So. It is happening. As most of us have always thought. You will, of course, remember (at least for the UK) the chatter about disposable vapes started gathering momentum with some commentary from a Green MSP and now the current “Conservative” Prime Minister has decided that his Government is going to implement a variety of measures for “A smoke-free generation”.
It would seem that Sunak has been taking lessons from former Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair in targeting, what is now, a highly stigmatised portion of society (albeit a slowly dwindling portion, thanks - of course - to the various anti-smoker policies introduced over the years; many of which had little to no direct impact).
This story came to my attention recently which, as I’m sure you’ll agree, is just the tip of a very nasty iceberg. Y’see, the Scottish Green MSP mentioned in the last bout of reporting (Gillian Mackay MSP) is just but the last in a long line of antagonists seeking to effectively ban the humble disposable vape.
Join me as we discover just how deep this rabbit-hole goes.
Back in September, the Scottish Government - specifically the Health & Social Care department - published the results of a public consultation, snappily entitled “Vaping products - tightening rules on advertising and promoting: consultation analysis”.
Settle down folks, this is going to be a long one.
I’ve recently had a few thoughts in my head about nicotine. The supposed “devil drug” that is “more addictive than heroin” (according to ASH Scotland from 2013, and debunked here - I know, debunked before ASH came up with that ‘FactSheet’; that’s just how inept they are), and how, in light of the US debacle, there are now circulating rumours of a nicotine cap.
Another day, another study. Two actually. Though the first I was planning to cover is a meta analysis (which will have to wait), while the second is a vaping mouse study. As most of you will no doubt be aware, conducting experiments on mice is an age-old way of identifying possible links to humans.
However, in a large number of cases, the results identified in mice do not necessarily translate well across species to us homo-sapiens.
It’s been a while since I had a good look at some junk science. I kind of missed doing it. So, what better way to get back to it then with this steaming pile of festering dingo kidneys?
This study sought to assess: 1) pervasiveness of vaping or electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) use, 2) General understanding of information on vaping or e-cigarette use, 3) Prevalence and respondent awareness of smoking/vaping prevention programs, and 4) Awareness of the harmful effects of e-cigarettes.
In paper bought to my attention via Frank Baeyens, it comes as no surprise that, once again, tobacco control ‘research’ hasn’t got the faintest idea.
The paper, paywalled of course, grandly claims that users of Sub-Ohm Devices (SODs) are daily exposed to similar amounts of carbon monoxide as cigarette smokers. Yes, you read that right.
Depending on use patterns and device operation, users of SOD devices may be exposed daily to similar levels of CO as are cigarette smokers.
It has been a quiet time on these pages, not through lack of things to write about, but more a lack of time to actually put finger to key.
Y’see, this campaign was released a few days ago - just in time for the typical “New Year Resolution” shenanigans - and of course, the accompanying video received rather a lot of attention.
The imagery above, and the accompanying video, bring back stark memories of the “black lung” propaganda; images of which can still be seen on cigarette packs as part of the gore-porn that adorns them.
As is the norm, things have been super-hectic here at Facts Towers so I have, unfortunately, missed an awful lot of stuff going on. I’ve also been absent from social media; mostly for good reason - it bloody annoys me.
Those of you that remember, The Freedom Association published some very interesting information about the various local authorities and their current smoking/vaping policies. Most of the councils are backwards looking, ignoramuses.
An interesting blog post dropped into my inbox this week that got me thinking. This particular post came in response to a mini Twitter thread (which I have seen, and somewhat agree with). I’m not going to link to either as I’d prefer this post to stand alone rather than be seen as a response to either, although it could be considered a response.
As noted in the blog post, the upshot of the mini-thread was thus:
For those of you most familiar with the modus operandi of the EU institutions, this won’t come as much of a surprise. Back in March 2017, the Commission published the results of a public consultation on whether or not e-cigs should be subject to a tobacco-style excise.
Naturally, the overwhelming answer was no. With the largest group of respondents being individuals. Naturally, being the EU, they weren’t particularly satisfied with such a response and all went quiet.
