http://www.clivebates.com/?p=2755
Public health disinformation encourages regulation that protects the cigarette trade
This is a guest post by David Sweanor, Adjunct Professor of Law at University of Ottawa and lifelong public health campaigner, Starts here…
There has been a concerted effort by opponents of vaping to denigrate these products – see endless stories on formaldehyde, ultrafine particles, poisoning, third hand nicotine exposure, gateway effect, renormalisation and the multiple violations of fact and presentation by WHO and its ill-judged supporters.
Sadly, but not surprisingly, these efforts at misinformation appear to be convincing many people that vaping is not a good alternative to smoking lethal cigarettes. Surveys of beliefs about relative risk show that fewer smokers now see vaping as less hazardous than smoking, let alone understand that the risk differential is enormous.
Widespread misperception – and getting worse
I am now hearing the same thing when talking with consumers; smokers who fear switching and vapers who are confronted by people telling them of ‘some new study that proves vaping is more hazardous than smoking’.
The point was driven home in the last few days in reading two comprehensive new reports from the Wells Fargo ‘Tobacco Talk’ retailer survey. The astute Bonnie Herzog, until now the most bullish Wall Street analyst when it comes to the ability of non-combustibles to replace cigarettes, is concerned about the momentum in the market, as the survey highlights the flow of misinformation on relative risks – one of the key reasons to switch from smoking to vaping. Simply put, there is a tremendous level of pseudo-scientific misinformation and scare stories that is feeding a moral panic about vaping. The inevitable result is that it is more likely that smokers will stick with deadly combustibles, more vapers will revert to smoking, smoking will decline more slowly than it otherwise would and the lucrative cigarette trade will have again been protected from a disruptive threat.
Bonnie Herzog, Wells Fargo, Independent Vapors Manufacturers Survey January 23, 2015:
While we estimate the industry will continue to grow robustly in 2015 (~40% topline growth), reaching retail sales of $3.5B, we would be remiss if we didn’t acknowledge the increased uncertainty we have observed among investors, our retailer/industry contacts, and consumers over the past 6-12 months. We believe this unfortunate trend is being driven by:
(1) mixed messages from the media;
(2) lack of FDA regulation or leadership; and
(3) lack of vapor industry or public health alignment, which are in turn driving worsening public perception of the vapor category. This is exacerbated by the fact that it is difficult for the industry to defend itself or make any modified risk claims (that their products could be less harmful than combustible cigs).
Comments from retailers:
“New ads on TV sponsored by the state, saying all sorts of negative things about e-cigs . . .”
“Public needs more awareness of vaping before regulations take hold and restrict use”
“The industry has basically let the anti-e-cig movement say what they want without rebuttal.”
Comments from VTM (Vapor Tanks Mods) manufacturers:
“. . . our stores grow 12% a month. EVERY MONTH. We just need more. Once the FDA regulations come out, all this spin that various parties keep throwing at this, the federal and state tax issue gets resolved; it is game over for conventional cigs. The issue facing the VTM’s now is, stay alive till then, and trust me we get attacked from everyone, even Big Tobacco inside our own industry, and government at all levels. They have leveraged uncollected future cigarette taxes for the next decade that they are in EXTREME FEAR of losing and not being able to cover the debt service on that leverage that is at the core of the anti-Vape propaganda. Let’s be honest, our US and State governments are in the cigarette business, Big Tobacco is just their supplier and marketing company.”
“So much is focused on the “unknown” 20-50 studies…however, the media won’t take a spectrum of risk approach despite the HUGE benefits to smokers’ health TODAY – it’s frustrating and transparent that those often quoted in the media do not have the best interest of the individual smoker in mind.”
“Mis-information campaigns funded by tax settlement dollars are taking their toll.”
“The largest negative impact is prohibitory regulation, since that completely skews the public perception, regardless of the science.”
“Majority of the general public has been consistently misinformed about the safety of vaping.”
Disturbingly, these attacks on vaping are nothing new in the realm of nicotine policy. There is a very long history of alternative products that appear to have the potential to challenge the market dominance of cigarettes by allowing consumers far less hazardous ways to get nicotine. In each case the threat has been seen off, leaving the tobacco companies free to continue their exceedingly lucrative and depressingly deadly oligopoly with its near-monopoly over the delivery of a very widely used dependence producing drug. We see several ways in which anti-tobacco activists have aided the cigarette business:
BAT’s market value has grown dramatically during the most intense phase of the Tobacco Wars
The combined stock market market value of the cigarette companies on the Financial Times 500 now handsomely exceeds half a trillion dollars, and the sector was once again an incredibly lucrative performer last year.
Market capitalisation – the total market value of the company’s shares – approximates the expected discounted flow of future profits/dividends after tax
Yet the ability of this industry to see off existential threats from alternative technology is not due to some cabal of evil geniuses in these companies. It is instead largely due to the unintentionally helpful actions of people who consider themselves to be sworn enemies of these companies.
It is often noted that Big Tobacco has few friends. But, with enemies like these, they hardly need any.
January 27th, 2015 | Category: Uncategorized
6 comments to Big Tobacco’s Little Helpers
Public health disinformation encourages regulation that protects the cigarette trade
This is a guest post by David Sweanor, Adjunct Professor of Law at University of Ottawa and lifelong public health campaigner, Starts here…
There has been a concerted effort by opponents of vaping to denigrate these products – see endless stories on formaldehyde, ultrafine particles, poisoning, third hand nicotine exposure, gateway effect, renormalisation and the multiple violations of fact and presentation by WHO and its ill-judged supporters.
Sadly, but not surprisingly, these efforts at misinformation appear to be convincing many people that vaping is not a good alternative to smoking lethal cigarettes. Surveys of beliefs about relative risk show that fewer smokers now see vaping as less hazardous than smoking, let alone understand that the risk differential is enormous.
Widespread misperception – and getting worse
I am now hearing the same thing when talking with consumers; smokers who fear switching and vapers who are confronted by people telling them of ‘some new study that proves vaping is more hazardous than smoking’.
The point was driven home in the last few days in reading two comprehensive new reports from the Wells Fargo ‘Tobacco Talk’ retailer survey. The astute Bonnie Herzog, until now the most bullish Wall Street analyst when it comes to the ability of non-combustibles to replace cigarettes, is concerned about the momentum in the market, as the survey highlights the flow of misinformation on relative risks – one of the key reasons to switch from smoking to vaping. Simply put, there is a tremendous level of pseudo-scientific misinformation and scare stories that is feeding a moral panic about vaping. The inevitable result is that it is more likely that smokers will stick with deadly combustibles, more vapers will revert to smoking, smoking will decline more slowly than it otherwise would and the lucrative cigarette trade will have again been protected from a disruptive threat.
Bonnie Herzog, Wells Fargo, Independent Vapors Manufacturers Survey January 23, 2015:
While we estimate the industry will continue to grow robustly in 2015 (~40% topline growth), reaching retail sales of $3.5B, we would be remiss if we didn’t acknowledge the increased uncertainty we have observed among investors, our retailer/industry contacts, and consumers over the past 6-12 months. We believe this unfortunate trend is being driven by:
(1) mixed messages from the media;
(2) lack of FDA regulation or leadership; and
(3) lack of vapor industry or public health alignment, which are in turn driving worsening public perception of the vapor category. This is exacerbated by the fact that it is difficult for the industry to defend itself or make any modified risk claims (that their products could be less harmful than combustible cigs).
Comments from retailers:
“New ads on TV sponsored by the state, saying all sorts of negative things about e-cigs . . .”
“Public needs more awareness of vaping before regulations take hold and restrict use”
“The industry has basically let the anti-e-cig movement say what they want without rebuttal.”
Comments from VTM (Vapor Tanks Mods) manufacturers:
“. . . our stores grow 12% a month. EVERY MONTH. We just need more. Once the FDA regulations come out, all this spin that various parties keep throwing at this, the federal and state tax issue gets resolved; it is game over for conventional cigs. The issue facing the VTM’s now is, stay alive till then, and trust me we get attacked from everyone, even Big Tobacco inside our own industry, and government at all levels. They have leveraged uncollected future cigarette taxes for the next decade that they are in EXTREME FEAR of losing and not being able to cover the debt service on that leverage that is at the core of the anti-Vape propaganda. Let’s be honest, our US and State governments are in the cigarette business, Big Tobacco is just their supplier and marketing company.”
“So much is focused on the “unknown” 20-50 studies…however, the media won’t take a spectrum of risk approach despite the HUGE benefits to smokers’ health TODAY – it’s frustrating and transparent that those often quoted in the media do not have the best interest of the individual smoker in mind.”
“Mis-information campaigns funded by tax settlement dollars are taking their toll.”
“The largest negative impact is prohibitory regulation, since that completely skews the public perception, regardless of the science.”
“Majority of the general public has been consistently misinformed about the safety of vaping.”
Disturbingly, these attacks on vaping are nothing new in the realm of nicotine policy. There is a very long history of alternative products that appear to have the potential to challenge the market dominance of cigarettes by allowing consumers far less hazardous ways to get nicotine. In each case the threat has been seen off, leaving the tobacco companies free to continue their exceedingly lucrative and depressingly deadly oligopoly with its near-monopoly over the delivery of a very widely used dependence producing drug. We see several ways in which anti-tobacco activists have aided the cigarette business:
- banning alternative products (Advanced Therapeutic Product’s nicotine inhaler, snus in the EU and several other jurisdictions, pharmacist-made nicotine lozenges )
- driving them from the market with adverse publicity and regulatory attacks (Star Scientific’s ultra-low nitrosamine lozenges, various heat-not-burn products)
- over-regulating to the point that cigarettes get a huge marketplace advantage (massively constraining all forms of nicotine replacement therapy)
- misinforming consumers about relative risks or withholding candid information (smokeless, snus, NRT; nicotine in general).
BAT’s market value has grown dramatically during the most intense phase of the Tobacco Wars
The combined stock market market value of the cigarette companies on the Financial Times 500 now handsomely exceeds half a trillion dollars, and the sector was once again an incredibly lucrative performer last year.
Market capitalisation – the total market value of the company’s shares – approximates the expected discounted flow of future profits/dividends after tax
Yet the ability of this industry to see off existential threats from alternative technology is not due to some cabal of evil geniuses in these companies. It is instead largely due to the unintentionally helpful actions of people who consider themselves to be sworn enemies of these companies.
It is often noted that Big Tobacco has few friends. But, with enemies like these, they hardly need any.
January 27th, 2015 | Category: Uncategorized
6 comments to Big Tobacco’s Little Helpers
-
Mark Magenis
January 27, 2015 at 6:02 pm · Reply
Some in the media are beginning to look behind the curtain, as
the misinformation gets more ludicrous.
- Anonymous
January 27, 2015 at 6:39 pm · Reply
I often wonder if the battle to prove the efficacy and relative safety of vaping compared to tobacco smoking means that the industry is being sidetracked on where it is focusing its energy. We’re trying to persuade/prove the vaping and THR benefits to the policy makers and Public Health, when frankly they probably (if not certainly) already know the truth. Their biggest fear has to be a mass exodus by smokers to ecig use and in particular generation 2/3 open systems. This is what all the media announcements and misinformation is trying to prevent. Whilst the number of full time vapers remains relatively low then they can dictate policy without fear of mass recriminations/objections from the electorate. A few hundred or thousand die hard vaping advocates can be ignored and walked all over. Energy and focus must be spent on educating the non smokers in the same way that charities successfully appeal to the public for donations when a catastrophe occurs. The non smoking public has to understand THR and be motivated to support a product that has the potential to save millions of lives. They’re happy to support calls to end Ebola or drought suffering around the world and surely the demise of tobacco smoking, if allowed, is as equal in importance to anyone who values human life. Somehow money needs to be raised in order to fund the PR that is necessary to educate and gain support for the demise of tobacco smoking by supporting vaping. Everyone seems to ignore the non smoking public, but politicians especially, realise that the reason that they can continue to policy protect and support Big T is because smokers/vapers are a minority and the majority of the public are basically anti smoking. The industry therefore needs to turn the non smoking public into becoming pro vaping and use whatever resources are necessary. Fighting an insular battle may not simply be enough.
- Clive Bates
January 28, 2015 at 9:48 am · Reply
Dear anon – I think this is very true, and one of the things that vapers can do is to explain their experience to (non-smoking) friends, relatives, journalists and elected representatives. We have found that the visceral authentic testimonies of vapers provided en masse have carried much more weight than the equally compelling scientific evidence.
Don’t write off direct political engagement by vapers though – the political calculation is
number of people holding a view x likelihood it will change their vote
That means a small number of people can be very effective at the margin if they are determined use their vote for a cause. There is a great book by Mark Penn, Microtrends, which explores the important of committed minority interest groups:
…the biggest trends in America are the microtrends — the smaller trends that go unnoticed or even ignored. One percent of the nation, or 3 million people, can create new markets for a business, spark a social movement, or produce political change.
Vaping meets these criteria, and has a tendency that could make it an effective political force.
- Ray Yeates (@RayYeates2)
January 27, 2015 at 8:48 pm · Reply
Anonymous has my attention fully. Here in Canada alone of all the active voices, testimonies and surveys comparing smoke vs vapor, policy makers and law commites continually change the laws and classifications to suit placing vapor under tobacco control. Those enticing little bottles of flavor induced (or not) have a market value equal to smoke. Parrallel both as one and double the pleasure……in tax$.
Quote: ” For all the power of facts, people do not react to health messages with cold, hard reason. They respond to them emotionally, said Paul Slovic, a pioneer in the field of health communications at the University of Oregon. When smokers are confronted with an image that makes them feel unlovable, unhealthy, unappealing or ashamed — and they link those feelings to their cigarette habit — they will, he said, be primed to…… quit.”( or whatever)
Published within an article L.A. Times June 26th 2011 on Barb Tarbox images to be used is the US and Canada on the face of cigarette packs. In all due respect Clive and Dave it is time to unify this M.O.V.E._ment) on all levels delivering the clear message ” our lives are at risk, no one else’s ; therefore we demand to practice our rights in preserving that right with a thus already proven safer alternative.” (change the wording as needed but not as dictated to by such mental midgets as tobacco control.
We MUST ” Get Up! Stand Up!…….for our “rights” I know I know…..but it looks like we are smoking! I get! ” They knnow”….. We are willing to pay ” dearly ” for it!
Carry on and vape safe! Regards : Psychology 1o1
Last edited:
