One of the worst ever tobacco control papers is ‘corrected’
Researchers were told their allegations were false, but they still went ahead and attacked a leading vaping company with baseless claims
Researchers were told their allegations were false, but they still went ahead and attacked a leading vaping company with baseless claims
A vision for a journal covering all aspects of nicotine in society based on open science, curiosity and organised scepticism
The World Health Organisation continues to present misleading information about e-cigarettes that spreads doubt and confusion among the public, media and policymakers. This post reviews its latest Q & A and finds multiple errors of analysis, misleading statements, and obvious biases.
“O Brasil vai repensar sua proibição de vaping?” Brazil is consulting on lifting its ban on vaping products. Will it recognise the perverse consequences of prohibition and shift to risk-proportionate regulation? We argue it should rethink its approach to nicotine.
Most Americans now incorrectly believe that e-cigarettes are just as harmful or more harmful than cigarettes. US health organisations have unethically cultivated this misunderstanding and compare unfavourably with UK equivalents. Their duplicitous behaviour resembles that of Big Tobacco 50 years ago.
This post examines how WHO and related institutions aggressively promote the prohibition of much safer alternatives to cigarettes, such as …
Bloomberg scrutinised. Unusually, a journalist decided to take a sceptical look at Bloomberg Philanthropies and its many proxies and the …
Holding the Bloomberg anti-vaping propaganda complex to account Read More
Download Post as PDFI remember back when I was Director of Action on Smoking and Health in the UK (1997-2003), …
On 20 January 2020, the World Health Organisation published a question and answer page on “ENDS” (Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems) …
This paper turned up in my weekly search of PubMed. Invalidity of an Oft-Cited Estimate of the Relative Harms of …