Stan Glantz attacks e-cigarette industry because thousands of vapers sent comments to FDA

[tommy2bad]

Look, the problem is simple ANTZ see smoking as a problem to be cured or prevented and as nicotine is the cause of smoking then it becomes the target for their ire.
This coincidental suits both pharma, who like the fact that nic gets treated as a medicine and the tobacco companies who have less competition for their product short term. Long term they know that they can afford to meet any restriction on alternative products.
It's not a conspiracy or plot to kill us all, it just lazy, self interested and self referencing thinking.

 

[Petrodus]

Quoting Kristin (Link)

Circular logic the ANTZ use:

ANTZ: No proof e-cigarettes help with smoking cessation.
E-CIG USERS: But we've quit smoking.
ANTZ: No you haven't really, you still use nicotine.
E-CIG USERS: So, there is no smoking cessation unless we quit nicotine?
ANTZ: Yep.
E-CIG USERS: That means the drug therapy for smoking cessation is actually treating nicotine addiction, not just quitting smoking alone?
ANTZ: Exactly.
E-CIG USERS: So, if they say "helps you quit smoking" but not "treats nicotine addiction" then they can't be making "therapeutic claims" because they aren't claiming to treat nicotine addiction.
ANTZ: (fingers in ears) Lalalalalalalala.....

____________________

Regardless of what flag they waive ...
The ANTZ have an agenda
Their ultimate goal is to eradicate even the memory of smoking
from the face of the planet.
Believe It OR Not

 

[Petrodus]

Big Question ...

What if the ECF received an electronic petition
signed by 10,000 ANTZ informing us we should
encourage all e-smokers to stop using e-cigarettes
and go "Cold Turkey" OR use BP products.

How would we view the Petition ??

 

[CES]

pretty much the same way they'll view ours...

It'd be nice if we could educate the ANTZ....but our best bet is educating people who's minds aren't made up yet.

 

[Petrodus]

Typical ANTZ (or FDA official) when confronted with the Truth

 

[FloridaNoob]

I do believe you are the one that actually misses the point. No one has said that e-cigarettes address or cancel nicotine addiction. They simply are an alternative to smoking. By your own logic a person who starts chewing tobacco or dipping is engaging in therapeutic actions. e-cigarettes are an alternative to smoking, and lesson the risks of the user to harmful side effects of cancer and other conditions by inhaling smoke from tobacco leaves. However, e-cigarettes do not supply a treatment for nicotine addiction, nor does anyone claim that said therapeutic benefits arise. By your logic if person addicted to caffeine, who switches from diet soda to regular soda to avoid the damaging effects of artificial sweetener is engaging in same therapeutic actions and the soda companies should have to bring their sodas before the FDA for strict trials and regulations. If your goal is to make people healthy and stop the smoking of tobacco, then why do you try to force people back towards tobacco? Because those of us who have switched to e-cigarettes to lessen our risks of cancer and other harmful effects, will be forced to go back to smoking. I believe your narrow view point will cause more deaths than save lives. If your viewpoint is that for every 7 smokers a non-smoker dies. Then why can you not see that for every 7 vapors 8 people live? Why do you hate us so much that you would rather see us smoking and dead, than use e-cigarettes and living better? Alas, I suspect you won't allow this comment to be posted, but if you do I look forward to seeing you try to justify your stance of I must quit completely something I have been doing for 20 years prior to e-cigarettes, or die from smoking.

I left the above comment on his blog. Not sure he will approve it. Who knows.

I honestly think that some regulation would be good. I think that there should not be any radio/TV ads associated with PV devices. I think there should be strict child proof caps and practices for making e-juice to insure out health and the quailty of the items we ingest via vapor. This might stop a couple of the mom and pops who don't have the facilities to make sure they adhere to good practices. However, I don't think that would be a bad thing. I mean you don't want someone giving you 68mg nic e-juice with a label that says 16mg bacause they don't know what they are doing. I also think their should be stiff penalties for anyone caught selling to a minor. After all we are not talking about johnny getting a pack of smokes from the store, but getting $50USD pv device from a store or online vendor.

 

[NorthOfAtlanta]

Typical ANTZ (or FDA official) when confronted with the Truth

Much to intelligent looking too belong to either group.

 

[kristin]

Their ultimate goal is to eradicate even the memory of smoking tobacco & non-pharmaceutical nicotine
from the face of the planet.

Fixed that for you.

 

[kristin]

Even if the FDA doesn't regulate e-cigarettes to the point that e-cigarette companies cannot afford to sell them or people don't want to buy them, we are still facing local sales bans to adults such as CASAA: West Springfield, Massachusetts Call to Action

If this becomes a trend, it doesn't matter what the FDA does. There are many fronts to this war.

 

[Petrodus]

Even if the FDA doesn't regulate e-cigarettes to the point that e-cigarette companies cannot afford to sell them or people don't want to buy them, we are still facing local sales bans to adults such as CASAA: West Springfield, Massachusetts Call to Action

If this becomes a trend, it doesn't matter what the FDA does. There are many fronts to this war.

TRUE
In the past American's favorite past-time was Baseball.
Today it's "Banning" our fellow citizens personal behaviors.

 

[DC2]

It's not a conspiracy or plot to kill us all, it just lazy, self interested and self referencing thinking.

Well, it is a conspiracy.

Actually, it is simply smart business by all parties.
But the difference between "conspiracy" versus "business as usual" could lead to a big debate.


Personally, I prefer to call it a conspiracy, since it meets the definition.

 

[DC2]

Regardless of what flag they waive ...
The ANTZ have an agenda
Their ultimate goal is to eradicate even the memory of smoking
from the face of the planet.
Believe It OR Not

I'm not sure why anyone would not believe it.

I think it is clear what the agenda is when they start doing this...
Winston Churchill's cigar airbrushed from picture - Telegraph

 

[Jman8]

Well it's evil, wicked, mean and nasty
(Don't step on the vape, Stan)
And it will ruin our fair country
(Don't be such an ..., Stan)
Well, it will hook your Sue and Johnny
(You're so full of bull, Stan)
All will pay that disagree with me
(Please give up you already lost the fight, alright)

 

[FloridaNoob]

well so far I don't see my comment approved and visible. So far it is just Stan's and Bill's comments. I am suspecting that he won't let any other intelligent comments be shown that disagree with his own viewpoint. However, I will keep checking each day for the rest of the week to see if I am mistaken.

 

[Lisa Belle]

In 1987, Stan(ton), you stood at the bottom of our San Francisco flat's steps at 270 Flood Ave., San Francisco, CA.. I was or had just quit smoking using nicorette gum and was a few months pregnant with our second Son. Alan my husband then, your childhood friend, which I have verified with documentation, showing the two of you climbing trees, while adorned and covered with reel to reel audio tape, great photo, a black and white of course. To the point. You had what I would call the most negative view of smokers I'd ever encountered in my life. You basically tore down Alan and myself with such a fervor as to be a kin to Gestapo tactics. He, and I were speechless and dumbfounded by your nearly violent vehemence and total disregard for the human element involved. Somehow, I stayed smoke free for the first trimester, unfortunately stress of moving away from the "city" to Petaluma, and the travel itself, caused me to relapse. Alan, has never even once attempted to quit smoking. Now, at 67 years he is still working, but must wear the oxygen tubes connected to tanks and is on all of Big Pharma's COPD and Emphysema drugs whilst still smoking. Now in 2013, I have for almost three years been smoke free thanks to e-cigarettes. While Alan is dying he still prefers to smoke. He seems convinced that the medical treatments and drugs are the answer and has re-signed himself to an early grave. I am almost 60 and after 40 years of smoking, I can take a 40 mi. bicycle ride, and am full of health, when only a couple of years ago, I was at the beginning stages of lung disease and warned about it. Why? Stan, can't you be a real person about it all? I know about your childhood, from Alan, sorry if you weren't validated enough way back when, but here is your golden moment an opportunity to turn around and be the spokesperson that could save the world from the scourge of SMOKING tobacco use and encourage progress. You could easily have an epiphany and see the light! Your old buddy would not die with such disdain and heartless disregard. (x) Mrs. Alan E. Bell (Lisa)

 

[FloridaNoob]

A very touching story. I feel for you both.


You know I just pulled up this man's wikipedia page and it almost seems like a PR press release rather than a true unbiased *history* of this man. Amazing.

 

[Fiamma]

Wiki is not history as lived, it is history thru the eyes of the editor. Many times I have seen items on a Wiki page deleted by an editor who does not agree with the item and either not replaced or replaced with that editors version of how things are. As has been warned many many times, you cannot believe everything you read on the net.

Perhaps Stanton's wiki page was written by a great admirer, perhaps even by himself.

 

[Jman8]

His Wiki page seems fine to me. Editors get scrutinized (often) for whatever contributions they make to a Wiki page. Click on the 'talk' tab on his page and you can see this. If you feel something pertinent is missing, you can likely edit it yourself, but that to might be scrutinized and/or removed if deemed not pertinent.

 

[Fiamma]

His Wiki page seems fine to me. Editors get scrutinized (often) for whatever contributions they make to a Wiki page. Click on the 'talk' tab on his page and you can see this. If you feel something pertinent is missing, you can likely edit it yourself, but that to might be scrutinized and/or removed if deemed not pertinent.

Also in certain classes information is wholesale deleted if an erstwhile editor finds it contrary to his/her personal veiwpoint. I've seen it over and over and over.

 

[sherid]

If you are on here posting against smokers, you are posting for Stanton glantz and all of the anti-smokers. If you do not understand that the war against smokers is also the war against vapers, you are not paying attention. Whatever is said and enacted against smokers will also be legislated against vapers, specifically because of people like Stanton Glantz. Pay attention to the movement against smokers/vapers or find yourself out by the dumpsters puffing on illegal tobacco/e liquid. WAKE UP PEOPLE