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 has never been a harm reduction strategy (seatbelts, methadone, face masks) that wasn't met with initial hostility. But the opposition to THR yields particular strange fruits. The motiviations seemingly go beyond just financial benefits from tobacco aftereffects. But since those anti-scientific efforts are unfolding at the very present, they provide a great opportunity to investigate the impetus and some of the psychology. Obviously armchair diagnosis will go nowhere, so this project will attempt some classification first.
- List some relevant organizations, in particular Bloomberg front groups.
- Political parties are on-topic, if there were attempts at curtailing smoking cessation.
- Attempt documenting NGO/FPH relations, and probable motivations (mostly for benefit of the doubt; it's just observational classification).
- Try to come up with a scoring system on scientific contravention, even if only approximating a list of points to check.
- Don't put every word on the gold scale for e.g. PAVe or public appearances. But for TI/WHO: do.
This wiki is built upon a source control system. Registration is open, no email address required. But might have to be curtailed later (if Wikipedia brigadiers get involved).
public mailing list
Half of the worlds problems are caused by people not talking to each other.
-- brought to you by smart-sounding simpleton quotes®
This project started as naming joke on the Truth Initiative. (Originally for tobacco reduction and undoing the tobacco industries disinformation; but now resorts to similar tactics). The very american trope with their fallacious name is the motivation for HI.
Also obviously this is a partisan pro-vaping/harm reduction assessment. No financial ties to e-cig, tobacco, pharma or tax preservation efforts. Publicity is the enemy of background lobbying.