E-cigs to be Banned

Via Facebook and UK Vapers today:

Now another massive blow to the harm reduction market, UK authorities have decided to ban all recreational nicotine, bar tobacco on the basis of a flawed ‘consultation’ and in spite of thousands of testimonies about the value of recreational sales.

400,000 existing UK users of electronic cigarettes and millions of potential swappers are now left with no legal alternative to smoke. The small businesses which brought us these life changing products are to be destroyed and the unregulated, higher risk import market will be the only source of supplies for people who bother to go to the trouble to try the product. The disproportionate and unjustified burden of medical regulation may well destroy the usefulness of the product and make it unprofitable. (For more details about commercial and economic impacts, Michael from http://www.cheapelectroniccigarettes.co.uk/ says he can tell you how his business will be affected – sales@cheap-electronic-cigarettes.co.uk )

Keeping people smoking, stigmatised, quitting, failing and repeating the process is how tobacco control keeps their gravy train running – over our dead bodies. The NHS is no longer a public health organisation, it is the state’s drug dealing arm and we’re forced by rent seeking legislation to use only their drugs while being subjected to non-consensual addiction treatment or exclusion from healthcare, care homes and social venues.

Nicotine has a similar pharmacological action to caffeine, it’s not a big deal but the delivery system can be harmful. The government will only allow the most harmful or those proven not to work, creating a problem and spinning it out of control; costing a fortune in financial, social and human terms.

Over twenty countries have closed their recreational nicotine markets since electronic cigarettes emerged six years ago. This medicalisation process is promoted by the World Health Organisation which only endorses proven ineffective pharmaceutical products and encourages suppression of harm reduction strategies.

Presumably the medicalisation of all recreational substances is the goal for totalitarian control.

A link was provided to a letter sent by West Sussex County Council on 29 July 2010, in which it is written:

As we discussed during our visit back in June, the MHRA have been in consultation over whether electronic cigarettes should be classed as medical products and regulated as such. I have been in discussions with other Trading Standards authorities and have found out that the consultation is almost complete. The outcome will be that as of a date (yet to be announced) there will be a 21 days period and then these products will be outright banned in the UK, unless the traders apply for certification as a medical device from the MRHA. This process could be complicated and costly so it is expected that many traders may cease trading.

First one unnecessary and vindictive ban, and now another. All that there is in an e-cig is nicotine and inert propylene glycol and flavouring. There are no carcinogens like benzapyrene which are found in tobacco smoke (and in fact in more or less all combustion products). Nothing is burned in an e-cig. So there is no health threat to vapers, and in particular no health threat to any third party. If it’s the nicotine that regarded as a threat, why aren’t nicotine patches banned too?

A lot of smokers have moved over to exclusively vaping instead of smoking. Their only option now will be to go back to smoking. I’ve got an e-cig (a Titan) which I hardly use, but came in really handy last winter in pubs, and when I came down with flu.

The real reason for the ban is probably to protect Big Pharma’s profits from nicotine patches (which will remain legal, natch). Patches have about a 1% success rate at weaning smokers off tobacco. But because using e-cigs is almost exactly like smoking, it’s much easier for smokers to quit smoking using them.

Either that, or antismoking campaigners want to stop people putting anything that looks like a cigarette in their mouths and even inhaling air through it.

The possibility of a ban on e-cigs has been foreseen, of course. What if e-cigs are just marketed as ‘flavour inhalers’ with no nicotine in them at all? That’ll probably happen now.

These nazis are storing up more and more trouble for themselves. They’re all just filthy bastards. And one day they’re going to be destroyed. Every single last one of them. And this measure will only serve to hasten that day.

P.S. F2C responds. And Pat Nurse. And Leg-iron. Plus Chris Snowdon. And now Anna Raccoon too!

About the archivist

smoker
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

46 Responses to E-cigs to be Banned

  1. Anonymous says:

    One either submissively accepts this further victimisation or one fights back. The government and their anti-smoking acolytes have deemed us outlaws … so be it, outlaws we shall be.
    Smoking Hot

  2. Anonymous says:

    One either submissively accepts this further victimisation or one fights back. The government and their anti-smoking acolytes have deemed us outlaws … so be it, outlaws we shall be.
    Smoking Hot

  3. Anonymous says:

    Disgusting…
    …that’s the only word I can come up with at the moment. What an outrage.
    -WS

  4. Anonymous says:

    Disgusting…
    …that’s the only word I can come up with at the moment. What an outrage.
    -WS

  5. timbone59 says:

    Thoroughly predicdable. Go back to 1979. Tobacco companies are not evil, they are a business. They had a ‘safer’ cigarette ready to market, it was banned. (No internet then, so it never saw the light of day). The ecig has gone further, not a ‘safer’ cigarette but a ‘safe’ cigarette, and there lies the problem. If there was a more discreet LED on the stem, if it looked as much like a cigarette as asparagus, would we have the same problem? By the way, I tried the ecig, and it has long gone into my recycle bin. Having said that, if I did not have an endless supply of tobacco from Spain, maybe I would have taken to it. If you have not experienced the satisfaction of nicotine, or don’t want to, you will ban it, however it is delivered.

  6. timbone59 says:

    Thoroughly predicdable. Go back to 1979. Tobacco companies are not evil, they are a business. They had a ‘safer’ cigarette ready to market, it was banned. (No internet then, so it never saw the light of day). The ecig has gone further, not a ‘safer’ cigarette but a ‘safe’ cigarette, and there lies the problem. If there was a more discreet LED on the stem, if it looked as much like a cigarette as asparagus, would we have the same problem? By the way, I tried the ecig, and it has long gone into my recycle bin. Having said that, if I did not have an endless supply of tobacco from Spain, maybe I would have taken to it. If you have not experienced the satisfaction of nicotine, or don’t want to, you will ban it, however it is delivered.

  7. Anonymous says:

    Of course they’re going to ban the e-cig. Nothing could possibly be more frustrating to today’s anti-smokers than seeing a group that they so enjoy persecuting and alienating getting round their attempts in a harmless, legal and – worst of all – enjoyable way.
    This latest announcement convinces me now 100% that the anti-smoking movement, each and every last one of them, with no exceptions – from the leading lights at the top to the faux coughers and hand-flappers in the local High Street – are sadistic, cowardly, lying, bullying scum. That’s what drives them. Not the cheeldren, not public health, not dislike of pubs, not even the financial rewards. It’s a driving need to dominate, to be seen to be more important, stronger, superior, better. Maybe in the early days there were a few people who misguidedly but genuinely believed that they were acting in the public’s best health interests. Not now. These days every frustrated, worthless piece of snot who doesn’t have any real control or influence in his own life just has to join the anti-smoking bandwagon and – hey presto – they’ve got a ready-made target group upon whom they can, with impunity, vent their feelings of bitterness and anger over the miserable state of their unsatisfactory little lives and the insignificant part they play within them, supported and funded by a Government who are either too blind to see what’s happening, or too cowardly to confront it.

  8. Anonymous says:

    Of course they’re going to ban the e-cig. Nothing could possibly be more frustrating to today’s anti-smokers than seeing a group that they so enjoy persecuting and alienating getting round their attempts in a harmless, legal and – worst of all – enjoyable way.
    This latest announcement convinces me now 100% that the anti-smoking movement, each and every last one of them, with no exceptions – from the leading lights at the top to the faux coughers and hand-flappers in the local High Street – are sadistic, cowardly, lying, bullying scum. That’s what drives them. Not the cheeldren, not public health, not dislike of pubs, not even the financial rewards. It’s a driving need to dominate, to be seen to be more important, stronger, superior, better. Maybe in the early days there were a few people who misguidedly but genuinely believed that they were acting in the public’s best health interests. Not now. These days every frustrated, worthless piece of snot who doesn’t have any real control or influence in his own life just has to join the anti-smoking bandwagon and – hey presto – they’ve got a ready-made target group upon whom they can, with impunity, vent their feelings of bitterness and anger over the miserable state of their unsatisfactory little lives and the insignificant part they play within them, supported and funded by a Government who are either too blind to see what’s happening, or too cowardly to confront it.

  9. Anonymous says:

    Anon, very well put. I’ve quoted you chez moi.

  10. Anonymous says:

    Anon, very well put. I’ve quoted you chez moi.

  11. Anonymous says:

    OT – fallout htpothosis
    OT
    Frank, more on the fall out hypothosis, I have dragged up some images and put them on a “stub” blog. I have colourized a lung cancer map that has a greater range from lowest to highest areas. The volitiliy is massive and appears to follow rain patterns just like your cesium 137 map. Were it rains more you get more radiation and where you get more raditation you get more lung cancer.
    http://alternativeanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/07/nuke-sitesrain-and-rivers.html
    http://alternativeanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/07/drip-drip-drop-little-april-showers.html
    http://alternativeanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/07/clearing-air.html
    http://alternativeanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/07/air-has-cleared.html
    http://alternativeanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/07/90s-and-lung-cancer-throws-its-toys-out.html
    Fredrik

  12. Anonymous says:

    OT – fallout htpothosis
    OT
    Frank, more on the fall out hypothosis, I have dragged up some images and put them on a “stub” blog. I have colourized a lung cancer map that has a greater range from lowest to highest areas. The volitiliy is massive and appears to follow rain patterns just like your cesium 137 map. Were it rains more you get more radiation and where you get more raditation you get more lung cancer.
    http://alternativeanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/07/nuke-sitesrain-and-rivers.html
    http://alternativeanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/07/drip-drip-drop-little-april-showers.html
    http://alternativeanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/07/clearing-air.html
    http://alternativeanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/07/air-has-cleared.html
    http://alternativeanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/07/90s-and-lung-cancer-throws-its-toys-out.html
    Fredrik

  13. Anonymous says:

    West2
    @timbone
    “. If there was a more discreet LED on the stem, if it looked as much like a cigarette as asparagus, would we have the same problem?”
    Have a look at http://www.e-savuke.com/en/ecig_mods.htm
    It’s an e-cig tim but not as we know it. (look at the copper)
    Things have moved on a lot in such a short space of time.
    @Frank
    It certainly shows there is more to this than health.
    west2

  14. Anonymous says:

    West2
    @timbone
    “. If there was a more discreet LED on the stem, if it looked as much like a cigarette as asparagus, would we have the same problem?”
    Have a look at http://www.e-savuke.com/en/ecig_mods.htm
    It’s an e-cig tim but not as we know it. (look at the copper)
    Things have moved on a lot in such a short space of time.
    @Frank
    It certainly shows there is more to this than health.
    west2

  15. Frank Davis says:

    Re: West2
    West2,
    Earlier today I read a comment by you on Taking Liberties, which I will reproduce here:
    The decision on e-cigs hasn’t been taken yet. The MHRA have indicated that a decision will come in September.
    This is not just about e-cigs though. It is about all NCPs (Nicotine containing products) except tobacco. It is a step to effectively split the market. Essentailly Tobacco would be the only recreational Nictoine product. All other NCPs would be regulated as medicines.(not sure what they are going to do about Aubergines though :))
    Some e-cig vendors want to get an MA to market e-cigs as NRT. The majority (that I am aware of) want the recreational market to remain open.
    It was thought that e-cigs would be used to force smokers off of real cigarettes. This has not been the case. The alphabet soup in the US have came out against them. In the UK, some people thought ASH supported the e-cig. A careful reading of their pamphlet shows this is not the case. They want medicalised nicotine as much as anyone.
    It maybe if a ‘ban’ were to happen, BigP will come out with their approved NRT device that looks like an e-cig but will be more controlled. Indeed if this were to happen then there is a likelyhood that the new medicalised nictine delivery devices would then be used as a way to coerce people who smoke.
    Of course this is not what most vapers. I speak to, want at all. They want a choice of product and essentialy what we have now.
    It is a pity that the divide and conquer approach has wokred so well with some Vapers vehemently anti-cigs and some people who smoke anti-ecig. This has enabled those who thrive on control to effectively proceed as they wanted.
    Ultimately the difinitive splitting of the market will be to no ones benefit except the antis.
    July 31, 2010 at 21:14 | west2

    The first sentence had me wondering whether a decision had been taken or not. The letter I reproduced above seems quite clear that a decision has been taken. Why do you believe otherwise?
    Frank

  16. Frank Davis says:

    Re: West2
    West2,
    Earlier today I read a comment by you on Taking Liberties, which I will reproduce here:
    The decision on e-cigs hasn’t been taken yet. The MHRA have indicated that a decision will come in September.
    This is not just about e-cigs though. It is about all NCPs (Nicotine containing products) except tobacco. It is a step to effectively split the market. Essentailly Tobacco would be the only recreational Nictoine product. All other NCPs would be regulated as medicines.(not sure what they are going to do about Aubergines though :))
    Some e-cig vendors want to get an MA to market e-cigs as NRT. The majority (that I am aware of) want the recreational market to remain open.
    It was thought that e-cigs would be used to force smokers off of real cigarettes. This has not been the case. The alphabet soup in the US have came out against them. In the UK, some people thought ASH supported the e-cig. A careful reading of their pamphlet shows this is not the case. They want medicalised nicotine as much as anyone.
    It maybe if a ‘ban’ were to happen, BigP will come out with their approved NRT device that looks like an e-cig but will be more controlled. Indeed if this were to happen then there is a likelyhood that the new medicalised nictine delivery devices would then be used as a way to coerce people who smoke.
    Of course this is not what most vapers. I speak to, want at all. They want a choice of product and essentialy what we have now.
    It is a pity that the divide and conquer approach has wokred so well with some Vapers vehemently anti-cigs and some people who smoke anti-ecig. This has enabled those who thrive on control to effectively proceed as they wanted.
    Ultimately the difinitive splitting of the market will be to no ones benefit except the antis.
    July 31, 2010 at 21:14 | west2

    The first sentence had me wondering whether a decision had been taken or not. The letter I reproduced above seems quite clear that a decision has been taken. Why do you believe otherwise?
    Frank

  17. Frank Davis says:

    Re: OT – fallout htpothosis
    Fredrik,
    Amazing stuff! I was particularly interested by the inhalation exposure graph, which shows inhalation exposure at high levels from 1950 through into the 1980s.
    Was tobacco the patsy that got lung cancer pinned on it?
    I’d like to put this in my blog. Would you like to write a guest blog post, showing these graphs (and maybe one or two of mine), and putting forward a new/revised theory? I could adjust the maps so they fit the page slightly better. The source for the maps and graphs would have to be given.
    Email me on cfrankdavis@googlemail.com if you’re interested.
    Frank

  18. Frank Davis says:

    Re: OT – fallout htpothosis
    Fredrik,
    Amazing stuff! I was particularly interested by the inhalation exposure graph, which shows inhalation exposure at high levels from 1950 through into the 1980s.
    Was tobacco the patsy that got lung cancer pinned on it?
    I’d like to put this in my blog. Would you like to write a guest blog post, showing these graphs (and maybe one or two of mine), and putting forward a new/revised theory? I could adjust the maps so they fit the page slightly better. The source for the maps and graphs would have to be given.
    Email me on cfrankdavis@googlemail.com if you’re interested.
    Frank

  19. Anonymous says:

    Re: West2 MHRA
    Frank
    There are many discussions at UK Vapers on the MHRA consultation and all aspects of Vaping in the UK.
    One of these was following the stakeholders meeting (June 4th 2010) the thread is “When do the MHRA publish” –> http://ukvapers.com/topic/1130-when-do-mhra-publish/
    One of the vendors reported
    “I’ve just returned from the stakeholders meeting with the MHRA
    It’s not a definite but they were saying late summer for a decision. We got them to extrapolate that to September , probably.”
    Now this may not be the actual date. It could of course be sooner or later.
    The recent letter come out through Trading Standards rather than the MHRA so I am somewhat puzzled about its aparently preemptive nature .

  20. Anonymous says:

    Re: West2 MHRA
    Frank
    There are many discussions at UK Vapers on the MHRA consultation and all aspects of Vaping in the UK.
    One of these was following the stakeholders meeting (June 4th 2010) the thread is “When do the MHRA publish” –> http://ukvapers.com/topic/1130-when-do-mhra-publish/
    One of the vendors reported
    “I’ve just returned from the stakeholders meeting with the MHRA
    It’s not a definite but they were saying late summer for a decision. We got them to extrapolate that to September , probably.”
    Now this may not be the actual date. It could of course be sooner or later.
    The recent letter come out through Trading Standards rather than the MHRA so I am somewhat puzzled about its aparently preemptive nature .

  21. Anonymous says:

    What will happen to the people that do not use nicotine in the e-cig ? Many vapers use glycerine flavoured with apple/mint etc with NO nicotine.
    How will they go about banning a battery and atomiser that delivers apple flavoured glycerine ?
    Will the EHO’s have to go round the pubs with a testing kit or will they have to confiscate the e-cig in use to send to the lab to see what is being vaped ?
    This is impossible as if they try to ban batteries or inhalers then there won’t be a mobile phone or asthma pump allowed anywhere. Possession of food grade glycerine doesn’t quite seem an offence somehow.
    Has anybody thought how this ‘ban’ may be policed ??

  22. Anonymous says:

    What will happen to the people that do not use nicotine in the e-cig ? Many vapers use glycerine flavoured with apple/mint etc with NO nicotine.
    How will they go about banning a battery and atomiser that delivers apple flavoured glycerine ?
    Will the EHO’s have to go round the pubs with a testing kit or will they have to confiscate the e-cig in use to send to the lab to see what is being vaped ?
    This is impossible as if they try to ban batteries or inhalers then there won’t be a mobile phone or asthma pump allowed anywhere. Possession of food grade glycerine doesn’t quite seem an offence somehow.
    Has anybody thought how this ‘ban’ may be policed ??

  23. Frank Davis says:

    What will happen to the people that do not use nicotine in the e-cig
    Well, exactly!
    Frank

  24. Frank Davis says:

    What will happen to the people that do not use nicotine in the e-cig
    Well, exactly!
    Frank

  25. Anonymous says:

    Have you seen this one ??? Imagine one being taken away from an asthma sufferer having an attack and it turned out to be their asthma pump !!
    [IMG]http://i722.photobucket.com/albums/ww223/brendajorsler/vape360.jpg[/IMG]
    Brenda

  26. Anonymous says:

    Have you seen this one ??? Imagine one being taken away from an asthma sufferer having an attack and it turned out to be their asthma pump !!
    [IMG]http://i722.photobucket.com/albums/ww223/brendajorsler/vape360.jpg[/IMG]
    Brenda

  27. Frank Davis says:

    This should work, Brenda:

    Frank

  28. Frank Davis says:

    This should work, Brenda:

    Frank

  29. Anonymous says:

    Re: West2 MHRA
    This confusion is probably my fault – apologies.
    The official MHRA consultation announcement is expected in September.
    The letter from Trading Standards was given to me on Saturday. I’m 99% sure it’s genuine and not a hoax. The contents of the actual letter may be an imaginary scenario in that TS officer’s mind, that’s something I’m not certain of.
    I sent out a message to a lot of people (really with the media and politicians in mind) that apparently was over dramatic in announcing a ban. My intent was to quote the government official.
    Kate

  30. Anonymous says:

    Re: West2 MHRA
    This confusion is probably my fault – apologies.
    The official MHRA consultation announcement is expected in September.
    The letter from Trading Standards was given to me on Saturday. I’m 99% sure it’s genuine and not a hoax. The contents of the actual letter may be an imaginary scenario in that TS officer’s mind, that’s something I’m not certain of.
    I sent out a message to a lot of people (really with the media and politicians in mind) that apparently was over dramatic in announcing a ban. My intent was to quote the government official.
    Kate

  31. Anonymous says:

    From Junican.
    How weird! I have read the letter from the West Sussex trading standards person.
    Frankly, the letter really amused me. How can a trading standards officer from an obscure county make such a decision? How does the system work?
    That aside, can one imagine a more unenforceable law (if it would be a law)? For heavens sake! We are talking about little tubes of stuff and little electrical gummages which can be sent through the post with the greatest of ease!
    I have an ecig although I do not use it at the moment. I have it ‘just in case’. I say, BRING IT ON! Think about the number of enforcement officers which would be required. There will be no convenient ‘places’ to ban it in and no convenient publicans to force to enforce it. The whole idea is laughable. Any government department which tried to bring this idea into law would be the laughing stock of the world.
    All the better, therefore, if they go ahead. Pathetic!

  32. Anonymous says:

    From Junican.
    How weird! I have read the letter from the West Sussex trading standards person.
    Frankly, the letter really amused me. How can a trading standards officer from an obscure county make such a decision? How does the system work?
    That aside, can one imagine a more unenforceable law (if it would be a law)? For heavens sake! We are talking about little tubes of stuff and little electrical gummages which can be sent through the post with the greatest of ease!
    I have an ecig although I do not use it at the moment. I have it ‘just in case’. I say, BRING IT ON! Think about the number of enforcement officers which would be required. There will be no convenient ‘places’ to ban it in and no convenient publicans to force to enforce it. The whole idea is laughable. Any government department which tried to bring this idea into law would be the laughing stock of the world.
    All the better, therefore, if they go ahead. Pathetic!

  33. Anonymous says:

    “The real reason for the ban is probably to protect Big Pharma’s profits from nicotine patches (which will remain legal, natch)……..
    Either that, or antismoking campaigners want to stop people putting anything that looks like a cigarette in their mouths and even inhaling air through it. ”
    Frank,
    I believe that it’s because of Big Pharma AND the fact that e-cigs LOOK like smoking. Actually, it seems that there may even be a 3rd reason: The government (and governments everywhere) does not want to lose the money that is generated on “evil” tobacco via excessive taxation.

  34. Anonymous says:

    “The real reason for the ban is probably to protect Big Pharma’s profits from nicotine patches (which will remain legal, natch)……..
    Either that, or antismoking campaigners want to stop people putting anything that looks like a cigarette in their mouths and even inhaling air through it. ”
    Frank,
    I believe that it’s because of Big Pharma AND the fact that e-cigs LOOK like smoking. Actually, it seems that there may even be a 3rd reason: The government (and governments everywhere) does not want to lose the money that is generated on “evil” tobacco via excessive taxation.

  35. Anonymous says:

    That last comment was from me, Jred btw…..can’t figure out how to get my name to show up on here..

  36. Anonymous says:

    That last comment was from me, Jred btw…..can’t figure out how to get my name to show up on here..

  37. Frank Davis says:

    Hiya Jred! It was lovely to meet you last week. I guess you’re back in LA now.
    Yes, it’s a bit of a problem commenting here. Some people know how to do it. But at least there’s an anonymous option which most people use, and either put their name at the top, or on the bottom.
    It reminds me that there’s a similar problem on your blog (jredheadheadgirl.blogspot.com?). I tried leaving a message there a few weeks ago, and couldn’t. It doesn’t even have an anonymous option.
    Nice pics on Facebook, btw.
    Frank

  38. Frank Davis says:

    Hiya Jred! It was lovely to meet you last week. I guess you’re back in LA now.
    Yes, it’s a bit of a problem commenting here. Some people know how to do it. But at least there’s an anonymous option which most people use, and either put their name at the top, or on the bottom.
    It reminds me that there’s a similar problem on your blog (jredheadheadgirl.blogspot.com?). I tried leaving a message there a few weeks ago, and couldn’t. It doesn’t even have an anonymous option.
    Nice pics on Facebook, btw.
    Frank

  39. Anonymous says:

    Re: OT – fallout htpothosis
    Frank,
    It is interesting is it not?
    The inhilation estimates + yields is from UNSCEAR ANNEX C

    Click to access annexc.pdf

    the cancer atlas tool is here
    http://cancercontrolplanet.cancer.gov/atlas/
    The problem I had with the blue and white maps on colbys site was that it gave the impression that lung cancer
    was going down, where as in fact it had gone up, because they were using different scales for before and after 1970. So for example after 1970 Alaska turns from red to blue despite the fact that lung cancer in Alaska had not gone down!!! This is clear evidence to me that
    lung cancer rates are not driven by tobacco consumption in the USA.
    Please feel free to use the images and blog as you like, at the moment I am using that (Smoking skills) blog to up load stuff to be used later. I am in the process
    of adding the CDC Wonder database
    http://wonder.cdc.gov/wonder/sci_data/mort/detailed/detailed.asp
    to a java based RDBMS (Apache Derby) because I want to reproduce the atlas myself, I shall be using jfreechart (java) to produce charts, I then aim to
    write some code to display the changing cancer rates over time at county level (USA), maybe using a 3D package eventually, I belive it will
    show clearly that lung cancer is more attracted to geography than smokers. But it’s going to be a lot of work
    so I shan’t be spending much time reading or posting on blogs!
    Fredrik.

  40. Anonymous says:

    Re: OT – fallout htpothosis
    Frank,
    It is interesting is it not?
    The inhilation estimates + yields is from UNSCEAR ANNEX C

    Click to access annexc.pdf

    the cancer atlas tool is here
    http://cancercontrolplanet.cancer.gov/atlas/
    The problem I had with the blue and white maps on colbys site was that it gave the impression that lung cancer
    was going down, where as in fact it had gone up, because they were using different scales for before and after 1970. So for example after 1970 Alaska turns from red to blue despite the fact that lung cancer in Alaska had not gone down!!! This is clear evidence to me that
    lung cancer rates are not driven by tobacco consumption in the USA.
    Please feel free to use the images and blog as you like, at the moment I am using that (Smoking skills) blog to up load stuff to be used later. I am in the process
    of adding the CDC Wonder database
    http://wonder.cdc.gov/wonder/sci_data/mort/detailed/detailed.asp
    to a java based RDBMS (Apache Derby) because I want to reproduce the atlas myself, I shall be using jfreechart (java) to produce charts, I then aim to
    write some code to display the changing cancer rates over time at county level (USA), maybe using a 3D package eventually, I belive it will
    show clearly that lung cancer is more attracted to geography than smokers. But it’s going to be a lot of work
    so I shan’t be spending much time reading or posting on blogs!
    Fredrik.

  41. Anonymous says:

    Re: OT – fallout htpothosis
    “Was tobacco the patsy that got lung cancer pinned on it?”
    That what I aim to find out! Or at the very least demonstrate that cigarette consumption does not
    drive lung cancer with the help of a about 1 billion subject years!
    Fredrik

  42. Anonymous says:

    Re: OT – fallout htpothosis
    “Was tobacco the patsy that got lung cancer pinned on it?”
    That what I aim to find out! Or at the very least demonstrate that cigarette consumption does not
    drive lung cancer with the help of a about 1 billion subject years!
    Fredrik

  43. Frank Davis says:

    Re: OT – fallout htpothosis
    Keep me informed of progress.
    Frank

  44. Frank Davis says:

    Re: OT – fallout htpothosis
    Keep me informed of progress.
    Frank

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.