Från: Atakan Befrits <H@gmail.com>Ämne: Question for you that I just put to Karolinska this morningDatum: 14 april 2014 16:51:26 CESTTill: firstname.lastname@example.orgDear Mr Nikagosian,
I am certain you are aware that Tobacco Control led to the demands for lower Nicotine and also Tar yields per cigarette as this was thought to lower total harm from smoking.
This in turn led to an entire new industry “expanding” tobacco as to make it physically double in size and thus app. 50% lower in Nicotine and Tar. First installation in 1979 and currently 50 up and running (from one company only).
Most of the science now points to this quicker and more complete incineration of the tobacco actually produces MORE harm than before. Besides of course having to smoke more cigarettes to get the required amount of nicotine.
I asked the Karolinska people how they reason around this being a consequence of Evil Cigarette companies of if the burden of responsibility should also be shared by Tobacco Control. What is your opinion?
Smoking was in fact LESS deadly per smoker 30 years ago than it is now, although Tar and Nicotine are down considerably. (You guys argue additives – I argue simple physics)
Besides this of course there is the question of snus, being something on the order of 98%-99.98% less harmful compared to smoking (prepared the proper way of course and used as intended – but that goes for 100% of pharmaceutical products as well). Can you show me one single drug on the market that is 99% effective when used as intended? A single one? Can you find very many cases of industry taking responsibility for abuse/misuse or poisoning by their products? (Sure you can find a lot of won lawsuits, but that is when industry has lied or covered up facts)
(Snus is my area of research and expertise – and it is my view that the WHO FCTC has killed a lot more people than it has saved so far. Not giving/recommending the best care or alternatives for chronics, for the express purpose of discouraging uptake in young and coming generations is completely uncool)
And now according to the FT you are actually intending to include e-cig/vapes in the FCTC?
Can this be possible?
Please tell me it isn’t