Motivation for anti-ecigarette campaign laid bare

The World Self-Medication Federation has directly attacked the electronic cigarette – and for the first time their motivation has been laid bare.

In the past we have had to dig into financial statements for evidence that NRT producers were behind a concerted campaign to discredit the e-cigarette. That digging around found that the anti-smoking organisations that were campaigning against the electronic cigarette, a device which scientists argue is around 99 times safer than a cigarette, had been funded by the producers of nicotine replacements products. (See anti-electronic cigarette funding.)

These organisations, willing to spend millions manipulating the press, were unable to answer simple questions about just why they opposed the e-cigarette:

Now the WSFM has no qualms admitting who is behind its attack:

WSMI members are world leaders in the manufacture and supply of Nicotine Replacement Therapy (NRT) products…

Source: WSMI

Barrier to Entry

The most attractive businesses to investors are ones which have a barrier to entry.

When a company has a moat around it that can prevent other companies from easily entering their industry, they can control their markets and raise prices to the maximum consumers can bear.

In contrast, where there is limitless competition companies are forced to compete, either on price or on quality.

Pharmaceutical companies had this moat. Few companies could afford the years of testing and inflated prices charged by regulatory authorities (the FDA charge many times what the Vapers Club has been quoted for private research into the electronic cigarette – research which has been repeatedly blocked by the FDA!)

And what company outside the industry could boast not only of a cosy relationship with regulatory authorities, but of authorities staffed by previous employees?

House of Commons document on the MHRA.

Their vast pockets mean they can bribe scientists to pretend they wrote industry ‘studies’:

MHRA slammed by parliamentary commission. Source: The Pharma Letter

And the UK pharmaceutical industry can do even better than that – not only do provide the MHRA with staff, they even pay those staff!

Proof of pharmacuetical earnings of an MHRA employer.

(MHRA Staff Interests, sent to me by Katherine Devlin of ECITA.)

Nicotine Replacement Products

Pharmaceutical companies use their power to market NRT aids.

NRT products have been intensively researched and developed for effectiveness, safety, adverse effects, cost and cost-effectiveness.

Source: WSMI

Only problem is, they don’t work!

Study showing NRT ineffective.

Source: Tobacco Analysis Blog

Of course, with convincing marketing, ineffective products do not matter. In fact, you can even fool smokers into trying product after ineffective product – a nice recurring market for big pharm.

“I tried the patch but I was allergic to it … I tried the gum but it made my gums and my teeth ache and hurt… I did not try Chantix but I had two friends try it but got, ah, I don’t know, crazy…I tried using lollipops or candies as an oral fixation. I got 14 cavities but I still smoked…”

New Competitors

But then came along electronic cigarette companies…

Our logo!

and, according to a Biopharm industry study, the moat was gone.

Evidence of industry fears revolving around the introduction of e-cigarettes.

Source: Velvet Glove Iron Fist

The above screen shot shows evidence of industry fears which, since we and other blogs highlighted it, have been removed from the bioportfolio website:

evidence removedA new campaign

Now the industry is attacking.

Electronic nicotine delivery systems … fall in a regulatory gap in many countries, escaping regulation as medicines (because no medical claims are made) and avoiding the controls applicable to tobacco products (because they do not contain tobacco).

i.e. Suppliers do not need millions of dollars to bribe/lie their way into existence.

Source: WSMI

To attack, the same industry that came up with suicide drug chantix/champix is throwing doubt on their safety.

By contrast, electronic nicotine delivery systems such as electronic cigarettes are not endorsed or registered as medicines and lack scientific evidence supporting their use

Source: WSMI

Science

However, what must be maddening to the industry is that scientists and experts not in big pharm’s payroll are throwing their support behind the electronic cigarette.

Dr Joel Nitzkin.

Indeed, Dr Joel Nitzkin, Chair of the Tobacco Control Task Force for the American Association of Public Health Physicians, told us

…we have every reason to believe that the hazard posed by e-cigarettes would be much lower than one percent of the hazard posed by cigarettes.”

Meanwhile, studies have shown that constituent ingredients of electronic cigarettes are similar to the very nicotine cessation aids sold by the pharmaceutical companies, that e-cigarettes can relieve nicotine cravings, that e-cigarette users can improve their health by using the devices AND that big pharm’s NRTs do not address the smoking stimuli satisfied by both cigarettes and e-cigarettes.

But with huge pockets, vast influence and the regulatory bodies in their pockets, does big pharm need to worry?

Note: ECigaretteDirect and the Ashtray Blog do not claim e-cigarettes are a smoking cessation aids. Electronic cigarettes are an alternative to cigarettes which save money, can be legally smoked in public places and provide nicotine without the combustion and tobacco of regular cigarettes.

4 thoughts on “Motivation for anti-ecigarette campaign laid bare

  1. CTV set up a poll for this topic day before yesterday that allows the public to give input and take it down 24 hours later why. We the public are the ones that matter here , not the big companies . We are at risk and know smoking kills . Why you trying to kill e-cigs? As more research comes in more and more is found they pose little if any harm and your still trying to ban them. SMOKING KILLS and we know that as a matter of fact yet they are sold legally. Patches Losenges, gums and Chantix ( which has also killed) are also legal. So is the AIR WICK and GLADE deodorizer which has unlisted chemicals that are harmful to humans and pets. They work that same way an e-cig works. 16 year old can also purchase them at the DRUG STORES! So tell us…what is the real agenda here…something really stinks…and it’s no longer this smoker who has 110 days now without the deception passed down for tooooooooo many years.

    CTV Atlantic Web Poll
    Do you think e-cigarettes are a healthier alternative to regular cigarettes?
    Yes. They don’t create smoke, so they aren’t as harmful.

    1227 (52 %)
    Not sure. I would have to learn more about them.

    548 (23 %)
    No. Health Canada doesn’t recommend them, therefore they can’t be a good idea.

    581 (25 %)

    Total number of votes: 2356

    This poll that was posted for only 24 hours got more response from your viewers than all the other polls listed on CTV’s website. As you can see the percentage is high in favour of a better alternative over tobacco cigarettes. I posted my say on that site but they stopped comments right afterwards and deleted my comments.

    This is only one such poll around the world resounding the arrival of a much better alternative to smoking tobacco cigarettes and I am witness to this fact that has already proven to be factual. My lungs are full of holes from advanced emphyzema but I can breathe much easier now and I’m still alive to do so. Why would you people of a far better education than me dare to not want others to know than can stay healthier at least if they found this better choice.

    Stop lying to the people, this is not going to go away , at least as long as I’m still alive. This is our choice not someones else’s political and financial redbook .

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *