Richardpruen (talk | contribs) (added info) |
Richardpruen (talk | contribs) (Tidy up) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[File:HIlogo.png|alt=Honesty Intuitive Logo|center|frameless|Honesty Intuitive Logo]] | [[File:HIlogo.png|alt=Honesty Intuitive Logo|center|frameless|Honesty Intuitive Logo]] | ||
'''''The debate on e-cigarettes is more toxic than e-cigarettes themselves.''''' Classic tobacco control is genuinely concerned over addiction potentials, and the involvement of corporate/big tobacco. While for-profit public health groups resort to conjectures and misrepresentations, paralogisms (Think of the children, and flavour fallacy), straight up disinformation (see EVALI), and the obvious repugnance towards public discourse (Bloomberg/WHO). | '''''The debate on e-cigarettes is more toxic than e-cigarettes themselves.''''' Classic tobacco control is genuinely concerned over addiction potentials, and the involvement of corporate/big tobacco. While for-profit public health groups resort to conjectures and misrepresentations, paralogisms (Think of the children, and flavour fallacy), straight up disinformation (see EVALI), and the obvious repugnance towards public discourse (Bloomberg/WHO). | ||
There are varying rationales however. Apart from pharma/cancer relations, there are also plain science denialists, XY problem solvers, harm/narrative protectionists, but also genuine misapprehensions. | There are varying rationales however. Apart from pharma/cancer relations, there are also plain science denialists, XY problem solvers, harm/narrative protectionists, but also genuine misapprehensions. | ||
=== scope === | === scope === | ||
edits