Results 1 to 2 of 2
Like Tree3Likes
  • 3 Post By Old Dog

Thread: Jane Brody turns up the NYT’s lies about THR, e-cigarettes, etc.

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Melbourne's leafy outer East
    Posts
    3,656

    Jane Brody turns up the NYT’s lies about THR, e-cigarettes, etc.

    Carl V. gets stuck into another ignorant "health expert"

    Brody’s actively damaging lies start after that, as she concludes her discussion of how not enough has been done to reduce smoking with an attack on the one recent innovation that has dramatically increased cessation:


    Electronic cigarettes are being promoted by some as a way to resist the real thing. E-cigarettes, invented in 2003 by a Chinese pharmacist, contain liquid nicotine that is heated to produce a vapor, not smoke. More than 200 brands are now on the market; they combine nicotine with flavorings like chocolate and tobacco.

    Setting aside the first common misconception (e-cigarettes were invented at least as long ago as the 1960s and the current form was invented by an American in the 1990s), how clueless do you have to be to say they contain “liquid nicotine” (rather than a very diluted nicotine solution) and that there are only 200 brands? Ok, so far it is just illiterate, but not harmful.


    But their contents are not regulated, and their long-term safety has not been established. In one study, 30 percent were found to produce known carcinogens.

    Not regulated — just like the vast majority of the (largely useless) cessation methods she recommends in her post. Not established — as opposed to the wonderful long-term safety of the approach her husband used, which was to repeatedly fail in his attempts to quit smoking until (according to her) smoking finally killed him. Seriously, is she even reading her own prose? And don’t even get me started on the NYT’s supposed expert health reporter falling for the “produce known carcinogens” silliness (hey guess what, Jane, 100% of humans tested produce known carcinogens).


    Dr. Frieden said that while e-cigarettes “have the potential to help some people quit,” the method would backfire “if it gets kids to start smoking, gets smokers who would have quit to continue to smoke, gets ex-smokers to go back to smoking, or re-glamorizes smoking.”

    Yes, and it would also backfire if it caused a resurgence of smallpox, triggered a nuclear war, or was a prelude to an invasion by space aliens (as I have speculated it might be — have you seen some of those mods?). Too bad we do not have an institution in society whose job it is to ask questions of government flacks, like “so, is there any reason to believe that is a real risk?”
    Jane Brody turns up the NYT’s lies about THR, e-cigarettes, etc. | Anti-THR Lies and related topics

  2. #2
    AVF Regular
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Off grid, quietly hermity, NW Tas
    Posts
    6,476
    so, is there any reason to believe that is a real risk?

    This goes into my armory of things.


 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4
Copyright © 2019 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0
All times are GMT +11. The time now is 11:50 AM.