I have just published a new question and answer (Q & A) resource on nicotine science and policy. It is available as a page accessible from the top menu of this blog and also at this address: Nicotine science and policy Q & A. I am hoping to keep it up to date… the […]
|
|||||
WHO’s anti-vaping propaganda is so bad it discredits the whole organisation On 20 January 2020, the World Health Organisation published a question and answer page on “ENDS” (Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems) or e-cigarettes and vaping products for nicotine as they are more commonly known: E-cigarettes: how risky are they? (current live version) Update […] 
An empty and feeble critique misses its target and adds nothing This paper turned up in my weekly search of PubMed. Invalidity of an Oft-Cited Estimate of the Relative Harms of Electronic Cigarettes. Eissenberg T, Bhatnagar A, Chapman S, Jordt SE, Shihadeh A, Soule EK. Am J Public Health. 2020 Feb;110(2):161-162. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2019.305424. […] I did a Twitter chat with the Campaign for Safer Alternatives on the typical objections raised to tobacco harm reduction. For those interested in the responses but who missed the live chat or got as confused as I did in trying to follow threaded answers, here is the chat as it unfolded over 15 […] Vaping risk compared to smoking: challenging a false and dangerous claim by Professor Stanton Glantz
This blog examines an extraordinary claim by Professor Stanton Glantz that the US public is right to believe that vaping is as harmful as smoking and that science is now catching up with public opinion. This claim is profoundly and dangerously false, and it demands a challenge. This is a 13,000-word review looking in detail at Professor Glantz’s 700-word commentary and its supporting citations, examining thirteen claims that form the basis of the overall claim relating to cancer, heart attacks, stroke and respiratory illness, impact on smoking cessation and population smoking. […] |
|||||
Recent Comments