Monday, October 11, 2010

NZ researchers suggest 10-year end game for smoking

Ok, so this is a little research study done in New Zealand, but its intent and its message is very scary.  Put bluntly, this study has suggested that the NZ government start phasing out the amount of tobacco available for import (and thus, for sale) in gradually decreasing amounts, to be completely tobacco-free in 10 years.  Of course, quit smoking products from our buddies at Big Pharma would be available, as would the wonderful pharmacopoeia of drugs offered to help those struggling smokers break their addiction.  The goal would be to force those last, reluctant smokers to give up their butts.

Honestly, this frightens me.  This is, to put it bluntly, tobacco PROHIBITION.  The forcing of the "Moral Right's" views on the general populace.

What happened during the 20's when we in the US tried prohibition with alcohol?  Anybody?  Anybody?

Well, a few people stopped drinking.  But the majority started simply buying their booze on the black market.  And with that black market came the mobsters, and organized crime, and an absolute explosion of violence for them crimesters to KEEP their marketplace.  It was such a miserably failed experiment in the folly of trying to morally control man's vices that the amendment was repealed within a decade...the only amendment to the US Constitution to be repealed.

Might I quote here:  "Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

Do we really want to see a black market emerge in the cigarette arena?  Do we really want a revisit of the crime and violence?  Think on how much crime is generated already in this country over illegal drugs.  Care to triple that?  Quadruple it?  How much closer must we get to complete chaos in this country before those in charge realize that there are SOME people you simply can't force into doing your wishes?

Thursday, September 30, 2010

Pasadena City College Opinion Piece

Much as it pains me to post a link to an article such as this - here's what the PV is up against -

And here's how I responded...let's see if they actually allow my comments to be posted (although I, for one, am not holding my breath)

My, my, my.  Allow me to correct just a few mis-conceptions you've written here...For starters, the tobacco giants had nothing to do with the creation of the electronic cigarette - in fact, the E-Cig is a direct competitor to the traditional, tobacco cigarette.

E-Cigs are marketed and used by consumers as an alternative to tobacco - better in many ways to a cigarette because there is nothing to light on fire and no by-products of combustion (such as smoke) to inhale into your lungs.

While there are some distributors who are, as in any industry, willing to make any sensationalist claims to make a quick buck, this product is NOT marketed as a way to quit smoking ... although many users have found that to be a happy side-effect to regularly using them. And while many users do wean themselves down on the nicotine, there are many more who do not, using this as a long term recreational nicotine consumption product.

Would you insist that the entire bottled water industry be shut down because a few resellers have claimed that their water is better because it cures cancer?  Of course not - that would be absurd.  Yet, that's exactly what the FDA want to do to the E-Cig industry ... shutting down thousands of honest distributors for the sake of silencing the few out there who are just in it to make a quick buck.  And all because this is a competitor to not only the tobacco giants, but the pharmaceutical giants as well (with their NRT products).

Nicotine is not, by itself, THAT harmful - it has risks similar to caffeine.  Plenty of studies within a few mouse-clicks on Google will tell you that.

Care to do a little research and re-evaluate your article here?

Sunday, September 19, 2010

An Accidental way to Quit Smoking

First and formost - the link:

Thank you so very much for writing this article - it's an excellent piece.  It states things cleanly and precisely, puts  the entire scope of the smoking wars in perspective.  Make no mistake, there IS a war in progress, and we're all the foot-soldiers in that war...anyone who currently uses nicotine in ANY form:  snus, snuff, cigarettes, pipes, PV's, NRT's, cigars, and many other nicotine-products out there that people use to sustain their nicotine balance.

Sunday, September 12, 2010

Midwest VapeFest 2010

And here it is...the aftermath of one of the greatest experiences of my life...I attended one of the largest gatherings of vapers in the US (would it sound pretentious to claim the WORLD?) - This last weekend we descended, en mass, to St. Louis, and took the town by storm.

Link is to my Photobucket Page, which is currently housing the pictures I captured of this event.

And, it gets better - not only was this event the largest gathering to date, we had a fantastic write-up in the St. Louis paper..

Which was a positive piece.

Let me genuflect on the experience... it will be emblazoned in my memory forever.  These people who gathered, vapers all, united in their common practice.  There were people there from all across the US, a few from Canada, and many, many more who couldn't be in attendance watching on the live video stream.

The thing that hits me the hardest about the experience? That I got to meet so many of the people I've known for a year plus, for the first time.  Glorious!

FDA Sabre Rattling

First, here's the link to our lovely FDA's page:

Here's the face of the story - the FDA has sent warning letters to 5 distributors or manufacturers of either the hardware or the liquid, regarding their sales promotions of PV's...claiming (continuing to claim) that these are unregulated or adulterated drug-delivery devises which need a new drug application to be sold, as so stated by the FDCA, which is the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, and how the FDA was granted authority to regulate all food, drugs, and cosmetics sold in this country. 

The biggest problem I have with the letters the FDA sent out, is they are still trying to regulate the products as a drug-delivery device under the FDCA, when Judge Leon specifically said they have all the authority to regulate these under the FSCPA (Family Smoking Control Protection Act) that they need, when he tendered his opinion in January. Granted, I'm biased here, being a PV consumer, but I'm inclined to agree with Leon's opinion.

If they (the FDA) really wanted to, they could drop this absurd appeal, and be regulating the products RIGHT NOW, as tobacco alternatives or a reduced risk product. Think on this - they have the authority, granted them by Congress, to hold manufacturers to quality and purity standards...all they have to do is come up with WHAT standards are acceptable.

Instead, they continue to push the appeal, they continue to make noises that these are drug delivery devices, they have now stepped up to harass local distributors, and they continue to waste the taxpayer's money while doing so. This could be OVER, folks, if the FDA would accept the premise that has been laid down by Judge Leon, that PV's are recreational nicotine consumption products, JUST LIKE CIGARETTES, and regulate the marketplace accordingly.

Why will the FDA not yield to this? Face. To back down now, to state that 'we were wrong,' would cost the FDA face, reputation, and status.

Sick yet?  I am.


Friday, July 30, 2010

The E-cigarette vs. the FDA by Paul Fetters

Paul Fetters, if you are reading this due to my link - THANK YOU.  I have to say you are well researched, articulate, and certainly call it like you see it.

And, you are right, in all counts.

Monday, July 26, 2010

The Rest of the Story Blog entry

Now, I've linked to this blog on those I'm following, but this one deserves special attention, simply because Dr. Mike Siegel wrote a potent statement (below).

When a product on the market is benefiting many people and leading to marked health improvement, the burden of proof is on those who want it removed from the market to demonstrate that the product is causing harm. This is why we err on the side of leaving products on the market until they are shown to be harmful. Since electronic cigarettes are already on the market, I feel that the same standard should hold. They should be removed from the market only if it is demonstrated that they are causing adverse effects. The burden of proof is on those who want the product removed.

THIS is the crux of the issue surrounding E-Cigs....that this is ALREADY an established market in the US, with 1000's of small vendors and resellers, and a customer base above 100,000 users in the US alone.  The FDA and the other alphabet-organizations would kill this industry in totality in their bid to squash the competition these products offer against the giants at Big Pharma.

An alternative that works.  That breaks the cycle of quit, smoke, quit, smoke, quit, smoke, which lines the pockets of Pharma with its ineffective smoking cessation products, tobacco with sales of its deadly cigarettes, and our Government, which taxes heavily and uses the funds to shore up its own ineptitude in managing the rightfully-collected taxes every citizen must pay.

Friday, July 16, 2010

Wauwatosa Potential Nicotine ban

Got some potentially bad news today in the form of this article:

'Tosa (which isn't that far away from me) is considering strengthening their smoking policies for City Workers.  Well, that's good, to a point, but the way they're going about it has me worried...first, the inconsistencies in their approach.

They quote the damage from second-hand smoke (SHS) as their major reason for considering tightening up their policy.  Well, first, any anti-smoking ordinance is going to quote the old standby of SHS, the clean air act, and all that rot.  The SHS mythos has gotten a lot of mileage, and, while I don't deny that there are people out there who are, indeed, extremely sensitive to SHS, I seriously get tired of the exaggerations.  There are militant groups such as ASH who claim that as little as a 30 minute exposure to SHS will have an otherwise healthy individual dropping dead of a heart attack, and this is what is fueling most of the hatred.

Let's keep it real, people.  SHS is NOT as dangerous as it's being made out to be to the general population.

Need to get back on point.  The inconsistencies.  Their primary focus is SHS - but then they go on to include smokeless tobacco products and non-smoking alternatives such as my PV in their ban.  Tell me how these products affect clean air?  Anyone?

I hear crickets.

If they want to focus on the last remaining smokers to force them to quit their habit, they realistically have to look at the history of the anti-smoking movement, and see what it has done before.  Education.  Scare tactics.  Demonization and denormalization.  For the smokers that are left, die hard, loyal to their products, and more than a bit armored against all the social engineering aimed at them already, these aren't going to work...they haven't worked so far, what makes anyone think their going to work now???

These last remaining smokers are, in other terms, the antibiotic-resistant strain of bacteria, the 'super virus's' of the world of nicotine/tobacco use.  They will not give up their vice.  Period.  Some simply need the nicotine to function, some are just stubborn, and some have the whole REBEL thing down to a science.  They've taken the anti's 'quit or die' approach with zeal, and are committed to DYING for their cigs.

Clearly, the force has met the irresistible object.  Neither are willing to concede defeat...and so the dance goes on in all its macabre glory.

If this country truly wants to eliminate smoking in the US, they need to switch tactics.  The education has happened.  Everyone, everywhere, is aware of the dangers of smoking.  The health risks.  The denormalization, the demonification of these products.

We get it.....smoking is BAAAAAAAAAD.

The tobacco giants finally get it, too...they are starting to develop and sell alternate products - American snus is gaining popularity.  E-Cigs are starting to go mainstream.  Camel's putting the orbs, sticks, and strips in test markets.  ALL these products are developed as alternatives to smoking, safer by far, because none of them involve lighting a carbon-based substance on fire, and sucking the results of that combustion into your lungs, and NONE of them share those hazardous by-products with bystanders around them.

We need our Gov't to embrace these new products.  Push them as alternatives, cheaper and acceptable.  Educate the population that there are products out there that CAN still give smokers the taste, actions, and nicotine spikes in their bloodstreams that they need, want, desire, and wish to continue doing, while minimizing the risks and eliminating the social stigmas attached to smoking.

They give smokers these alternatives, and they'll see the smoking rates decline rapidly, without all those messy side effects, like death.

It's called compromise, and needs to be on both sides of the fence.  Smokers need to use these alternative products.  Gov't needs to embrace them.

Wednesday, June 30, 2010

CTFK CNN Opinion Piece

This article, showing up in today's CNN Opinion section, is written by Matthew Meyers, who is the President of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids (CTFK).
Here's the article:

I'll take his rantings and give you my own (ok, I'm biased, and I'll admit it here, as I consider him to be one of the biggest Tobacco-haters out there, next to Banzaff at ASH) opinions.

The Supreme Court's decision puts the responsibility squarely on elected officials to eliminate the tobacco industry's harmful influence and take effective action to protect the nation's health.

Ok.  Now, this is scary.  Screaming out for the need for the members of the Hill to rise up and protect us all from the evil Tobacco Empire?  Shouldn't the consumers do that, by simple marketplace choice?  But, no, wait....we don't have that option anymore.  We're now supposed to let our elected officials do the thinking for us.  Can you say 'Nanny state?'

Congress and the Obama administration should fund a national public education and stop-smoking campaign, and the Food and Drug Administration must effectively exercise its new authority to regulate tobacco products.

Personally, I think there isn't a person on the face of this planet who DOESN'T know at this point that smoking is dangerous, addictive, and has a 50-50 chance of killing you prematurely.  Do we REALLY need to fund additional educational and stop-smoking campaigns?  Hmmm.  From the perspective of CTFK, I'd say yes....because at least a portion of that funding will go into their coffers.

And the FDA exerting its newly-gained authority to regulate tobacco products?  They've done a bang-up job of it so far...banning those dangerous 'candy-flavored cigarettes!!!' that less than 5% of the current smoking population used, restricting advertising further, and flatly refusing to educate the public on the concept of Reduced Harm Tobacco Products.

Tell me, please, how burying the truth, that not all tobacco products carry the same risk, is this protecting the public?

As smoking rates have declined and restrictions on smoking have multiplied, the industry has introduced new smokeless tobacco products and significantly increased marketing for them. Some of these products look like candy, are flavored like candy and have colorful packaging like candy. They are easily concealed in settings such as classrooms.
Even as the FDA begins to exercise its new authority over tobacco products, the industry concocts new schemes to thwart the regulations.

Far be it from me to criticize what the CFTK is telling me (no, wait.....I WILL criticize) but it sounds like the tobacco industry is simply trying to re-invent its product lines to REDUCE the harm of combustible cigarettes - just as countless other industries have done when society or technology makes their products unfavorable or obsolete.

And speaking of these new.....candy-like nicotine products....has anyone had a chance to look over the new Nicorette Mini-lozenges?  Why aren't our friends at CTFK denouncing THESE products as well...after all, they come in mint flavors, a convenient package, look like a breath mint, contain nicotine, and are available OTC.


Oh yea, that's right...they're not being denounced because they are made by our friends at Big Pharma, and they have NOTHING but your health on their minds, don't ya know......

Pffffft!  The bias is screaming to our population.

The tobacco industry spends nearly $13 billion annually -- $35 million every single day -- to market its deadly and addictive products.
So?  How much money is dumped into advertising campaigns for new drugs, which later have to be pulled from the marketplace because of 'unforeseen adverse side-effects.'  How much money is dumped into advertising for alcohol - another highly-addictive substance sold for legal consumption to informed adults, for food products with a high-level of allergens, for automobiles that kill millions of people every year, for........well, you get my point.

I, for one, am tired of the 'damned if they do, damned if they don't' mentality of the anti-smoking crowd.  Their mission has changed for the worse.

They are hell-bent not on protecting the innocent public, but punishing the guilty Tobacco Giants.  Can you see the harm in this shift in thought?

Thursday, June 3, 2010

Dr. Gupta Mentions E-Cigs in his Blog

There was an article today in Dr. Gupta's blog regarding my toys - one that I simply was moved to reply to....and I wasn't the only vaper who was so inspired.  Before I forget - here's the article:  Paging Dr. Gupta

And here's my response to his article.

Well, I'd say the FDA has certainly gotten fair value for the dollar on that alarmist press release they put out last summer. The misinformation simply continues to spread like wildfire – and everything points back to the source of things as that press release. Not the STUDY – the PRESS RELEASE.

I am not a member of CASAA. I do not get any financing from any E-Cig manufacturer, anti-smoking charity organization, tobacco manufacturer, or government agency. I am simply a consumer of these products.

Personally, I think its a shame and a tragedy that the PRESS RELEASE is what is so devastating in defining both professional and private public opinions on the E-Cig. If anyone were interested, they can find information on these products readily available on the web, and you can easily confirm that information with several different sources. But, alas, it is not the is simply easier to take one small piece of misinformation and run with it.

I remember when research in this country used to mean something...that people, both in their private lives and their professional ones, would take the time to examine the situation from multiple angles BEFORE voicing a solid opinion.

Nowadays, its degenerated into nothing more than knee-jerk reactions and the parroting of misinformation created by those who would control the masses with emotionally-laden alarmist statements.

Tuesday, May 18, 2010

Smoke Free Wisconsin Needs Education

SmokeFree Wisconsin does not like the PV (big surprise, there) and they have a habit of not publishing comments that are unfavorable to their position on their blog. I've since become inspired again to leave a comment on their blog regarding their last entry against E-Cigarettes. Any bets on whether or not they'll allow it to be published?

Nonetheless, the words were, in my opinion (and I'm the author, so I'm biased here) powerful, and I thought I'd share them with you even if SFW doesn't feel the need to.

The post, and reply, are here:

Basically, they are lauding CTFK's disgust at the Honorable Judge Leon's ruling for PV's in January.

And this would be my reply:

Ok, Erich. I've got a few things to point out in your Feb. 8 response to John Richards.

First and formost - disconnect E-Cigarettes from the Tobacco Giants. Completely. The E-Cig is C.O.M.P.E.T.I.T.I.O.N. to Big Tobacco. They'd like nothing more than to see a product that works for the bulk of smokers as an alternative to their deadly products removed from the market and buried completely.

Second, nicotine is not the bad guy here. Nicotine gets a bad rap because of it's traditional delivery device: Cigarettes. If nicotine was so dangerous, so horrible a chemical, would it be approved for usage by the Pharmaceutical Giants? Nicotine helps increase cognitive function, can help adults with AD/HD self-medicate their disease, and shows promising in lessening the impact of Parkinson's and Alzheimer's diseases.

Third, you state that these products have not been proven better or healthier. Again, there are studies, including the one by the FDA, that show that the E-Cig is, indeed, safer than the product they are intended to replace: CIGARETTES. This website provides plenty of information on E-Cigs. I implore you to browse this, and come to an informed opinion of the product instead of relying on half-truths and media 'spin.'

Thank you for your time.

Sunday, May 16, 2010

A New Cessation Device brought to you by Pharma

Someone pointed me in the direction of this rather interesting article:

This Pharma house is working on developing a new nicotine delivery system - all well and good, that's what a Pharma house does, continuing to develop new chemical compounds to help us all live longer, more productive lives. But I'm reading between the lines, here, and coming up with some interesting conclusions all on my own.

...have been developing a method to deliver nicotine to the lungs that recreates some of the familiar sensations pleasurable to smokers.

"We wanted to replicate the experience of smoking without incurring the dangers associated with cigarettes, and we wanted to do so more effectively than the nicotine replacement therapies currently on the market," Jed Rose, director of the Duke Center for Nicotine and Smoking Cessation Research, says in a statement.

Bully for them. A 'safer' smoking experience is what they're after, one that emulates smoking without the actual combustion, delivers nicotine deep in the lung, and gives the smoker the feel of smoking. As an aside, I'll also read into this statement admission that the current NRT's on the market have room for improvement.

Got news for them: the Electronic Cigarette already does these things, and does them well.

Let's take a look at what's in these, though:

The device they came up with does not use fire or heat. Instead, as the smoker draws air through the cigarette-shaped device, a chemical called pyruvic acid is drawn into contact with nicotine, creating a cloud of nicotine pyruvate vapor.

Ok. Pyruvate acid. What are the known dangers of that? Let's check the MSDS (Material Safety Data Sheet)

"Potential Acute Health Effects:
Very hazardous in case of skin contact (irritant), of eye contact (irritant), of ingestion, of inhalation. Hazardous in case of skin contact (corrosive), of eye contact (corrosive). Liquid or spray mist may produce tissue damage
particularly on mucous membranes of eyes, mouth and respiratory tract."

Yea, I think I'd really like to be putting that in my lungs.

The new inhaler was studied by Health New Zealand, - last year for Dr. Jed Rose - the results of that study are soon to be published, giving documentation needed for the Pharma House to gain approval for it through the FDA. The picture on HNZ's website shows a large, vapor-spewing device. The product hasn't even been manufactured as a cigarette-sized delivery device yet. Statements included in the study claim that the inhaler will be on the market within 3-5 years - fast-tracked through the approval process by the weight of Big Pharma.

So Pharma is developing a device that will LOOK like a cigarette, create a visible vapor LIKE A CIGARETTE, and will deliver nicotine in the lungs LIKE A CIGARETTE.

Sounds an awful lot like the PV's we use today. Where are the anti-smokers? Why aren't the ALA, the ACA, the CTFK, ASH and others denouncing these products? Oh, My, God, these might tempt children to try them. This might re-normalize the ACT of smoking. Current smokers might be confused by these cigarette-shaped objects, and light up in a non-smoking area, flooding the area with their 2nd, 3rd, and 4th hand smoke! These may become a gateway to regular tobacco use!

Not surprisingly, I hear nothing.......It's amazing what the right amount of money and influence can bring you, and these anti-smoking organizations get a LOT of money from the Pharma industry.

I'm very tired of the Corporations eliminating their competiton by using our Government as the bully to do its dirty work.

Wednesday, May 12, 2010

FDA brings out the big 'NAMES' in its court case

Not surprisingly, the FDA has brought some of its bully 'friends' to file amici briefs in its continuing court case which seems poised to determine the fate of the electronic cigarette in this country.

The American Academy of Pediatrics
The ACS (American Cancer Society)
The Cancer Action Network
The AHA (American Heart Association)
The American Legacy Foundation
The ALA (American Lung Association)
The AMA (American Medical Association)
The CTFK (Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids)
The Public Citizen

I have to ask: Why now? Why did these large, impressive, very public groups take it into their collective heads to NOW file in support of the FDA - a year after this case was first brought to light?

I think someone has switched tactics. Earlier in the year, there were bills in a few states introduced, quietly, which would have banned the sale of electronic cigarettes at the state level. These bills were worded almost identically in each of the different states - essentially granting the power to regulate them as drug-delivery devices to the FDA, circumnavigating this limbo the products find themselves in right now with the Federal court case.

Well, we vapers are a vocal bunch, and are tired of having our right to make informed decisions taken away from us. To date, none of these bills have passed into law.

I was fortunate enough to be part of the grass-roots movement supporting PV's. I went to IL on the day that state's bill was being discussed in the Health and Human Services committee, and I watched these committee members faces as they had the wool literally removed from their eyes regarding these products.

I watched a paid lobbyist for the ALA sit in that hearing chamber, I saw her body language change from confident to surprised to shaken to desperation to defeat, and I heard her LIE through her teeth when she spoke of the dangers of these products.

I watched vapers from MO, IL, and WI stand in front of that committee, and speak with eloquence and passion about PV's. Confident, they spoke the truth, and the truth rang genuine in their words.

By the time we left that conference room, there was no doubt in my mind that the fate of that bill was sealed - and I was right. It was not brought up for a vote. It died in that committee.

Shortly after that victory in IL, the above-mentioned three letter ass-ociations filed their want to appear as friends of the FDA. They are, for the time being, content to put all their mighty weight and pull behind the Federal court case, and not try to pick off the states one by one.

Each and every organization in the list up above has put their names and reputations on the line. They have shown themselves to be not, as their mission statements so boldly proclaim, for the betterment of public health, but for something else, something dark and unable to face the light of day.

These groups are anti-smoker, not anti-smoking. It is the action of smoking that they are campaigning against. Why else would they look at a product like the PV, and declare "we don't know what's in them," in one breath, and "The FDA found carcinogens and antifreeze in them," in the very next breath???

Gee, don't the two statements contradict each other?????

Facts are:

the ONLY way these charities recommend a person quit smoking is a product manufactured by the Pharmaceutical Giants, who just happen to pour a TON of donations into these organizations each year. (Can I say it without sounding facetious? Don't bite the hand that feeds you?)

The FDA study performed last year proved that PV's are multiple magnitudes safer than the product they were designed to replace: cigarettes.

They refuse to measure these products against cigarettes. Hell, they even refuse to measure these products against traditional pharmaceutical NRT products. They are hell-bent to establish a standard that these are measured against: abstinence of all things tobacco or emulating tobacco.

The only way they will allow people in this country to consume nicotine is if the experience is NOT enjoyable. How DARE we enjoy ourselves!

It's time to stop the madness. The ride needs to end, and the carnival needs to be packed up and move on to another show. the bearded lady needs to be shaved, the midgets need to grow up, and the barkers need to award the big prize.

I'm taking my money and putting it in a better place - and right now, anyplace is better than donating to these organizations who would rather I return to smoking than enjoy my PV, smoke-free for over a year!!!

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

Thinking Again

I am tired. Tired of the virulent hatred surrounding a practice I enjoy: Vaping.

There are bills now sitting on the dockets in MD and IL to ban the sale and distribution of any product not "approved by the FDA" to consume Nicotine. Now, not only does this push consumers to believe that cigarettes are approved, but it eliminates any and all competition to the US (and, to a certain extent, the world) nicotine market, forcing those who enjoy nicotine into inneffective pharma products or deadly (and overtaxed) tobacco for their fix.

It will force the practice of vaping underground. That's where all quality control goes out the window, folks...with black-market nicotine solutions being sold out of back-alleys. Where people are growing their own tobacco and extracting the nic out of it who have NO idea what they're doing.

And why are we going down this road? Power, control, money. The FDA released that press release over 6 months ago, and we're still feeling the impact of their ill-wishes. Their own limited testing found that PV's are magnitudes safer than cigarettes. Yet, their press release stated:

These products contain Propolyne Glycol, an ingredient found in asthma inhalers.

These products contain trace elements of carcinogens, comparable to the amounts found in FDA-approved NRT's.

These products contain nicotine in varying amounts, to appeal to a wide demographic of committed smokers.

These products come in a wide variety of flavors which may appeal to a large proportion of adult smokers, to tempt them away from deadly tobacco and in to a reduced-harm product that minimizes their risks of damage to body functions from repeated consumption of tobacco.

all in the wording, people. Had the FDA released their little press-bomb using positives instead of negatives, we wouldn't now be struggling to keep our right to make adult, informed decisions on what we put in our bodies. Shows you just who is pulling their strings, doesn't it?