notblowingsmoke

New PHE review, divisive media reports

Late last night various tweets were being posted by the media with previews of today’s papers front pages from i, Daily Telegraph, Daily Mirror and The Times. All four were based on an impending publication from Public Health England (PHE), but as is the norm for the media, the headlines didn’t actually reflect the contents of the publication.

I’ll admit to being a little wary of today’s news based on those previews alone, despite assurances from Lorien Jollye that the report from PHE was actually a very very good thing. As with anything related to vaping and smoking I’m very cynical and the preview headlines all had a common theme which sadly led me to believe the wrong thing. (more…)

The fool factor, misleading statistics

Why is it that whenever we get media attention on vaping from anywhere in the world, a quick dive around into the “study” behind it generally doesn’t match up to the headlines? Or should it be, why on earth are media outlets and the journo hacks not asking the right questions whenever they get their grubby little mitts on a story? (more…)

Stop smoking, think of the cheeeldren!

A common refrain from many in the tobacco control camp. They want you to stop smoking because, well kids. They also don’t want you to stop smoking by vaping because, well kids.

State funded fake charities aimed at “promoting the stop smoking message” are no different. Just recently ASH wanted the UK Government to force tobacco companies to pay a levy to “fund further tobacco control efforts” and we all know how that’s turned out in the US don’t we? (more…)

Statistical sleight of hand

Another day and yet another “study” that has been totally skewed to the rafters in order to push a regulatory agenda. It really can be depressing, what makes it even worse is when organisations that state “Our vision is to eliminate the use of nicotine and tobacco products by youth and young adults.” get it so badly wrong. You could be forgiven for thinking that the stats were only slightly misinterpreted, but no. These wonderful folks deliberately co-joined two completely different sets of statistics to get the results they were looking for. (more…)