General principles debated, nothing new to learn

General principles debated, nothing new to learn

In case you’ve been asleep for most of this past week, Wales held the first reading of the ludicrously titled “Public Health (Wales) Bill” in the Senedd. Many were expecting a fairly inglorious climb down from the nutty Minister for Health and Social Services. At least, that’s how it has been reported by Auntie Beeb:

The decision this afternoon can be interpreted in two ways.

Some critics will view it an embarrassing climb down - and ask why did the health minister press ahead with the proposed ban in the face of significant opposition and unclear evidence.

Medicines for a Consumer Problem

Medicines for a Consumer Problem

There’s a problem that those in power want to solve. Or more to the point, they don’t want to “solve” it at all. They want to “control” it. That “problem” is smoking, which to my mind isn’t a problem at all. It’s a choice people make. Yes there’s an “addictive” side to it, yes there’s a big cost to it, and yes there are some risks associated with it. But you know what? I don’t care. If folk want to smoke than that is down to them. Their life, their choice end of story. Almost.

Guest Post: A Billion Lives

Guest Post: A Billion Lives

As the title says, this is a guest post written by Shannon Sparkles with some input from me, however the bulk of what follows originates from Shannon.

I’m really sad that I feel the need to write this, but it needs to be done.

When the team behind “A Billion Lives” posted the film’s new teaser Friday morning, I was elated. I was finally able to get a glimpse into the work that is sure to change the world.

The experience of vaping

The experience of vaping

It’s one of the hottest topics in public health right now. It’s divided scientists and researchers across the globe. It’s even divided the community on some aspects of it. Vaping. A consumer driven market that has enabled 2.6 million people (UK) to either reduce the harms of smoking or stop smoking full stop.

The question that rattles around in my head regularly is why is this topic so divisive and why are so many intent on heavily restricting it? To that end, I try to go back to basics, with a little help from some friends.

Them or Us

Them or Us

Earlier this week I had the pleasure of being able to attend the e-cigarette summit at the Royal Society. It was an eye-opening experience, not least of which the number of speakers there exalting the positives of vaping, but it wasn’t that that was the most eye-opening. There were some that were conspicuous by their absence, and no I’m not talking about the opponents of e-cigarettes.

At some point during the day, two blog posts were released (here and here) which prompted the Spock eyebrow from me.

E-Cigarette Summit: The Debate Goes On

E-Cigarette Summit: The Debate Goes On

“Much has changed since we ran the inaugural Summit in 2013, when calls for medicinal licensing and outright bans on e-cigarettes were dominant”.

Reading that in the introduction and welcoming statement in the e-cigarette summit programme highlights, at least in the UK, just how far things have come. When you have the likes of Professor Ann McNeill, Professor Robert West, Professor Linda Bauld, Professor Marcus Munafò, Dr Konstantinos Farsalinos, Professor John Britton, Professor Peter Hajek, Professor Ricardo Polosa talking about e-cigarettes folk sit up and listen. The list of names that gave talks is far longer. Including Clive Bates, Louise Ross, Lorien Jollye, Sarah Jakes, Professor David Abrams, Oliver Kershaw, Andy Morrison, the Department of Health represented by Alette Addison, Public Health England by Rosanna O’Connor.

Engaging the Professionals

Engaging the Professionals

Back in August I had the distinct pleasure of meeting Nicky from the Harrow Stop Smoking Service to talk about all things vaping. Talking about the devices, reasons for using them, differences, experiences and all that. It was a really good positive meeting and could quite easily have gone on for far longer than the time allotted.

The recent event was a heavily condensed version of that meeting with a guest speaker, Jessica Harding and myself. It was publicised as a ‘Stop Smoking Service Annual Update Meeting’ which would include the latest information on vaping, with an emphasis on the PHE Review. This post will include commentary from Jessica along with both our thoughts and impressions on the event and those who attended.

Indoctrinating the children

Indoctrinating the children

When it comes to anti-smoking campaigns and organisations one of the key mantras is “protecting the kids”, the ever-present “think of the children”. Trouble is, whenever an organisation says to policy makers “thinking of the children” it inevitably tugs on said policy makers heart-strings. Everyone wants their kids to grow up and lead good, healthy, normal lives don’t they? Let’s face it, I grew up to lead a relatively normal healthy life. I made choices along the way, some good and some not so good, it’s all part of this little thing called “growing up”.

Poxy Proxy

Poxy Proxy

Ever since the media kicked up a small storm over a 14-year-old having his vapouriser confiscated I’ve been thinking about this area. Of course, my own opinions are likely to differ from a lot of folks so feel free to take them or leave them.

As I mentioned at the start of the previous post on this:

I agree wholeheartedly that proxy-purchase should be allowed for existing smoking youth only. That is a given. If your kid smokes, I have no issue with an adult buying them a vapouriser. I’m more ambivalent towards proxy purchase if the kid in question doesn’t smoke but again, no real problem with it.

The Truth Shall Set Ye Fret

The Truth Shall Set Ye Fret

Surely it comes as no surprise at all to discover yet another troughing organisation suckling on the over-abundant cash-cow that is tobacco control, yet this one takes it to a whole new level of incredulousness.

Truth Initiative

You could of course be forgiven for thinking that this strapline is totally benign aimed to bring information to the people to enable them to make informed choices. Of course, when you see the very first page of their website, that little benign statement of “We are here to empower, not judge” goes straight out the window.