The debate on electronic cigarettes

Unbelievable response from McKee,Chapman,Glantz and Daube in response to the Lorien Jollye Lancet article. Factually inaccurate, playing the victim complete with veiled Astroturf accusations:

Two things are now clear. First, the advocates of e-cigarettes seem only willing to engage on their own terms. Second, anyone with the temerity to suggest that e-cigarettes are anything other than the game changing solution to the problem of tobacco will be subject to grossly offensive attacks,2 with growing evidence that these are being orchestrated

 E-cigarettes in the UK: a more inclusive debate is needed

Loriens article as published in The Lancet:

What a peculiar situation I find myself in. Not long after starting vaping—after 23 years of smoking—I realised that things were being grossly misunderstood about what e-cigarettes could offer to smokers. Naively I, and others, thought we could explain to politicians and public health experts where they were going wrong. We are normal people trying to dispel fears and misconceptions with experience and knowledge. We have struggled to get the ear of the very people who are advising the Government, WHO, and the public. We have been insulted or ignored, often both, in a shockingly aggressive way. Why?

 Clipped. But Published

Loriens Original Article – Full Text

The reason I am blogging this is not for the same reason as the BMJ letter entry. This time, my letter has been published in the Lancet, albeit abridged. That is why I wanted to put up the complete text that I sent. The shorter, published, version can be found here.
I should say that the editing was not done without my input and they were very patient and helpful.

The low spark of highly placed boot boys

And a Fantastic response from Jo Lincoln – Redhead Full of Steam

Quite why these four eminent professors are “surprised” is a question that defeats any attempt I may make to answer it. The facts of the matter are childishly simple. Whilst it is true that many in the public health community are actively engaging with e-cigarette users, it is also true that many others (including all four of the authors of this response) routinely block any attempt at communication from e-cigarette users. It’s also a matter of record that members of the public health community have indeed taken time out of their day to hurl insults at e-cigarette users. Quite eminent members, in fact. Members such as… oh, I don’t know… Martin McKee, Simon Chapman, John Ashton…

Martin McKee – lying troll

More response here from The Random Vaper

As far as I am aware, the only people who could be described as e-cigarette advocates at that seminar were myself, Dick Puddlecote and Chris Snowden, mine and Dick’s blogs about the event can be found here and here.

Even in the Q&A session at the end McKee was taking questions from the audience then rewording them as he put them to the speakers as if for some reason the speakers themselves couldn’t hear or understand the originators.

Funding from GSK

Dear London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine,

During you last complete financial year, how much total funding
have you received from Glaxo Smith Kline (GSK) in terms of
donations, research funding, staff or student sponsorships and any
other source of income ?

Yours faithfully,

Matt Gluggles

Pathetic response from Glantz, McKee, Chapman and some guy named Daube…

I’m not going to try to be as eloquent as Beki Vapes or The Red Head Full of Steam or even The Random Vaper. All three of my fellow bloggers are much better than myself at this writing malarkey and have described in full detail all the things I wish I could have said myself

Tobacco Control Dinosaurs vs Cornwall Waitress

Because it was with astonishment that I read on Friday that these global tobacco industry heavyweights had conspired to produce an attack piece over a Lancet article written by … a housewife and part-time waitress from Cornwall…..

Tobacco Control leaders and e-cig victimhood

Since this in an area in which I have some expertise I decided to respond (available, along with the subsequent responses referred to, via the link above). I don’t think there is anything in my reply which was personal, or particularly aggressive, especially in the context of the tone of the original blog. My response was posted by the BMJ on 24th April, and I tweeted a link to it the same day, as did @Clive_Bates, prompting the following exchange….

Stop! Wait a minute Mr. Postman…

Thanks to the magic of the internet, clicking on one of the links in this list will automatically open your default mail app, thereby saving you the effort of doing so. Given that Christmas is approaching fast, this is surely a boon for the busy hostess…..

Block Together

A Tobacco Control Resource!

Block Together is designed to reduce the burden of blocking when many accounts are attacking you, or when a few accounts are attacking many people in your community

More on #lancetgate 15th Dec

Voices From The Street.

Lorien Jollye

This week we saw a response to my letter. I admit to being surprised, especially as to the people that chose to respond. Profs Martin McKee, Simon Chapman, Stanton Glantz and Mike Daube. I was even more surprised at the content of their response.

 Debating e-cigarettes with Professor Martin McKee

Clive Bates

There is much discussion about willingness to enter debate about e-cigarettes following this letter from Professors McKee, Glantz, Chapman and Daube. I will return to this letter shortly, but in the meantime here’s an example of how it works in practice. In July, I sent an email to Professor McKee of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, challenging some of the criticisms of legitimate scientists he had made in the media, suggesting he discuss his concerns with the scientists he was criticising, and personally offering to debate with him debate in a public forum. Here’s the what I sent…..