Big Brother finds stuff

Big Brother finds stuff

Social media. A rather quaint place. Filled with thousands of people from a variety of walks of life. You could be forgiven for thinking that social media is important, ‘cos it isn’t. Not in the least, but by that very same token it is important for Big Brother.

As I’ve written about before, researchers in the field of Tobacco Control absolutely adore social media as it gives them raw, unfettered access to a field of stuff that they know nothing about.

Stop Smoking Services & E-Cigs: What’s the Deal?

Stop Smoking Services & E-Cigs: What’s the Deal?

We’ve all seen the recent news about the lowest smoking prevalence on record and all that. Some quangos are of course claiming that this lowest rate is largely thanks to policies (obviously they mean bans and tax hikes among other ludicrous measures, such as banning smoking in your car) and plain packaging (which while passed hasn’t become a reality nationwide yet).

With a few exceptions, the elephant in the room hadn’t been discussed and that is of course the role that e-cigarettes have played. Which brings about another item. Stop Smoking Services (SSS). We’ve been told that the number of people going into these places is in decline (some areas more than others). Now you would think that with such a decline in SSS attendance, there would be a similar decrease in the number of people quitting smoking as in, the prevalence rate wouldn’t be the 16.9% it is now - rather it’d be close to the original 19.3% it was in 2012.

The WHO Report on ENDS/ENNDS

The WHO Report on ENDS/ENNDS

It’s been rather busy outside of my vaper-sphere recently which has unfortunately led to a lot of things slipping, including this post. Many of you are aware that the World Health Organisation recently released all the documents for the upcoming tax-payer funded shenanigans to be held in India for Conference Of Parties #7 (COP7). There’s a number of documents that are of interest, some of which I’ll write about here but the main interest at the moment is the originally named document FCTC/COP/7/11 ‘Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems and Electronic Non-Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS/ENNDS)’

Finding our Way

Finding our Way

Yesterday I had the pleasure of reading a Q&A between my friend Fergus Mason and David Goerlitz. Having seen the documentary film A Billion Lives, and having heard David on Smoke Free Radio with Dimitris last year, there wasn’t much in that interview that I wasn’t already aware of.

Still, it was worth a read if only to remind myself of just how the tobacco control industry is more about control then it is about reducing smoking, and it can quite easily be summed up in one line:

More Evidence that ANTZ are Grasping Straws

More Evidence that ANTZ are Grasping Straws

Once again, there is a headline sweeping the UK media channels - both print and radio - that is not only misleading, but is also downright dangerous. Many of the UK papers have led with the headline “Vaping is as bad as SMOKING”, which regular readers of this blog will know is simply not true. Vaping may indeed not be entirely risk free, but there are very few things (if any) in this world that are risk free. I suppose you could say, the greater the pleasure the greater the risk - but that doesn’t apply to vaping, it’s always been the odd one out really.

A Case of "Told You So"

A Case of "Told You So"

In a truly mind-bendingly terrifying moment, one of the key arguments used - particularly in the US - by the opponents of vaping has been gloriously ripped asunder. That argument is of course that The Children™ will use them and become “addicted” to nicotine. The thing is, there is a substantial portion of teens that vape without nicotine a statistic that is overlooked by the US tobacco controllers. You can imagine the shock and horror on their faces when they read that part of this study.

New Insanity in Tobacco Control

New Insanity in Tobacco Control

Every once in a while there is such utter ridiculousness that I simply cannot help but laugh. See, this is one of many reasons why I (like Dick Puddlecote) love ecigs. They have managed to throw the entire tobacco control industry into such frothing madness it is pure comedy. These budding researchers - seeking to make a name for themselves within the tobacco control industry - are analysing everything to do with ecigs in a bid to make the mantra “ecigs are bad mmmkay” more legitimate. As in, let’s make the ridiculous stance of the FDA, Australia and the EU the right one by doing untold amounts of utterly pointless trash that will later get cited by more ridiculous trash to make these nasty horrible ecigs go away.

EU Trolling Us?

EU Trolling Us?

The hypocrisy is rife within the EU (not such a great shock it has to be said), but it is such a glaring “we don’t know what the fuck we are doing” type that I simply couldn’t resist putting finger to key. Ya see, as any business knows, distance selling is one of many keys to success. More often than not, products and services are sold to other territories. This takes distance selling to a different pot. Cross-border. Businesses aren’t just having to apply local laws and so forth, once their product crosses an international border, it has to comply with the destination laws too.

Flawed Science for Flawed Policy

Flawed Science for Flawed Policy

I would say that this is a break from the norm, but I’d be lying. You see, as vapers, ex-smokers and current smokers (and even never smokers to some extent) we all know that the tobacco control science is little more than bits of paper trying to justify disproportionate restrictions, taxes and even bans on the things we enjoy doing.

I get it, some folk really don’t like us for our choices and they really don’t want us outside of their sphere of influential control. That’s really the reason for much of this pseudo-science. Those in power, seek power entirely for their own sake. They are not interested in the good of others, they are solely interested in power, pure power.

Raking the Coals

It seems there is no end to the shenanigans that a certain double-barreled researcher can get up to, especially when the majority of said research is (at least in part) funded by payouts from the Master Settlement Agreement. Something that should at least be mentioned (if only in passing) in the “disclosure” section of the paper. But then, why should it be necessary when a large proportion of funding from the National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health, and the US FDA Center for Tobacco Products is mentioned? Natch.