Showing posts with label forbes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label forbes. Show all posts

Friday, January 24, 2014

Big Cities Lead in E-Cig Superstition

In another pro-ecig article from Forbes, Dr. Gilbert Ross of the American Council on Science and Health looks at how the superstitious fear of electronic cigarettes is being promoted by America’s big cities.


“Making e-cigs inaccessible for desperate smokers by inane restrictions will send this message: “Keep on smoking.” To those who say, “We just don’t know what might happen,” I respond, we sure do know what happens with the real ones: almost half a million dead American smokers every year.”


Ross is amazed that these places, where daily life is so completely based on technology and embracing the new, seem to be where all the baseless opposition to e-cigarettes is coming from. With Los Angeles, Chicago and New York all leading the charge to ban e-cigarettes, treating them exactly the same as tobacco, it is only in places like Wisconsin that we see governments making an effort to treat electronic cigarettes as what they are: a new product that has next to nothing in common with traditional cigarettes.


Ross takes oin all the arguments these cities have made: from claims that bans protect children, to the idea that electronic cigarettes are toxic, and counters them with facts and common sense, making the point that discouraging smokers from switching to electronic cigarettes could come at the cost of a great many deaths caused by smoking tobacco.


Big U.S. Cities Foment Baseless, Superstitious Fear Of Electronic Cigarettes | Forbes



Big Cities Lead in E-Cig Superstition

Thursday, April 11, 2013

SAotD: A Derp Moment from Forbes

forbes com logoIt’s been several days since I’ve seen a completely nonsensical quote about e-cigarettes that I hadn’t seen a million times before. Congratulations, Forbes, for the Stupid Article of the Day. Specifically, what won the prestigious award would be this quote from contributor Ilya Pozin:



“While e-cigs aren’t considered to be real cigarettes, why do both Facebook and Google forbid their manufacturers to advertise on their sites? This leads us to question both the effects and components of this product.”



This is the stuff neck-breaking facepalms are made of. I’ve re-read this several times trying a find a way to interpret it that doesn’t mean that Pozin relies on the people who run Facebook and Google to form his opinions of a product’s effectiveness  and the quality of the ingredients used in it.


Facebook and Google don’t allow e-cigarette ads, so they must be bad?  This is some of the screwiest, most backward logic I’ve ever seen in print, and I make it my business see a lot of backward logic.


The rest of the article seems to at least attempt a balanced look at the subject, but in two short sentences, Pozin managed to completely destroy any credibility he may have otherwise had, and turn the entire article into a joke.  There’s just no way I’d be able to take an article seriously after the writer admits he bases his opinion of a product’s quality on the advertising policies of social networking sites.


Electronic Cigarettes: Booming Industry Or Health Fiasco?



SAotD: A Derp Moment from Forbes