2016/10

Among many things, this really does boggle the mind. Y’see, whenever ASH or their sock-puppet ilk wave their “statistics” under the noses of our ruling elite, they claim that it is “without bias” and of course “entirely independent” - among many other platitudes.

Y’see, ASH et al are entirely free of conflicts of interest aren’t they? So their surveys must be the Holy Grail. No question about it. When it comes to knowing the smoker, ASH has all the answers. Or so they’d like you to believe.

We all know that attitudes towards e-cigarettes are slowly being eroded in the UK by the near constant barrage of churnalism. That’s right The Sun I’m looking squarely at you, crass fuckwits that you are. I might even look towards The Telegraph too. Not for the usual reason of their “science” editor this time, though that could be considered one big reason.

Now we have an actual study, funded by the National Cancer Institute and the FDA CTP, and performed by some researchers deep in the bowels of Stanford. Well, we know how the last one turned out don’t we?

As part of the implementation of the Tobacco Products Directive - 2014/40/EU - and specifically Article 20, the section that relates specifically to e-cigarettes the European Regulatory Science on Tobacco (EUREST - what can I say, the EU does alphabet soup better than the Americans) - the EU wanted a report on the “potential risks” of the product. To be fair, that is a laudable goal considering the use of the product. The problem, of course is the implementation. Not to mention the cost.

Today marks the launch of a new, worldwide umbrella consumer organisation for nicotine product users. Predominantly this will have a focus on e-cigarettes, but will encompass other reduced risk products.

Formed in June 2016, INNCO is the collective voice for the most influential nicotine consumer organisations in eleven countries around the world: organisations who each recognise that there are safer ways to enjoy nicotine consumption than tobacco smoking.

You may remember of course that there had been a consumer advocates meeting at the Global Forum on Nicotine and a lot of ideas were discussed, and a plan of action formed - along with the delegation of various responsibilities. Much of which couldn’t really be talked about outside of the meeting (I’m sure you can appreciate. Plus I’m still not entirely sure why I was even invited to the session).

If there’s one thing that public health like to do, it’s to provide advice on how we, the Proles, live our day to day lives. This advice, which always ranges from the “no shit sherlock” to the “what the hell are you thinking” type. The vast majority of such “advice” is pretty much common bloody sense. Thing is, nanny seems to think us Proles don’t have any, so they have to spoon-feed us guidance on a regular basis, just so we don’t forget who’s in charge.