Discussion in '#BANTHIS' started by Vape Fan, Sep 22, 2019.
I'm guessing that fairly certain death was the other option
Well, with them pushing people to smoke rather than vape, I figured no one was really worried about that!
What’s with Grosse Point? It’s really straight or something?
Grosse Point is a really upscale ritzy area. Million dollar plus homes n stuff. Little Johnny would NEVER get involved in anything like vaping. It's also very close to the city and the parents like to keep their contrast with that.
Like something like vaping THC would never happen there! Lol Well, that explains why the kid got that transplant, though. An inner city kid would never have gotten it.
I’m just tired of them lumping our vaping in with the stuff these kids are doing. And states still want to ban for “the kids”. :barf:
Grosse Point Blank...great Cusack movie!
That’s the only place I’ve ever heard of it.
Puerto Rico maybe ban all vaping?
So all these countries want back handlers from BT?
They prolly only get the panic THC vaping deaths news on vaping from the US.
Consider how much news we get from PR and what kind?
Those who control information control the world.
So they don’t have a clue about kids and street carts! Sigh.
True, I’ve no idea what goes on in PR. It just bums me out that countries are jumping on the bandwagon to ban vaping. I thought it might just be here going mental.
Last week, Dr. Brad Rodu, Professor of Medicine at the University of Louisville and long-time supporter of tobacco harm reduction, posted an update on his blog to a months-long story about a study with dangerously inaccurate conclusions regarding vaping and heart attacks. Dr. Rodu (and now a dozen other well-known and credible people in the tobacco and nicotine research and policy space) is calling out the study for erroneously concluding that switching to vaping from smoking increases one's risk of heart attack. The inaccuracy of the conclusion can be linked to data being fabricated by the study’s authors, Drs. Stanton Glantz and Dharma Bhatta.
As a matter of transparency, study authors routinely disclose limitations of certain study protocols and data sets. But making up claims out of whole cloth is generally frowned upon. When evidence of such a fabrication is brought to the attention of journal editors, corrections must be published and, many times, the article in question needs to be retracted. Considering the consequences of discouraging people who smoke from switching to low-risk alternatives like vaping, this particular study deserves the full boat of remedial action, including retraction and possibly censure for the authors.
Taking Dr. Rodu’s suggestion in last week’s blog post to heart, CASAA is encouraging our members to make contact with the editors at The Journal of the American Heart Association (JAHA) urging them to formally retract the Glantz-Bhatta heart study.
A timeline of events and reporting on this issue follows below, along with a link to our engagement that you can use to easily send a message to JAHA editors.
Bhatta, Glantz - “Electronic Cigarette Use and Myocardial Infarction Among Adults in the US Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health.” (June 5, 2019, JAHA)
Glantz (Blog) - “More evidence that e-cigs cause heart attacks, this time from PATH.” (June 6, 2019)
Rodu - Letter to JAHA Editors (July 11, 2019)
Rodu - Letter to JAHA Editors (July 18, 2019)
Jayne O’donald (USA Today) - “Study linking vaping to heart attacks muddied amid spat between two tobacco researchers.” (July 19, 2019)
Jacob Sullum (Reason) - “Anti-Vaping Researchers Claim E-Cigarettes Cause Heart Attacks Before Smokers Try Them.” (July 19, 2019)
JAHA Response (Oct. 30, 2019)
Brad Rodu (Tobacco Truth) - “Opportunity For the World-Wide Research Community: Spend 15 Minutes to Counter Falsified Research in the Journal of the American Heart Association.” (Nov. 13, 2019)
Andrew Gelman (Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science (blog)) - “Controversies in vaping statistics, leading to a general discussion og dispute resolution in science.” (Nov. 27, 2019)
Jacob Sullum (Reason) - “8 Months Later, This Journal Still Hasn't Corrected Its Study Implying That E-Cigarettes Magically Cause Heart Attacks Before People Use Them.” (Feb. 7)
Brad Rodu (Tobacco Truth) - “Indefensible Inaction by JAHA Editors on Obvious Research Misconduct.” (Feb. 7)
Juul bought ads on websites for Cartoon Network, Nick Jr, and Seventeen to promote its addictive e-cigarettes to children and teenagers, lawsuit claims
Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey and her office conducted a year-long investigation into Juul's marketing practices
Wednesday, they filed a lawsuit against the market-dominating company
It alleges the company bought ads on websites such as Cartoon Network, Nick Jr and even study assistance sites
At least one Juul representative coached someone on bypassing age checks in an email exchange and 80% of its email list failed age verification, the suit says
Public health experts blame the trendy, discreet Juul for fueling the youth vaping epidemic that has one in four high school students using e-cigarettes
bye bye Juul.
If true then yes, that's reprehensible. Not to mention unbelievably stoopidd.
The one thing that remains constant is that our community was no part of this debacle. Well, almost no part.
That won't stop the loathsome bureaucratic babysitters from making us pay for it though.
The companys that sold the adspace to Juul should be sued as well if true.
In my area of broadcast TV, I haven't hardly seen any anti vaping commercials in general, compared to a short time ago.
But one that promotes ditching Juul runs often.
Trump Administration Proposes to Remove FDA’s Authority to Regulate Tobacco Products
Thought we already had that one here somewhere?
In any case it is in a proposed Budget thing and will for sure not be passed by congress before May 12.
And I suspect that it would require other law changes by congress.
I only did a minimal search to see if it was posted. Assumed it was, just like
Altria's Juul investment goes up in smoke
I'm sure congress is so wrapped up in the past, that they don't have time to look at the future or work to get anything accomplished
Seen any ads on TV that promote ditching ads on TV yet?
Sometimes there's as much time on commercials as there is movie or whatever. When it's like that, I stream.
Let’s hope so. Although since they’re Altria owned, they could just come back under a different name!
If they just took off the BP ads, it would be fine!
If the product does get FDA approval it will survive. however Juul per sie will likely not.
If you've got Netflix, watch "The Pharmacist"
Yeah, I always hate it when I'm watching ads for like 10 minutes till suddenly it interrupts with yet another 5 minute soap opera.