thundercat
Full Member
Joined:September 2012
Posts: 187
Location:
Likes: 31
Recent Posts
Last Online May 26, 2013 9:05:59 GMT
|
Post by thundercat on Oct 12, 2012 21:52:05 GMT
On 1st ad-break and just like to say Dave. We call them stinkies, cos they do bloody stink.... we all have to agree to that. Its not that we look down on smokers. We all smoked, but found a safer and cleaner way of doing it. Hi, I also took very slight umbrage at Daves remarks regards the term Stinkies. I use that term not because I look down at those that use cigarettes but because I now find cigarettes abhorrent . The term Stinkies refer to cigarettes and not the people who use them. Andy
|
|
hifistud
Super Member
Im A Fluffy Bunny Too
Watching, waiting...
Joined:March 2011
Posts: 1,035
Location:
Likes: 26
Recent Posts
Last Online Jun 18, 2013 20:10:50 GMT
|
Post by hifistud on Oct 12, 2012 22:38:23 GMT
Hi, I also took very slight umbrage at Daves remarks regards the term Stinkies. I use that term not because I look down at those that use cigarettes but because I now find cigarettes abhorrent . The term Stinkies refer to cigarettes and not the people who use them. Andy that little rant-ette was aimed at a rather more remote forum than this. Everybody Can Find it if they look... and there, it seems that it very much is the person rather than the item that's looked down upon.
|
|
giles
Super Member
Rogue Element
Joined:August 2012
Posts: 2,208
Location:
Likes: 709
Recent Posts
Last Online Feb 23, 2013 12:10:56 GMT
|
Post by giles on Oct 13, 2012 0:23:08 GMT
hifistud, do you really believe that the pharma companies spent more money attacking smoking than the tobacco companies did defending it? Did so simply because they are killjoys? Difficult to see what other motivation they could have given the amount of money they make out of smokers' health problems.
And, no, you don't need to control for ETS when you are comparing people who say their spouses smoke with people who say they don't - why would you? are you proposing that people whose spouses smoke are more likely to work in a smoky environment (excluding tobacco smoke of course, which you don't believe to be damaging to health)?
And, and, and...
All we are doing here is making it obvious we don't belong on the same team. Vapers have a nice simple argument to justify the continuing legality and tax-free status of vaping. It involves making the entirely true case that vaping is better than smoking both for the user and for anybody near them. If you are going to confuse that argument with a defense of passive smoking, please keep well away from us.
|
|
hifistud
Super Member
Im A Fluffy Bunny Too
Watching, waiting...
Joined:March 2011
Posts: 1,035
Location:
Likes: 26
Recent Posts
Last Online Jun 18, 2013 20:10:50 GMT
|
Post by hifistud on Nov 1, 2012 14:52:38 GMT
You've missed the whole point, Giles, and that is that the Big Pharma funded governmental bodies like the WHO and MHRA and so on are NOT just attacking "smoking", they're attacking nicotine use in all its aspects, and in order to do that they have systematically lied to everybody. They have lied about all aspects of nicotine use, either overtly, or by omission.
And don't confuse the Tobacco Control Zealots with Big Pharma - BP stands to cash in on what the zealots do,and so fund their activities, but, trust me, they don't want folks to Quit nicotine on a permanent basis - if that happened, they'd lose billions and billions in revenue, as they'd have no-one to peddle their NRT wares to. It's also why they don't support an immediate worldwide ban on tobacco products, no matter how much the zealots would like to see it.
As far as control groups for epidemiology - I'm sorry to appear confrontational, but without a control group, any data is meaningless - go and check out Michael Siegel's blog, or speak to any proper research scientist and you'll see what I mean.
Finally, if you truly believe your last paragraph, then you haven't been following what the WHO is up to - every argument you put forward reinforces their view that e-cigs are best got rid of, or, at worst (from their point of view) brought under medicines legislation - they will have successfully got you to buy in to their denormalisation and hatred of smokers... divide and conquer. Works every time. Don't believe their lies.
|
|
giles
Super Member
Rogue Element
Joined:August 2012
Posts: 2,208
Location:
Likes: 709
Recent Posts
Last Online Feb 23, 2013 12:10:56 GMT
|
Post by giles on Nov 1, 2012 23:30:15 GMT
Hifi, you think I'm missing your point, I think you're missing mine. Sorry, but I really don't think it is worth continuing with this.
|
|
hifistud
Super Member
Im A Fluffy Bunny Too
Watching, waiting...
Joined:March 2011
Posts: 1,035
Location:
Likes: 26
Recent Posts
Last Online Jun 18, 2013 20:10:50 GMT
|
Post by hifistud on Nov 2, 2012 0:11:34 GMT
OH, I understand your point. I just happen to think it's ill-advised, mistaken, and, ultimately, dangerous to the longevity of e-cig usage outside of medicines legislation.
|
|