What's Behind Opposition to the Electronic Cigarette?
Previous Page: Freedom to Choose and the E Cigarette
Next Page: Electronic Cigarette Extremism
ECD: What, in your opinion, is behind the opposition to the electronic cigarette?
Dave: I think is is best summed up by Bill Godshall. He wrote that because e-cigarettes probably have the best ability to reduce prevalence of smoking tobacco, and they are not produced by pharmaceutical companies, it is basic cynicism on the side of the anti-smoking movement to get e-cigarettes outlawed - so that the only alternative nicotine therapy available will be those produced by pharmaceutical companies.
I was shocked that Bil Godshall wrote in the tobacco analysis blog - that these people involved in tobacco and nicotine prohibition are bigoted puritans, that they are ideologues, they don't want to be reminded of cigarettes, and also that anyone who mentioned that cigarettes were safe would get fired from their job if they worked in anti-tobacco.
ECD: And Bill is not pro-tobacco - he is from Smoke-free Pennsylvania.
Dave: Exactly. And for the ultimate in fascism and complete lack of logic and humanity, some would prefer smokers would (to)die if it would prevent others from smoking. That absolutely beggars belief! Even I would never have dared to suggest that!
ECD: Well, this is from the country which produced ASH. Did you see ASH's press release suggesting smokers be put on trial for murder, and be sentenced to death in those states which have the capital punishment?
Dave: To be honest, I had never heard of that? Is that ASH America?
ECD: Yes - the actual press release has been removed but there are extracts on the Tobacco Analysis blog.
David: Personally I quite welcome Banzhaf and ASH in America, coming out with all this hysteria. They are so extreme that they will eventually be seen for what they genuinely are - a bunch of narrow minded bigots and puritans who can't be trusted to tell the truth.
ECD: He's hugely beneficial to your cause, I think, because in being so extreme he makes the anti-smoking movement look ludicrous. And also Stanton Glantz, who suggested that allowing smoking to be viewed in films was comparable to poisoning the water supply.
David: I welcome it. And David Goerlitz, who was the original Winston man, and who then worked for the anti-tobacco movement, and who used to work with Glantz and Banzhaf and saw them becoming so bigoted and extreme in their views, has come over to the pro-choice lobby to a certain extent.
ECD: Yes, he's the one who admitted on video to being offered money to lie for the anti-smoking movement in court. And Michael Siegel also, he's another one who left the anti-smoking movement.
David: Sure. And his blog is an absolute gold mine.
ECD: And he is increasingly getting a voice in America, he has been on two radio shows in the last three days.
Dave: Can we really just hope that the tide is turning?
ECD: It is changing in the UK, isn't it, because they are starting to embrace a tobacco harm reduction strategy. However, we are concerned at the moment because the MHRA wants to license e-cigarette as medicine. And we think they should be widely available as possible. We think it should be regulated for quality, but not as a medicine.
Previous Page: Electronic Cigarettes - as a Medicine?
Next Page: Electronic Cigarette Extremism