Gerry Stimson (UK, IHRA) on Tobacco Harm Reduction (e-cigs and snus)

[Tom09]

Haven’t read his name before, but Prof. Stimson appears to have been executive director of the International Harm Reduction Association (IHRA). Traditionally, IHRA has been mostly concerned with questions relating to illict drug use - but also kept an eye on alcohol and tobacco.
In this recent video, Stimson discusses the role of e-cigs (and snus) in the harm reduction framework.
[Link courtesy to Kate on vapers network.]

 

[JC Okie]

Wonderful video...sane, logical, honest. Cudos to Stimson!

 

[Petrodus]

Well ... KUDOS
This is an excellent example of a "Quality" informative video.

There are tons and tons of videos out there ... This one was
professionally done. Love the fact the speaker was over 30
and the scene ... outdoors in a relaxing setting with him
talking as if in a 1 on 1 conversation.

Very impressed with this "Professional" video ...
I'm not easily impressed !!

 

[rolygate]

Yes, a well-presented and sensible argument from a reasonable man.

What depresses me though is the widespread naivety of medical professionals. It seems they have never heard of regulatory capture; and they don't seem to realise the agenda of the pharmaceutical industry, who by and large control what goes on in the health field. Pharma will defend the status quo at all costs, in order to protect the huge sums earned from the drugs sold to treat sick smokers. Chemotherapy drugs, cardiac drugs, vascular drugs, COPD drugs and other treatments are a significant proportion of their income, and one they protect vigorously.

It's as if the medics haven't realised that the world's biggest criminal corrupters only have one aim in this area: to eliminate any effective methods of tobacco harm reduction, by using their legal arm within government if necessary.

 

[Petrodus]

I wonder if many in the medical profession, at the very least, suspect
the criminals are running the show ... but don't want to openly
discuss it, because there's little to nothing that can be done about it.

 

[rolygate]

It's one of those distasteful subjects that nobody talks about or even admits exists, until they are forced to come to terms with it - a process that is normally very painful, and delayed as long as possible, since the implications are so serious it appears to be something that cannot be dealt with.

And how many examples of that have we seen.

It will require some medical professionals of extraordinary courage to fight that battle. All I've seen is what you might call 'convenient blindness' - not to say institutionalised cowardice.

 

[Petrodus]

The public at large doesn't want to hear the ugly truth.
If the truth is forced on them ... They wouldn't believe it.

 

[TennDave]

Awesome video! I like where he touched on regulation and said it should be, or as he understood it, it would be "light."

 

[rolygate]

Yes, if that were true, it would be acceptable.

The only thing is that the FDA and MHRA act for the pharmaceutical industry; and where their interests are contrary to the interests of public health, pharma comes first. As a prime example, these agencies have fought a hard battle to have safer forms of nicotine delivery outlawed.

Their agenda is quite simple: defend pharma income at all costs. There is no 'light touch regulation' from someone who wants to kill you off as soon as possible. If there were to be such a thing, it would be introduced in order to create the classic wedge scenario: make it all look very reasonable and acceptable in Year 1; then once it has a solid and unchallengeable legal basis, in Year 2 or 3 start to turn the screws in order to make the products as unattractive, ineffective, and unavailable as possible.

Once again - their agenda is to remove all forms of consumer tobacco harm reduction.

A significant reduction in the number of smokers is incompatible with maximising pharma profits. The Sweden scenario is their ultimate nightmare and they are desperate to stop that spreading. With only around 8% of Swedish men now smoking (12% of the population averaged across male/female), pharma has the worst returns of any developed country there. Far too few people get sick from smoking or buy NRTs - Snus fixed all that. E-cigarettes are now looking as if they will be an even worse setback for pharma than even Snus is, with a 50% reduction in smoking looking increasingly possible - which is why ecigs are Pharma Enemy #1.

So while it was possible in the past to say the Sweden scenario was pharma's worst nightmare, it now looks as if ecigs will take that slot.

 

[Petrodus]

Mmmm ...
If this is this plan, then there isn't any power on earth that can stop them.
BP has more money than some countries AND they own the FDA.
The FDA will of course, follow the orders of their employer (BP).

Eliminate harm reduction to keep people smoking so BP can sell their wares.
The FDA will enact laws and will enforce them. No one cares about smokers anyway.

No money in healthy people - Its Business ... Nothing Personal


Considering the US is being herded down the path to socialism ...
This scenario is possible.

PS: Its not "4 more years" ... Its going to be "Ya haven't seen nothin' yet"

 

[NorthOfAtlanta]

Yes, if that were true, it would be acceptable.

The only thing is that the FDA and MHRA act for the pharmaceutical industry; and where their interests are contrary to the interests of public health, pharma comes first. As a prime example, these agencies have fought a hard battle to have safer forms of nicotine delivery outlawed.

Their agenda is quite simple: defend pharma income at all costs. There is no 'light touch regulation' from someone who wants to kill you off as soon as possible. If there were to be such a thing, it would be introduced in order to create the classic wedge scenario: make it all look very reasonable and acceptable in Year 1; then once it has a solid and unchallengeable legal basis, in Year 2 or 3 start to turn the screws in order to make the products as unattractive, ineffective, and unavailable as possible.

Once again - their agenda is to remove all forms of consumer tobacco harm reduction.

A significant reduction in the number of smokers is incompatible with maximising pharma profits. The Sweden scenario is their ultimate nightmare and they are desperate to stop that spreading. With only around 8% of Swedish men now smoking (12% of the population averaged across male/female), pharma has the worst returns of any developed country there. Far too few people get sick from smoking or buy NRTs - Snus fixed all that. E-cigarettes are now looking as if they will be an even worse setback for pharma than even Snus is, with a 50% reduction in smoking looking increasingly possible - which is why ecigs are Pharma Enemy #1.

So while it was possible in the past to say the Sweden scenario was pharma's worst nightmare, it now looks as if ecigs will take that slot.

I'm wondering if we haven't started some panic in the front offices in Big Pharma, the web is their worst nightmare as they can't control what is said or what is posted in the way of studies and surveys which are not so slowly putting the lie to their statements of doom about ecigarettes. It seems like getting the truth to some political types works as CASAA call to actions have been successful in getting ecigs removed from several bans and we are starting to see more positive or at least not negative news stories about them.

I think they made their biggest mistake when ecigs came out by thinking they would be no more effective than the crap they sell and by the time someone paid attention to it the cat was well out of the bag. There are just to many of us who smoked for decades, tried every way to quit many times over and picked up this silly looking plastic "cigarette" and found out it was possible to leave our 30, 40, 50 year "friend" behind and are breathing again.

It's kind of like Kudzu here in the south, if you hit it with weed killer as soon as you see it it can be controlled, leave it alone for a week and it takes over everything. I think they missed the easy stage and may have lost the war.

Not that we can back off, we must keep the pressure on them and talk, post, write emails and letters every chance we get. It's called grass roots and has been proven to work many times.

 

[Petrodus]

It's kind of like Kudzu here in the south, if you hit it with weed killer as soon as you see it it can be controlled, leave it alone for a week and it takes over everything. I think they missed the easy stage and may have lost the war.

Kudzu ...
Yeah, ya can't stop it ...
I remember many years ago, when living in Mississippi, when someone
came up with the brilliant idea to use Kudzu as ground cover along highways.
BIG MISTAKE ... Once it gets a foot-hold, there's nothing ya can do to kill it off.
It will grow over everything including burying trees under its green mat.

Today ... a number of southern states claim they are the Kudzu State


Hopefully, in time, our movement will "choke out" the opposition with
our overwhelming numbers.

 

[Bill Godshall]

I'm very pleased to see Gerry Stimson's new video, and I'll forward it to my large e-mail list.

I met Gerry in 2006 at the IHRA conference in Vancouver, where I urged Stimson and IHRA to join with us in advocating tobacco harm reduction products and policies.

But except for several tobacco harm reduction sessions (organized by TobaccoHarmReduction.org's Carl Phillips and Paul Bergen) at subsequent annual IHRA conferences, and for publishing a "Best Tobacco Harm Reduction Articles" about 7 years ago, the IHRA had done virtually no tobacco harm reduction advocacy.

 

[Bill Godshall]

I disagree with rolygate's doom and gloom posting about the FDA and MHRA.

The FDA failed miserably in attempting to ban e-cigarettes from 2009 to 2011, and they now realize that e-cigarettes, snus and dissolvables are here to stay.

I also strongly suspect the MHRA has abandoned trying to ban e-cigs in the UK.

Rather, I suspect that both the FDA and MHRA will propose many excessive and unwarranted regulations for e-cigarettes (while continuing to repeat false and misleading propaganda and nothing good about e-cigarettes).

That is why we must aggressively expose and oppose any excessive and unwarranted regualations when the agencies eventually propose regulations for e-cigarettes.

 

[DC2]

Not that we can back off, we must keep the pressure on them and talk, post, write emails and letters every chance we get. It's called grass roots and has been proven to work many times.

This is the message I wish we could get to every member of the entire electronic cigarette community.
Not just this forum, but all forums.

And even more importantly, get all vendors to keep their customers educated and informed.

Because there are far more people outside of these forums than there are inside of them.
And because it is in the best interest of the vendors, and their livelihoods, to do so.

 

[Petrodus]

The reason why many are not actively involved today in the fight is because
there isn't a sense of emergency as we experienced when the FDA was gunning for us.

No immediate specific danger threatening the movement. The threats are there, but
not in your face threats that could ban e-cig sales and thus our vaping way of life.

Some of us were here back in the days before the FDA lost their fight ... Tons of
members here and tons of enthusiasm. Today ... BT is in the game and e-cig stores
are opening left and right around the country. The FDA will come at us again and when
that happens things will heat up again ... But not to the degree we experienced during
the last fight with the FDA.

Many members that I remember back then ... are no longer here.
Burn out is just 1 reason.

Just my opinion