Skip to main content

View Diary: Are Democrats REALLY Pro-Choice? (39 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You're being ridiculous (6+ / 0-)

    Restricting vaping to adults and treating a nicotine product like a cigarette is being safe.
    Why are you against regulating e-cigs to keep them out of the hands of children?
    To use your (admittedly ridiculous) line of reasoning, by not regulating e-cigs to keep them away from children, you're condemning them to death.

    Electronic cigarettes need to be strongly regulated — and quickly — to prevent another generation of young people from becoming addicted to nicotine, according to the American Heart Association's first policy statement on the products.

    In its statement, the heart association pointed to studies suggesting that e-cigarettes, which contain nicotine but no tobacco, could serve as a "gateway" drug to addict young people, who may go on to regular cigarettes or smokeless tobacco. The association pointed to flavors in e-cigarettes, such as bubble gum, arguing that these are intended to attract kids.
    More than 263,000 non-smoking kids tried e-cigarettes last year — three times as many as in 2011, according to a study released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Monday. About 44% of non-smoking kids who experimented with e-cigarettes said they intend to smoke regular cigarettes, compared to 22% of kids who had never tried e-cigs, the study found.

    If trees gave off WIFi signals, we would probably plant so many trees, we would save the planet. Too bad they only produce the oxygen we breathe.

    by skohayes on Fri Aug 29, 2014 at 04:05:01 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Wow do you have this backwards!!!!! (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I've taken days off to go to the state capitol to SUPPORT bills banning selling to minors! The Consumer Advocates for Smoke-Free Alternatives Association is doing the same.

      The American Lung Association, the American Heart Association, the American Cancer Society, and Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, have successfully lobbied AGAINST such bills.  Google it.  They got the governors of Rhode Island and Wisconsin and now I think Missouri to VETO such bills, thus keeping e-cigs available to kids in their states.

      They object to any such bills UNLESS those bills ALSO define e-cigs as tobacco, thus making them automatically subject to a lot of the same restrictions.

      In addition, the (Democrat-Controled) CDC is straight-up lying about those statistics regarding kids and cigarettes.  They are triple-counting the kids, they are reporting kids who say they would "probably not" accept a combustible cigarette from a friend as "Intending to Smoke Cigarettes."  Read this blog and if you don't "get" the math, ask someone:

      •  Giveaway here (3+ / 0-)
        the (Democrat-Controled) CDC
        Care to explain what you mean by "Democrat-Controled [sic]"?

        Looking at the blog post, if you move the 'probably nots' to the no category, which I agree makes sense analytically, the never-e-cig kids' intention to smoke also goes down dramatically. In fact the odds ratio for smoking using that methodology appears even higher than it did before (with e-cig users 8 times as likely to report an intent to smoke [8% vs 1%] vs. just about 2-3 times before [59% vs 24%]). So I'm not sure your point was made there.

        •  It takes some math: (0+ / 0-)

          To answer your question:

          I'm an ardent Obama supporter.  However, I am NOT happy AT ALL with his earlier HHS appointments.

          IMO having CDC bureaucrats putting out junk like that press release while CDC doctors are risking their lives fighting ebola is disrespectful in the extreme.

           I'm keeping my fingers crossed that Ms. Burwell will rein them in and require the CDC management to go back to honest science.  

      •  Bullshit blog there, friend. (0+ / 0-)

        I'm not trusting someone who posts anonymously on a blog and makes up their own statistics to make the numbers they don't like look better.
        What utter horseshit.

        If trees gave off WIFi signals, we would probably plant so many trees, we would save the planet. Too bad they only produce the oxygen we breathe.

        by skohayes on Fri Aug 29, 2014 at 12:30:06 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site