Is The American Lung Association Truly Evil?

[ZenAnarchi]

Grimm Green points out that during the public hearings for the FDA’s plan on promoting vaping as a less harmful alternative, the ALA comments ask the FDA to withhold this information. Do they truly want people to continue to die of cancer so they can secure funding? You be the judge:



The article he refers to has a couple of brilliant quotes imo:
"This is highly ironic, given the extent to which the Lung Association and other tobacco control organizations went to punish the tobacco industry for lying to the public and hiding critical health information," writes Michael Siegel, a visiting professor at the Tufts University School of Medicine. "It is also unethical because it violates the public health code of ethics, which calls for honesty and transparency in public health communications. We do not hide critical health information from the public."

And:
There is perhaps an underlying fear among many anti-tobacco groups that if the public knows how much safer e-cigarettes are than cigarettes, then many people who never would've used nicotine will start doing so. But "you don't get to live in a super virtuous world where nobody does anything," says Dobbins.

Besides, "in order to get people to comply with your vision of virtue, inevitably, you have to engage in coercion. And coercion has societal costs and health costs as well, and you have to take those into account“

That last sentence should trigger a high degree of contemplation for those who wish to ban disposables…just saying Here’s the article in its entirety:

https://reason.com/2023/09/05/ameri...ands-the-fda-mislead-the-public-about-vaping/

 

[Toby iVapour]

No (to answer the question of the title).. I see it as as warped ideology...

Article from Clive Bates concerning this topic -
Is tobacco control the new Big Tobacco?
https://clivebates.com/is-tobacco-control-the-new-big-tobacco/

How should we understand the widespread hostility to tobacco harm reduction in the mainstream tobacco control community and much of the public health community?

I don’t think we can ignore it any more… the symmetries and parallels with the worst excesses of “Big Tobacco” of the 1970s can no longer be ignored. The methods, ethics and consequences are all too similar, and becoming increasingly common.

 

[zouzounaki]

Besides, "in order to get people to comply with your vision of virtue, inevitably, you have to engage in coercion. And coercion has societal costs and health costs as well, and you have to take those into account“

That last sentence should trigger a high degree of contemplation for those who wish to ban disposables…just saying

just for info, i might be the least virtuous person you could hope to meet

 

[SubSSC]

Bastards! It's all about money and ensuring that it continues to flow!

 

[Simon G]

No I don't think they are 'evil' ... or 'pure evil' as Grimm says.

All I see is a difference of agenda. He should know what the ALA think about this already, you can go to their website and read what they think about vaping (and smoking) To suggest they are doing it so people continue smoking and are 'evil' seems pretty disingenuous to me.

... does that make Grimm Green 'evil'? no I don't that either.

But it's like claiming the people that were against those methadone walk in clinic things were evil and wanted people to die from heroin use.

It's just a lack of understanding and both sides being somewhat virtuous dare I suggest?

 

[Toby iVapour]

Or Catholics being anti-condoms...

It's just a lack of understanding...

 

[Simon G]

Or Catholics being anti-condoms...

Sure....."'they are pure evil and want everyone to die of aids, it's the only explanation I can think of"

I'm a little surprised Grim wasn't a bit more nuanced on this, he's not an idiot and I do respect what he's done for advocacy in more recent years too.

 

[Deleted member 54254]

Am I supposed to get outraged, having a hard time understanding what my reaction should be. I'm generally an easy going guy, so as usual, I'll let it slide as it's pretty dull.

 

[zouzounaki]

i don’t think there is any “evil”. the concept is a lazy throwback to organised christianity using it to describe anything they either don’t understand or see as a threat. which ties in to what @Simon G says.

even if it is the case that their position is financially motivated, that’s not “evil” it simply means they are corrupt and greedy. it happens a lot

 

[Simon G]

i don’t think there is any “evil”. the concept is a lazy throwback to organised christianity using it to describe anything they either don’t understand or see as a threat. which ties in to what @Simon G says.

even if it is the case that their position is financially motivated, that’s not “evil” it simply means they are corrupt and greedy. it happens a lot

I don't think it has anything to do with money. I think it's simply the organisation's principles.

.... and with regard to the suppression of information....Would I want information suppressed that could, in my view, prevent a tragic outcome? ... sure, maybe... that comes under 'doing the wrong thing for the right reasons' it's a dangerous game but morally I don't think it's out of the question.