Almost without fail, news articles that attacks the e cigarette has comment areas that are filled with doctors and scientist, along with multitudes of the population showing evidence of the need, want and support for this amazing new product that most ex smokers are calling a “lifesaver”.

Since the FDA was exposed on the faulty testing procedures during their preliminary test on the e cigarette, and using personnel on the advisory board that have clear conflicts of interest concerning the e cigarette industry, the general pubic is already showing signs of looking for other means to get the e cigarette and claiming that they will not use tobacco or what they refer to as “worthless” smoking cessation products by the same pharmaceutical companies that are funding the special interest fight against them.

400,000 smokers a year die from tobacco related illnesses in the United States each year while legislators and special interest protect tobacco companies from being banned through legislation that insulates tobacco and cessation markets from products that do work to eliminate tobacco.

by Tiffany Ellis, original article OfficalWire.

These are just a few of the questions that will be addressed at the 2009 William J. Bicknell Lectureship in Public Health to be held at Boston University School of Public Health. The event will be held on Friday, Oct. 23, from 9 a.m. to noon, in the first-floor auditorium of 670 Albany Street, on the Boston University Medical Campus. A continental breakfast will be available from 8:30 a.m. The event is free and open to the public.

I want to extend a special invitation to Rest of the Story readers, especially those in the Boston area, to attend this event.

Link to original post with more details.

So here’s the deal, up until the FDA’s news blast we were a growing company 2 kiosks 7 employees and growing, growing, growing. The sky seemed to be the limit. Fast forward 6 weeks. sales down 40% one kiosk closing. I now have to lay off 2 employees both of whom are single mothers, for both of whom our little stores were the only income. Both of these people worked hard and did everything right. They made no false promises. No health or carcinogen or cessation claims. They showed up to work on time. They are good employees and nice people.

So congratulations FDA! You succeeded in putting two single mothers out of work so that you can continue to line your pockets with the BLOOD MONEY from big tobacco and big pharm, all while encouraging millions of americans to poison themselves. I hope this is a proud day for you, our public health watchdogs.

I know what hatred feels like. It doesn’t feel good…

Original post here to leave a comment.

“The whole slippery slope argument is fallacious.

It says that intelligent people aren’t capable of making decisions.”

Great read by Christopher Snowdon click here for the full article.

Today’s world is awash with the message “Just say no to ______” Whether it be drugs, alcohol, cigarettes, sex, or a bacon cheeseburger, it seems most of the anti _____ groups want this as the ONLY strategy in effect.

Back in the late 1700’s and early 1800’s, The Temperance movement was founded. It advocated restraint and responsible use of alcohol rather than total and outright abstinence. It was started by Dr Benjamin Rush’s expressed views taken to heart by a group of aprox 200 farmers in Connecticut.

Over time, the idea of responsible use morphed and changed, and became outright intolerance of use at all. Members of the Temperance movement became rabidly hostile to any use of alcohol, which back then was seen as harmful to the public as smoking is today.

This temperance movement worked hard to get lawmakers to change their votes, and in 1917, a Senate pressured by this movement introduced Prohibition, which was brought into law on January 1919, and practiced on 1920.

The message was alcohol was evil, a sin, a public harm, and must be stopped at all costs. Does this sound similar to the anti smoking rhetoric? It does, as many of the messages and even the tactics are adopted from the temperance movement’s drive to ban all alcohol in the United States.

But, most readers know what happened. Illegal bars, called speakeasies, sprang up all over the place, moonshiners made or brought in illegal booze, and people generally got their beer and whiskey anyways. It became so ineffective that in 1933, the Constitutional amendment known as the Volstead act, which prohibited alcohol, was repealed.

“Just Say No” resurfaced almost 50 years later, when the Los Angeles Police Department developed the DARE program. Their intent, to keep children from growing up and using drugs, was a laudable goal. But, using gross exagerations, such as marijuana being a gateway drug to other drugs, led children to dismiss other portions of the lesson, and do as they wanted. Some studies that were dismissed by DARE proponents actually showed drug acceptance and use INCREASED under DARE.

The message of “Just Say No” also found it’s way into the schools under the guise of sexual education. Abstinence only education was something made popular by religious organizations, and made the ONLY sex education in several areas.

Again, did it work? In areas where “Just Say No” has been the only accepted standard, the rates of STD transmission and teen pregnancy has increased, not decreased. Why? Not only was abstinence touted as the only acceptable standard, reduced risk strategies, such as condoms, masturbation, and birth control were demonized, and made out to be worse for them than unprotected sex.

Now, we come to the main course. Groups like ASH. Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids, American Heart Association, American Lung Association, and American Cancer Society all are in the “Just Say No” category. To them, smokers must quit or die, and any means of harm reduction, such as electronic cigarettes, are to be demonized and done away with.

These methods of harm reduction are not in their vocabulary. They are no different in thinking than the Temperance movement that made alcohol illegal.

JUST SAY NO DOES NOT WORK! There is scientific and historical proof it does not work. A responsible organization, truely aimed at helping the public and concerned for the public’s welfare, will look at harm reduction strategies, and find them more acceptable than what they are fighting.

So, Anti Smoking organizations, how can you help the people quit smoking? Look into alternatives to smoking. Advocate items that reduce harm while also allowing users to get what they want or need.

Electronic cigarettes have been around for quite some time. The Chinese have been using them for long enough for any negative health effects to surface. they have been in the United States for almost 3 years, long enough for the FDA to have heard some kind of negative health effect.

But, at this time, no major health issues have arisen from the use of these Electronic cigarettes. The FDA even asked for people to report in their negative side effects or health issues arising from these, and so far, no word on them.

During all this, most Doctors asked about them have taken the harm reduction road, and applaud the use of these. They, like anyone responsible for other people’s health look at the chemicals in these compared to an analog, and feel the electronic cigarette is much safer and better for their patients’ health than a tobacco cigarette.

the logical conclusion of this writer is that any group that does not look into harm reduction as a way to reach their primary goal is NOT looking out for your health and welfare, and has another agenda they wish to use.

JUST SAY NO to “Just Say No”