Search This Blog

Wednesday, August 24, 2016

FDA Docs: Don't Tell Them Vaping is Winning...

The next item in the FDA NicoPure response is this (see previous post for links to the relevant documents):

"Second, the magnitude of the public health harm caused by tobacco use is “inextricably linked” to nicotine addiction. 75 Fed. Reg. 69,524, 69,528 (Nov. 12, 2010). “The pharmacologic and behavioral processes that determine tobacco addiction are similar to those that determine addiction to drugs such as heroin and cocaine.” Id. The power of nicotine addiction is perhaps best illustrated by the failure rate of individual cessation efforts. In 2004, for example, “although approximately 40.5 percent of adult smokers reported attempting to quit..., only between 3 and 5 percent were successful.” Id. at 69,529. The tobacco industry has long appreciated the importance of nicotine addiction to their sales. In an internal 1972 memo, one company acknowledged that “a tobacco product is, in essence, a vehicle for the delivery of nicotine”—a “potent drug with a variety of physiologic effects”—and that the “industry is then based upon the design, manufacture, and sale of attractive forms of nicotine.” 146 Cong. Rec. H1849 (Apr. 5, 2000) (statement of Rep. Ganske) (quoting an R.J. Reynolds memo)."

This is really clever.

What is not said is that combustion and tar are the real problems.

Which they are.

After reading the above quote supposes that "nicotine addiction" is the cause real cause of all the problems of smoking.

But its not because Philip Morris now sells the iQUOS - which heats tobacco to below combustion temperature so there is presumably fewer health issues - is new on the market this year.

Hmmm.... Must be no worse than smoking.

Oh wait - Philip Morris's market is currently in decline - 5% a year.  Guess they need vaping to go away (see below).

No burning - no problem!

Third on the FDA list is this:

"Third, the tobacco industry has long depended on recruiting underage users who become addicted before age 18. Congress found that, despite laws prohibiting the sale of tobacco products to minors, the “overwhelming majority of Americans who use tobacco products begin using such products while they are minors and become addicted to the nicotine in those products before reaching the age of 18.” Legislative Finding 31, Pub. L. No. 111-31, § 2, 123 Stat. 1776 (2009). Congress additionally found that “[a]dvertising, marketing, and promotion of tobacco products have been especially directed to attract young persons to use tobacco products, and Case 1:16-cv-00878-ABJ Document 42-2 Filed 08/16/16 Page 19 of 102 these efforts have resulted in increased use of such products by youth.” Legislative Finding 15; see also United States v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., 449 F. Supp. 2d 1, 572 (D.D.C. 2006) (the “central purpose of the tobacco companies’ image advertising is motivating adolescents to smoke”), aff’d in part, 566 F.3d 1095 (D.C. Cir. 2009). "

Again the alternative is left out.

If mom or dad vapes and its "less risk" (according to the FDA itself) why doesn't the FDA want children to also engage in less risky behavior?

Apparently having little Johnny smoking is better than vaping - even though its less risk.

How disingenuous is all this?

No one smokes in my house any more out of six adults.  Four children are no longer exposed to "combustion" smoking.

Yet there's apparently a big problem with this...

The bottom line here is that the FDA knows vaping works better:

In 2011, according to this WSJ article, the NRT (gum, patches, etc.) market was "$835 million market in annual U.S. retail sales of over-the-counter smoking-cessation aids."

The 2014 vaping market according to Wells Fargo?  Two billion ($2,000,000,000) more than twice the size of the NRT market.

Friday, August 19, 2016

FDA Docs: Smoking Beagles and Breast Cancer?

The FDA/nicotine/smoking/tobacco rabbit hole goes very deep.  I have cherry picked away at some of it and left crumbs for you to follow.  The going gets tough for a while so hang in there...

From the FDA Response to NicoPure (bottom of page #10):

"Although the FDA recognized that completely switching to e-cigarettes may reduce the risk of tobacco-related disease for individuals currently smoking conventional cigarettes—one of the deadliest products ever brought to market—it found that e-cigarettes still pose a number of significant health and safety risks. "

Okay, so out of the box the FDA agrees we have "less risk" with e-cigarettes.

Is that a health claim?

Of course, there are still a "number of significant health and safety risks."

So the next few posts are going to examine, in as painless a detail as possible, what the FDA says (next paragraph or so in the response):

"First, nicotine is “one of the most addictive substances used by humans,” 81 Fed. Reg. at 28,988, and “a powerful pharmacologic agent that acts in the brain and throughout the body,” Surgeon General’s Report (1988) at 14 (AR 1183). “[N]icotine is psychoactive (‘mood altering’) and can provide pleasurable effects,” and “causes physical dependence characterized by a withdrawal syndrome that usually accompanies nicotine abstinence.” Id. E-cigarettes can deliver as much nicotine as conventional cigarettes—sometimes more. 81 Fed. Reg. at 29,031."

(Gee, seems like Colorado weed falls into the "psychoactive mood altering and pleasurable" category as well... but that's another story I guess.)

Perhaps, but the first reference (81 Fed. Reg. at 28988, is a (Ref. 7) link to page 29095 #7).  This is, of course the FDA's citing the FDA's own deeming regulation.

The referenced document can be found here (the listed link appears to be broken but you can search the title of the document: "Institute of Medicine of the National Academies, ‘‘Ending the Tobacco Problem: A Blueprint for the Nation,’’ 2007").

This document is quite long and on the bottom of page #5 it says "First, nicotine is “one of the most addictive substances used by humans...”

However, this document also says this (underlines my own):

"The number of studies that have assessed the role of specific genes in smoking behavior continues to grow. The work of Malaiyandi and colleagues (2005), for example, suggests that cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2A6, the liver enzyme which mediates the conversion of nicotine to cotinine, may play an important role in smoking (Malaiyandi et al. 2005). 
In a review of recent genetic studies of nicotine dependence, Li (2006) presents evidence that several genes may be implicated in nicotine dependence (Li 2006). 
The results of these studies suggest that specific subgroups of smokers have a significantly higher probability of abstinence when they use nicotine patches, nicotine nasal spray, and bupropion treatment (Lerman et al. 2002, 2004; Swan et al. 2005). .... "

So maybe smoking is genetic?  (See this and this.)  This is a fascinating subject if you delve into it...

Next the 1988 Surgeon General report is here:

This is hundreds of pages in length but there are many interesting gems to be found besides the FDA's ominous quotes:

  • We discover, for example, that on page 106 much can be said about the chronic smoking of male beagles and their testicles.
  • We also discover that smoking in human women results to some degree is earlier menopause and lower incidences of breast cancer.
  • Smokers weigh less.  Wonder if this has anything to do with the current obesity crisis?

How interesting...

Perhaps nicotine is not all so bad after all.  I am certain that vaping to reduce breast cancer might be an attractive alternative to a mastectomy.

All in all the FDA is regurgitating decades of what every vaper already knows: smoking is bad, or, more specifically, smoking (combustion) tobacco is bad.  Decades of federal dollars flooding the coffers (I wonder if those federal dollars are as addicting as nicotine).

And yes, there can be negative effects of nicotine as well be most of what is said relates to animals.  Humans are often only "observed."

But these document often use "smoking" and "tobacco" and "nicotine" in interchangeable ways leading one to suspect that perhaps these three things have been considered the "same thing" until vaping came along.

Clearly this is all cherry picking: both on my part and the FDAs.

There are thousands of pages here and I am certain you can probably get those pages to say just about anything you wanted to regarding nicotine...

Just remember the 

Thursday, August 18, 2016

FDA: Not Telling the Truth in Court...

From the FDA website linked below...
As I have said before not even the FDA thinks nicotine outside the realm of "combustion tobacco" is addictive (from this FDA website):

"Now, the Food and Drug Administration—after reviewing scientific research on the safety of NRT products sold over the counter (OTC)—has decided that some warnings and limitations specified in the directions for use on the labels of these products are no longer necessary to make sure they are used safely and effectively to quit smoking.

The changes that FDA is allowing to these labels reflect the fact that although any nicotine-containing product is potentially addictive, decades of research and use have shown that NRT products sold OTC do not appear to have significant potential for abuse or dependence. [my underline, NRT=Nicotine Replacement Therapy]"

Since vaping isn't combustion tobacco and its also sold "OTC" how is this different?

Yet in their response to NicoPure's lawsuit here is what the FDA says about nicotine (page 4, first paragraph):

"Second, the magnitude of the public health harm caused by tobacco use is “inextricably linked” to nicotine addiction. 75 Fed. Reg. 69,524, 69,528 (Nov. 12, 2010). “The pharmacologic and behavioral processes that determine tobacco addiction are similar to those that determine addiction to drugs such as heroin and cocaine.” [my underline]"


A somewhat different story.

Yet I can buy these FDA-approved NRT products OTC anywhere - on Amazon, for example.

I don't have to do a single "age check."

Amazon doesn't know if its me behind the screen placing the order or my 13 year old grandson...

And they don't even think nicotine is addictive on their NRT web site.

Do these gums, etc. have actual leaf tobacco in them - nope.

And neither does vape.

The only difference I see is that the FDA has no control over vaping yet hence it cannot be an NRT.

Despite millions around the world no longer smoking "combustion tobacco."

People come into vape shops all the time, I personally have had this experience, and say their doctor told them to start vaping.

Again, where's the truth here FDA?

Wednesday, August 17, 2016

Nicotine Off Market as a Big Pharma "IND?"

This link describes how the FDA is generating new "guidance" (link here) related to supplements and the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA).

Vapers' and vape-related businesses need to be concerned as to what date "nicotine" became available for sale relative to the passage of DSHEA as well as exactly what it is besides now being a "tobacco product" - or, more correctly, what it was...

The link describes various scenarios" "...[a] drug company decides to corner the market on a whole list of ingredients to keep them out of the hands of supplement formulators forever more. This could very easily be done under this [new] guidance. Remember that it is not always clear what counts as a NDI or what has been grandfathered, so drug companies can use this confusion to claim that supplements which have been around for decades have been sufficiently “altered” that they can be claimed as drugs."

The "NDI" designation indicates when a "supplement" appeared on the market (before DSHEA its grandfathered and after its "NDI").

"IND" means a new drug under these proposed regulations.

If a company attempts to make nicotine an ingredient in a new drug product, in an "IND," nicotine would lose its status as "NDI" and be forced off the market.

Nicotine, though now an "imaginary" tobacco product, it didn't used to be and I do not know what it was relative to this prior to 8/8/2016.

In any case please read and repeat:

If nicotine is an "NDI" and is incorporated into a new "IND" application its no longer salable as a supplement under these proposed regulations.

These proposed regulations provide a neat back door for Big Pharma (or anyone really) to potentially control nicotine and remove public access to it forever.

Can this happen?

Probably, though there would likely be lawsuits from other Big Pharma as no single company would get to control nicotine for vaping, its simply too profitable!

Also nicotine is now sort of an "imaginary" "tobacco product" which DSHEA specifically exempts (does not include, i.e., tobacco is not a supplement).

The proposed regulations place restrictions on nicotine but its unclear, and I have worked with a DSHEA lawyer on this, as to what DSHEA implies relative to "nicotine" which is why this is dangerous and important to vaping.

DSHEA really, I don't believe, thinks nicotine is tobacco.  Hence it must be "something else..."

But what???

I do not think we can fall back to the prior legal cases related to vaping and the FDA from 2007.  The reason for this is the court told the FDA it couldn't make vaping into a medical device.

This is a different animal in that nicotine could be controlled "by inclusion" in a "drug" application to the FDA.  Its not the FDA deciding what it is.

And this has happened already, a variant of vitamin B6 was eliminated from the market both as a drug and supplement because of its inclusion in an "IND."


Tuesday, August 16, 2016

Philip Morris: Free on Facebook

Meet the iQOS from Philip Morris (PM):

I wouldn't know about this save for the "People Also Shared" iQUOS add from none other than Facebook?

And more!  In the third panel about poor, sad PM laying people off to expand their "improved health" product investments.

But wait, aren't such claims disallowed under the new FDA deeming regs?

This just showed up today on my Facebook feed.

Wow!  People must be "talking about it!"

Except the article is from March, 2016...?

AND Facebook doesn't let anyone advertise anything related to vaping...

Or does it?

Maybe if someone shares it? My private post?  Suddenly people I don't know get to find out about things others are "talking about"?

Gee, sounds like advertising to me...

Perhaps someone should be talking to Facebook and Zuckerberg about prison...

Let's imagine that 1,000s of Philip Morris Facebook goons share this amongst each other to build up the interest...

No, regardless of how much vape stuff "I share" or "I see" none of that makes it up to this level of "talking about..."

How interesting.

So no, this iQUOS crap wasn't just shared into popularity.

Its a plant.

Look at the middle panel: E-Cig poisoning on the rise!

Let me guess, the new Philip Morris product resolves the poisoning issue by making a nice, Big Tobacco product that not mixed in someone's garage or basement...

I suppose somehow Philip Morris can have a article written about their uninteresting, tobacco leaf-based non-vaping no-proof-its-healthier crappy product just so it can magically appear on my Facebook feed.

Guess old Zuckerberg is cool with PM pushing their "improved health" investment opportunities...

Zuckerberg needs prison for this...

Sunday, August 14, 2016

FDA: Air Fresheners Meet the ENDS Standard

(NOTE: Though the tone here is "sarcastic" the science is not...)

As if convenience store "manufacturing" of tobacco weren't bad enough there's a second, more serious issue:

Air fresheners.

A few examples include:

"Scent Warmers"

"Essential Oil Diffusers"

These devices contain warmers that heat chemicals or use atomizers to disperse chemicals for you to inhale.

Yes, indeed, if you smell something you are inhaling it.  Molecules that pass through your nasal passages enter into your lungs after you smell them, hence inhalation.

According to this blog twenty or more million Glade plugins are sold each year.  And there are many manufacturers, e.g., Air Wick, besides Glade.

These units are ENDS systems.

Plain and simple and match exactly the words of the FDA regulations (see page #8):

"The following is a nonexhaustive list of examples of components and parts used with electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) (including ecigarettes): e-liquids; atomizers; batteries (with or without variable voltage); cartomizers (atomizer plus replaceable fluid-filled cartridge); digital display/lights to adjust settings; clearomisers, tank systems, flavors, vials that contain e-liquids, and programmable software."

But, you say, nicotine is not in these products.  Er, well, bear with me...

First off what's in this "Fresh Citrus Blossom" Glade product (remember, designed for inhalation) would be this:

"(e)-1-(2,6,6-trimethyl-1-cyclohexen-1-yl)-2-buten-1-one; [(3,7-dimethyl-6-octenyl)oxy]acetaldehyde; [1-methyl-2-[(4,4,5-trimethyl-3-bicyclo[3.1.0]hexanyl)methyl]cyclopropyl]methanol; 1-(2,6,6-trimethylcyclohex-3-en-1-yl)2-buten-1-one; 2,4-dimethyl-3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde; 2,6,10-trimethylundec-9-enal; 2,6-dimethyl-7-octen-2-ol; 2-phenoxyethyl isobutyrate; 2-t-butylcyclohexyl acetate; 3.alpha.,4,5,6,7,7.alpha.-hexahydro-4,7-methano-1h-indenyl propionate; 3-hexenol; 3-methyl-2-butenyl acetate; 4,4.alpha.,5,9.beta.-tetrahydroindeno(1,2-d)-1,3-dioxin; 4-methylanisole; 5-methyl-2-(2-methylpropyl)-1,3-dioxane; amyl cinnamal; benzaldehyde; benzyl acetate; benzyl butyrate; butyl ester of pvm/ma copolymer; cyclamen aldehyde; decanal; dimethyl heptenal; dipropylene glycol; ethyl 2-methyl-1,3-dioxolane-2-acetate; ethyl 2-methylbutyrate; ethyl 2-methylvalerate; ethyl butyrate; ethyl isovalerate; ethyl linalool; ethyl methylphenylglycidate; ethyl salicylate; ethyl trimethylcyclopentene butenol; ethyl vanillin; gamma-decalactone; gamma-nonalactone; gamma-undecalactone; geranyl acetate; hexenyl acetate; hexyl 2-methylbutyrate; hexyl acetate; hexyl butyrate; hexyl propionate; indole; isoamyl acetate; isoamyl allylglycolate; isobutenyl methyltetrahydropyran; isobutyl methyl tetrahydropyranol; isopropylphenylbutanal; lauraldehyde; linalool; methyl anthranilate; methyl benzodioxepinone; methyl Ionones; methyl n-methylanthranilate; nona-2,6-dien-1-ol; nonadienal; phenethyl alcohol; ppg-2 methyl ether acetate; terpineol; trans-hex-2-en-1-ol; undecylenal"

Considerably more ingredients than an e-cigarette.

And remember, these are in the rooms of your small children and family.

So what if I had, say a Walmart, where I sold both Vuse and Glade products?

Certainly a Glade product that atomizes fragrance for inhalation with heat would be considered an "atomizer" in the FDA regulations sense (the Glade site says its an atomizer).

And Walmart is, in fact, a "vape shop" by any stretch of the imagination because it sells a variety of e-cigarettes right at the "tobacco" checkout.

And these Glade things contain ingredients like "ethyl vanillin."  This is a "fragrance" sold as such to giant companies like SC Johnson (who make Glade) and is also exactly what you might find in a "big tobacco" vape...

SO it must be safe to inhale, right?

What about "ethyl trimethyl cyclopentene butenol" (see this - its a synonym for "(E)-2-ethyl-4-(2,2,3-trimethyl-1-cyclopent-3-enyl)but-2-en-1-ol").  Why, its a perfume agent, just like you might by from, say, a standard vape flavor source.  (I can't seem to find it under the FDA GRAS list for food much less for "inhalation..."

(You and your kids are inhaling it right now - day in and day out - probably for years or decades...)

And certainly the FDA requires any ENDS-based products for inhalation, whether they contain nicotine or not in a "vape shop," to be properly marked as "tobacco products."

But I see that air fresheners are not...

So what's going on here?

Bullshit is what's going on...

Regulatory fraud is what's going on...

Vape shops have been singled out for targeted enforcement.

Trust me, no FDA inspector is going to Walmart and start seizing the Glade plugins or Vuse.

But if you should mix a simple nicotine-free e-liquid and not charge someone to sample it its prison for you....

So here's the plan:

1) Go out and buy a Glade (or AirWick or whatever) plugin system (make sure it has an atomizer or "heats" the fragrance).

2) Hook it up so that it runs and then buy a pack or two of refills and add them to your shop's inventory (and yes, in Pennsylvania at least, add 40% of the retail price to your tobacco tax form).

3) Now sell one to someone.

So now several things are true:

A) You and your vape shop are just like Walmart (or Target or K-Mart) - same products for sale, same ingredients, etc.

B) Your Glade product, because you also sell nicotine, must be marked as such because anyone who walks into your shop is now "vaping," i.e., "inhaling" a chemical mix of non-nicotine vape (this would include the FDA inspector).

C) You must therefore demand payment before the inhalation of the "vaping" compounds in your shop.

(If you are interested check out the Youtube videos for refilling air freshener cartridges... Put some e-liquid in one ... er, wait - you probably wouldn't want to inhale what's in an air freshener...)

WARNING (Adults only past this point...)

These FUCKING IDIOTS are putting Fabuloso into their Glade plugins...

There are many, many youtube videos of this.

(I assume a bottle of Fabuloso is far cheaper than a Glade plugin hence this mania...)

Gee, I wonder what inhaling C9-11 Pareth-8 does (here's the MSDS if you've got a strong stomach...)  More here.  Irritates mucous membranes...  No wonder little Johnny has asthma.

Better yet, at least one video had some kid sitting in the room no doubt enjoying the "fresh smelling" house.

Where's the FDA?

Fabuloso as an inhalant.

No outrage...

Not nicotine so no problem...

Where's the outrage?

Saturday, August 13, 2016

Zig Zag Live Tonight!

Zig Zag at Mogie's TONIGHT!

9 PM - 1 AM Saturday, August 13th

FDA: Convenience Store Tobacco "Manufacturing"

So let's take a look at this video:

Here we see someone testing a device (its called, ironically, a "pusher") for a retail store that dispenses cigarettes.  This fits into a larger device like this:

No doubt you've seen these in convenience stores - like every convenience store in the USA and probably most of the world.

Cigarettes, you see, arrive from the manufacturer at the retailers store in something like this:

A large box with many cartons.

Inside a cigarette "carton" you will find individual packs of cigarettes organized much like this "carton" of coils:

Oh wait, I guess cigarettes are in cartons like this:

I wonder what the difference is?

After all both are "tobacco products", er, well, the box of coils might be a tobacco product unless it was used for vaping weed...

If the convenience store retailers takes the carton of Marlboros apart is he not "manufacturing tobacco" just like the poor SOB running a vape shop and taking a single coil out of a box?

I have to break the "seal" on the carton.

I have to take the carton out of a larger box.

Why is this magically (and I do mean magically) different for folks with a vape shop?

(Note: One could argue, I suppose, the "coils" are stuck together by packaging and hence make a single "unit" of some sort.   But then again, disassembling things is not the same as "assembling" things.  The box of coils is not sealed, like the carton of cigarettes above, its sort of like the "box" that ships from the cigarette manufacturer...)

The distinction is pure regulatory bullshit.

(See this video linked below.  Look, the guy is taking cigarettes out of the shipping box and then out of the carton and putting them into a "pusher" as above... )

(It's hard to find any videos of people unpacking cigarettes and putting them on retail shelves its so common and ordinary.)

And what if, in the convenience store, I take the cellophane off the cigarette pack and ask the clerk to throw it away?  Wouldn't the clerk by consorting with their employer to "manufacture" tobacco?

Or what if I have arthritis and I ask the clerk to open the pack for me?

After all, if I buy the cigarettes the clerk and the convenience store no longer own them.

I own them.

So if I ask you to do a favor for me with something I own what's the issue?

The FDA themselves in videos say its only if the retailer "does something" is it manufacturing?

Like "assemble" a collection of cigarette packs into a "machine" like a pusher?

Certainly I could purchase a "pusher" and even buy cigarettes at a store that subsequently goes out of business, and, at the going out of business sale, I could also buy the "pusher".

I got news for you FDA, retailers, at least according to your new regulations, are "manufacturing" things every day.

Come on FDA, why is my local convenience store not manufacturing???

Isn't this just "selective enforcement...?" There are 155,000 convenience stores in the US along.

Someone should go around and take videos of this stuff.

Sunday, August 7, 2016

The Government's Children: Tobacco, Zika, and Vaping...

It would seem unfortunate for the US, for South America, and virtually anyone else in the world that the Zika virus is not somehow related to tobacco.

Tobacco you say?

If it were it would be jeopardizing Dr. Tom Frieden's CDC tobacco revenue for "anti tobacco marketing" something would have been done about it already.

(Well, the FDA, the state of Pennsylvania, and the CDC could quickly gain control over Zika by just "pretend" that anyone entering the US with the Zika virus was carrying an un-tax-stamped, illegally purchased vape or pack of cigarettes and they would be immediately put directly into federal prison... Hmmm... Maybe Obama could just write out an executive order?  I digress...)

About 1,200 people in the US alone die each day from smoking-related illness.  The FDA, Frieden, and Mitch Zeller have worked hard to preserve this.  After all "tobacco & related illness" costs in the US, if treated as its own economic "country" would be in the top fifty economies in the world...

Think about this - the US tobacco & related illnesses together - if thought of economically as a country - would be be about the size of the Czech Republic.

Little wonder nothing can be done to stop it.

Imagine if suddenly the entire infrastructure of the Czech Republic simply vanished leaving millions homeless, jobless, standing naked on the scorched earth.  The impact would be far worse than the Haiti earthquakes which killed say 200,000 and cause problems for perhaps a million people in total.  The Czech Republic - with perhaps ten times the inhabitants would create a disaster of on precedented magnitude.

Now that the FDA has declared vaping a "tobacco product" so the tobacco economy can continue because the consequences of it failing are too much for them to imagine.

Nurses and doctors unemployed, probably by the millions, and hospitals empty of the sick and dying.

No more giant cigarette factories cranking out product.

If you really think the government gives one hoot about your or "your children" read this report on child labor on the tobacco farms (image above)...

Soon children will go back to smoking instead of vaping.

Soon children will be back on tract to become card carrying members of the tobacco economy.

Here in Pennsylvania perhaps a half dozen vape shops right around my home have disappeared in the last few weeks (Pennsylvania wisely realized that it needs to start moving new products into the Tobacco Master Settlement category or trouble will rear up very soon and tobacco companies will be unable to pump the Commonwealth's coffers full of cash).  The 40% vaping tax will ensure that people will return to smoking and that Tom Wolfe, the governor, can "close his budget gap" on the backs of children.

Now compare the reaction by the government to Zika...

Zika is well known to cause direct, objective harm to children.

Fortunately it doesn't touch tobacco revenue so the CDC can still sit around and do nothing.

Even though the CDC knows we have a ridiculous no-holds-barred "open door" policy at our boarders.

Even though we send thousands of athletes to a Zika-infested country.

Even though, at least according to the Miami Herald, we see a "hockey stick" rise in new Zika cases:

My point is that the CDC really does basically nothing but redistribute wealth.

The "flu shots" it supports do nothing by any rigorous scientific analysis.

Its all about them wanting you to "believe" they are helping you.

But in fact they are only preserving their economic well being.

Remember, we could stop the influx of Zika just by pretending those entering our country with the virus simply carried an unstamped pack of illegal cigarettes...

Thank God for political correctness and the hispanic vote (oh wait, won't the poor be disproportionally affected by Zika...?)

(On the other hand, we can just let the southern USA burn - Zika will never get as far north as Washington, DC and the outlying Virginia suburbs... Or will it Tom Frieden?)

Monday, August 1, 2016

Zika Babies: No Real Impact on US Tobacco Taxes

Zika baby from the linked Ars Technica article
This Ars Technica article among many outlines the dangers of the Zika virus from the world:

Around 4,000 confirmed and suspected cases of microcephaly in 2015, up from 147 cases in 2014 - a twenty seven (x27) fold increase in one year.

Suggestions that women put off having children until 2018 in Brazil and other parts of South America.

Zika spreading in Columbia according to the CDC.

The dangers of microcephaly include:

  • Seizures
  • Developmental delay, such as problems with speech or other developmental milestones (like sitting, standing, and walking)
  • Intellectual disability (decreased ability to learn and function in daily life)
  • Problems with movement and balance
  • Feeding problems, such as difficulty swallowing
  • Hearing loss
  • Vision problems

These problems are not speculative.  The exist in thousands of South American children today.  No doubt more will be born soon: there and here.

And what has the CDC does about this since it is now active in Florida (note that Ars Technica map excludes the USA)?

Basically nothing up until now though just recently the CDC issued a warning about traveling to Miami - at the behest of the poor bastards living where Zika thrives...

The map below, again from the Ars article, shows what's happening.  No doubt we'll begin to see this across the souther USA very soon.

So what does this all have to do with vaping?

Well, for one thing, like vaping (supposedly) its a danger to children.  Unlike the CDC warnings on vaping Zika is an objective (proven, actual) danger for children in the womb as well as for the elderly.  Four thousand children harmed...

Yet the CDC has done absolutely nothing to prevent the spread of Zika in the US.


No quarantine.

Nada, er, well, maybe helping out by telling people to drain standing water and use bug spray.

The CDC has known about this for a long time.

It's been all over the news for many weeks because the Olympics start in Brazil in a few days and athletes are choosing not to go rather than risk exposure.

Vaping, to my knowledge, at least so far has harmed a very few people, mostly due to battery issues.  And certainly its not given 4,000 children anything like microcephaly.

So it would seem from the CDC perspective that its completely OK to let something like Zika into the US regardless of the potential harm.

All in the name of political correctness and fattening the DNC voter rolls.

Oh, and I guess that babies with Zika don't really impact the US Cigarette Tax structure.

So we can let them Zika in.

People can get sick.  The elderly will die.  (Remember Ebola - no danger there - just ask those who are 'still recovering'...)

God forbid we restrict travel...

(Thank God that there's no active plague ravaging some poor country right now...)

Vaping, on the hand, a far, far, far less dangerous activity, is now practically banned by the FDA.

All in the name of saving the children...

Remember the "children" when you think about the new cases of Zika here in the US.

Think about Dr. Tom Frieden, CDC director, and his compassion for the "children" when you fire up your vape.

Vaping, unlike Zika, will save lives, will help people breath better, need less medical care...

(Oops! Better scratch that last one... can't have any union healthcare workers out of a job... Hell, Zika here in the US will probably mean more and better union jobs in the crappy Obamanomic disaster of an economy.)

There will be many cases of Zika here; its already spreading to unlikely places and band-aid quarantines will do little to hold things together.

(Unlike SARS - remember how SARS was going to kill us all - when the government doesn't trumpet fear to the heavens you know there is real danger.  SARS will kill us according to the CDC - remember?)

Thanks, Tom.

Thanks for keeping our collective priorities straight.