by Carl V Phillips
Stanton Glantz has demonstrated once again why he had to get out of engineering and move into the tobacco control industry where not getting the facts right does not cause things to fall down (indeed, it is more or less a mandatory qualification). He, along with his coauthors Rachel Grana and Neal Benowitz were hired by the anti-THR WHO to write what I have been told is a ham-handed hatchet job on e-cigarettes. (I will try to summon up the strength to read their drivel and write more about the lies later.)
Someone who did have the stomach to read it pointed out to me the follow passage:
McAuley et al (2012) conducted a published risk assessment of e-cigarettes funded by the Consumer Advocates for Smoke-free Alternatives Association, CASAA, a pro- e-cigarette advocacy group.(McAuley et al., 2012) Key details about the protocol for conducting their risk assessment are not described, as there are obvious problems with the study that do not warrant its review in this report. In fact, a technical report (Burstyn, 2013) (below) reviewing the existing data on e-cigarette constituents that was also funded by CASAA excluded this study due to its poor quality
Nice of them to recognize the high quality of Igor Burstyn’s work and our support for it. But you would think that even these people are literate enough to figure out that McAuley was funded by NVC and not CASAA. Notice that this could not be a mere case of accidentally entering the wrong abbreviation in the text, since they actively suggested both studies had the same funder.
It has always been clear that anti-tobacco people are basically cut out of the same mold as racists and other “-ists”. They are tribal and hateful, and just happened to have chosen tobacco users rather than black people as the target for their primitive hatred. Had they been born in a different place and time, they would be wearing hoods and burning crosses. But it did not occur to me that, in keeping with their basic racist typology, they also share the attitude that “all dem n—–s look the same to me” in their views of consumer advocates.
It is also ironic that while the McAuley research, sadly, did have some serious flaws that Burstyn pointed out, it is still higher quality than pretty much anything Glantz has ever done.