devices through clinical trials prior to the approval of these products, meaning that electronic cigarettes would have to be taken off the market (at least in the United States) and would most likely never again see the light of day (given the cost and time it takes to obtain approval of new drugs or devices).

Furthermore, the report makes it clear that WHO does not consider quitting smoking via electronic cigarettes to be a legitimate form of smoking cessation. This reaffirms an earlier WHO statement that "the World Health Organization (WHO) does not consider it [electronic cigarettes] to be a legitimate therapy for smokers trying to quit."

The Rest of the Story

 

[mistinthewoods]

I don't think that they would have that opinion if it wasn't paid for. It's not hard to find the evidence to dispel those beliefs of theirs. Just ask any of the tens of thousands of people who have quit smoking by using ecigs and ask them how they're feeling.

 

[trouble2k]

"does not believe there is evidence that smoking cigarettes is any more dangerous than using electronic cigarettes"

Then, why should they care!? Smoke cigarettes or vape on an e-cig? It's all the same to them. Even if it was the same, and we all know it's not, then maybe they should at least put one ounce of common sense into their little mixture of lies and progaganda. At least make their claims sound somewhat legitimate by adding in the reduced risk of burning down homes and starting other fires. I consider that reducing harm, don't you?

What amazes me is that there are actually people out there who will believe this load of cr*p.

 

[MitchellBeans]

Don't you guys realize? Its obvious that we, the common folk, are simply too dull and do not know what is good for us, so a government agency has to decide for us! They are really smart!

 

[stefon]

If they can't tax it...we can't have it.

 

[REGGAEGEEK]

Who thinks the WHO is an actual "health organization" anyway? More like the "Wealth Hostage Organization", Union Mafia.

 

[tobarger]

What amazes me is that there are actually people out there who will believe this load of cr*p.

Sadly, they don't call them sheep for nothing.

 

[tobarger]

I don't think that they would have that opinion if it wasn't paid for.

Of course there is big money behind it.
eg. Tobacco/Pharmaceutical

 

[Troutbum]

I didn't see the Moore film, but remember the riots. I'm pretty sure it was the WTO and not the WHO.
No matter really. They are all full of crap.

 

[judybr]

I went and read the info on the links and found this one comment makes some sense:

"WHO does not discount the possibility that the electronic cigarette could be useful as a smoking cessation aid. The only way to know is to test."
This was in 2008 I think.

I know this would be difficult to do but even if we could obtain some kind of stats from the people that frequent these forums maybe we could submit evidence of harm reduction. I noticed that there are contacts listed on the 2008 comment but don't know if they would still be current.
As a group that knows what we are accomplishing with our own health, maybe others here that know and understand stats and compiling evidence on just health improvement using vaping, could make up some kind of stats list that could be used as evidence of health improvement with these PV's.

If we don't stand up for ourselves as vaporers we will be treated just like the previous smokers we were(and some still are). We can gripe till doomsday but not taking some kind of action is the worst thing we can do. We have already learned that as smokers that have been treated like 2nd hand citizens for years.
Just a thought anyway.
Judy

 

[BCB]

CASAA has compiled information from vapers about their improved health. Go to the CASAA website. This information is available and convincing.

 

[PapaBloog]

I didn't see the Moore film, but remember the riots. I'm pretty sure it was the WTO and not the WHO. No matter really. They are all full of crap.

Whoops, my bad - you're right WTO, WHO, all the same - big-monied organizations attempting to tell us what to buy and do.

 

[BuzzKill]

WHO = World Harm Organizers LOL !

 

[throatkick]

As with anything new, it leaves the door open to studies, counter studies, bias, money and the whole political process which is tainted with those serving more sinister causes than most would think.

How freakin' hard is it to get 1000 people, give them a PV and have them vape their heads off for year? I am over simplifying and exaggerating to make a point obviously. Ultimately, the reason I am ...... at this is because, the way things are going, I am starting to realize that we will have to find out the truth on our own. It is evident that anything they have to say can't be trusted, regardless of whether or not we like their final conclusion.

In times when intellectual honesty is more valuable than gold, all I can say is, they have chosen to mess with a feisty crowd

 

[BuzzKill]

There are some limited studies starting to take place now , there is a link here somewhere for one back east .



News Archive



The Public Health Case for Electronic Cigarettes - Hit & Run : Reason Magazine

 

[PapaBloog]

There are some limited studies starting to take place now , there is a link here somewhere for one back east .

News Archive

The Public Health Case for Electronic Cigarettes - Hit & Run : Reason Magazine

I am awaiting the actual Boston University report from Siegel - don't want to plunk down the $30 for the first run copy - interesting, in the second link:

Thus far, none of the more than 10,000 chemicals present in tobacco smoke, including over 40 known carcinogens, has been shown to be present in the cartridges or vapor of electronic cigarettes in anything greater than trace quantities. No one has reported adverse effects, although this product has been on the market for more than 3 years....

Talk about the "grapevine effect" - what, cigs now have 10,000 chemicals? When I first checked - it was 4,000 then this grew to 7,000, and now 10,000? Does anyone REALLY know what's in an analog?!? And, only 40 of the original 59 chemicals are known carcinogens?