Jump to content

lindsayfox

VT Member
  • Posts

    31
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by lindsayfox

  1. Yes, but in this case "guilty until proven innocent". The media pretty much throws anything they can at e-cigs and expect us to prove them wrong. Is that fair?

    I've used an analogy known as the "Russell's Teapot" - sound familiar? Well, basically it says that the anti-e-cig crowd should be the ones providing solid evidence to support their claims against e-cigs. It's a bit long but I think it calls for a great debate: *Link removed by admin*

    I wrote a summary and rebuttal on the debate, in case anyone doesn't want to sit through the whole thing: *Link Removed by Admin*

    And if you really want to get to the bottom of the story, listen to the VP Live segment here: http://soundcloud.com/vp-live/the-fda-and-rj-reynolds-are

  2. There was an interesting debate on HuffPost on March 27, 2013. If you haven't watched it yet, check out the video here

    Participants: Dr. Michael Siegel (The Rest of the Story), Dr. David Abrams (Legacy For Health), Cynthia Hallett, Dan Henry, Gregory Conley (CASAA), and Katherine Mangu-Ward.

    Both sides made some interesting points. Dr. Siegel came on top with his strong points, no surprise there.

    The host made a pretty good point: the "burden of proof" lies with the people claiming that e-cigarettes are dangerous. Do you agree or disagree?

  3. Recently, the media has been putting a lot of pressure on e-cigarettes. They claim these devices to be "unsafe" and threatening to our society. I wrote an (affiliate link removed)which feeds off of many recent studies by the FDA, Dr. Siegel, NCBI, etc. to help fight these untruthful claims published by the media.

    I need your help and contribution to improve on this debate and to help the newcomers understand that e-cigarettes are not as bad as the media claims them to be.

    What are some of the recent claims you've heard about the safety of e-cigarettes? What do you think would make a good argument which would help the general public appreciate e-cigarettes more? any other thoughts?

    Thanks in advance.

    -Lindsay

  4. In what seems to be a very short sighted move, employees at the Leeds criminal courts have been asked to prevent people from smoking electronic cigarettes while in the building. The rationale employed was that it will lead to wrong behaviors even though the court acknowledges that e-cigarettes are not harmful to health in any way.

    In September of this year, we saw a similar ban on e-cigarette, where a few Asian countries decided to ban e-cigarettes from train stations and shopping malls. Though their reasoning behind the ban was that they find it unsafe for people to smoke e-cigarettes in crowded places. I personally don't see the danger of holding an electronic device that produces vapor in any location regardless of how crowded it may be.

    Anti-smoking groups had only criticism for this move. Surprisingly, pro-smoking groups shared the opinion. After all, it is widely known that e-cigarettes are extremely effective because they contain enough nicotine to deal with cravings.

    What this particular rule illustrates is that there is a lot of confusion about electronic cigarettes; the sad fact is that a lot of people have no idea that this product can help them quit the habit with a great deal of ease. This lack of knowledge is sure to have a negative effect on public health because it will subvert people’s efforts to stop smoking.

    The Yorkshire Evening Post carried a detailed story on this subject which you can read in detail here: http://www.yorkshire...s-ban-1-5063327

    -Lindsay

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines