Thursday, 12 September 2019

‘Who benefits financially?’ Sharyl Attkisson brings up inconvenient questions about the #VapeBan in must-read thread

Leave it to Sharyl Attkisson to ask questions nobody wants asked about the e-cigarette ban. It’s not the first time the actual investigative journalist has been front and center pushing buttons about a hot topic …
1-Always interesting to see that when powerful/financial interests want to alert us to health issues, you get a daily count, list of states, etc. But when they don't want us to know of a particular risk or issue, it's very hard to find in the public dialogue.

86 people are talking about this
She may be onto something here.
2-There's legitimate concern about vaping. Why is TV advertising of cigarettes banned but e-cigarettes allowed? Who owns e-cigarette companies and...

53 people are talking about this
3-Who benefits financially if flavors are banned but *only* tobacco e-cigarette e-liquid is allowed?

81 people are talking about this

*adjusts tinfoil hat*
6-But I have a feeling we are about to hear about every single e-cigarette incident. Again, not saying there isn't reason for concern, it's just that I believe financial interests wants us concerned about that and not other health issues.
72 people are talking about this
Follow the money.
And the power.
True story.
So what else is new?
Where’s the cigarette ban?
Wait, let’s not give them any ideas.
Note: To be completely transparent, this editor is not a smoker or a vaper (and honestly is not a fan of either) but the government banning something at this level is not a good thing. Like, at all. What’s next? A ban on sugar? Wheat? Fast food?

Yeah, we know you know, but it’s a slippery slope, folks.

No comments:

Post a comment