OTTAWA — It's illegal for kids under 18 to buy tobacco products in Canada and there's a movement afoot to make sure today's youth are never allowed to light up a cigarette — even after they come of age.
Sure I have. Smoking kills. And vaping is ultimately just as safe as the nicotine patch. It doesn’t take much to understand that.
But as long as you are entertained mocking me by posting smarmy pictures, enjoy. I find it despicable. I doubt you ever research the topic. But the WHO, the World Health Organization, can be accused to killing millions with their zealotry that pushed many countries to outright ban vaping, while smoking remains perfectly legal and convenient. That is the result of many fraudulent studies.
This is not a trivial topic about “an axe to grind”. From my perspective, it’s not much different than mass murder. Why? Because of stupidity or profiteering.
So laugh it up. Mock me if you want. I don’t have time or energy to read and debunk this latest study, they are relentless. But I have read these kind of studies in the past and all the anti-vaping studies turned out to be fraudulent. Fraud use for propaganda leading to bad policies and preventable deaths. That is the moral dimension of this shit.
So reputable scientists at the WHO telling people that they shouldn’t inhale vape juice is tantamount to “mass murder”? I don’t know how to respond to this message without it sounding like I’m “mocking you” because what you are saying is so unbelievable and has so many flaws in reasoning that there is no sober response that doesn’t make you look bad
I don’t get why getting the patch and vaping should be seen as a simple neutral choice of delivery method when the delivery method is the very thing being debated?
Nobody here is against the patch to get off smoking. The article is about starting the habit. And studies about vaping is literally about the delivery method.
People who start vaping are more likely to start smoking. Before vapes, they may have gone straight to smoking? Or not done it at all? But to focus on the getting off, when there are people getting on and then going further should be seen as diversion from the topic at hand.
Sure I have. Smoking kills. And vaping is ultimately just as safe as the nicotine patch. It doesn’t take much to understand that.
But as long as you are entertained mocking me by posting smarmy pictures, enjoy. I find it despicable. I doubt you ever research the topic. But the WHO, the World Health Organization, can be accused to killing millions with their zealotry that pushed many countries to outright ban vaping, while smoking remains perfectly legal and convenient. That is the result of many fraudulent studies.
This is not a trivial topic about “an axe to grind”. From my perspective, it’s not much different than mass murder. Why? Because of stupidity or profiteering.
So laugh it up. Mock me if you want. I don’t have time or energy to read and debunk this latest study, they are relentless. But I have read these kind of studies in the past and all the anti-vaping studies turned out to be fraudulent. Fraud use for propaganda leading to bad policies and preventable deaths. That is the moral dimension of this shit.
So reputable scientists at the WHO telling people that they shouldn’t inhale vape juice is tantamount to “mass murder”? I don’t know how to respond to this message without it sounding like I’m “mocking you” because what you are saying is so unbelievable and has so many flaws in reasoning that there is no sober response that doesn’t make you look bad
I don’t get why getting the patch and vaping should be seen as a simple neutral choice of delivery method when the delivery method is the very thing being debated?
Nobody here is against the patch to get off smoking. The article is about starting the habit. And studies about vaping is literally about the delivery method.
People who start vaping are more likely to start smoking. Before vapes, they may have gone straight to smoking? Or not done it at all? But to focus on the getting off, when there are people getting on and then going further should be seen as diversion from the topic at hand.