Getting to the crux of the anti-electronic cigarette campaign

I have just been reading a negative article about the e-cigarette on the Huffington Post, and there was one comment by a ‘super-user’ which I felt really got to the heart of the matter:

You will continue to see more attacks on e-cigs. After all it threatens the 18 Billion dollars per year that the government rakes in from tobacco taxes. The pharmaceutical industry relies on the Billions in stop-smoki ng medication s and NRT products. Big tobacco, of course, hates ecigs.

I wonder why people find it so hard to make the connection between the hundreds of billions (when looked at on a worldwide basis) that BigTobacco and BigPharm stand to lose and the campaign against the device.

Perhaps people don’t realise how corrupt these industries already are. One example of the massive corruption involved is that half the medical articles ‘written’ by British scientists in medical journals are in fact ghostwritten by pharmaceutical companies!

There is also a moralistic sentiment that smoking is bad in itself, rather than because of the harm it causes. I find that perfectly illustrated by an outraged sentence in the Huffington Post article:

They are using e-cigs to control, not quit, smoking.

Why shouldn’t control be good? After all, surely the biggest logical argument against allowing smoking is that people are unable to control their habit, or to quit should they wish to?

The article appears to be in response to Siegel’s research into the electronic cigarette, which was overwhelmingly positive. I had wondered how long it would be before someone tried to sabotage that research!

Leave a comment:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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