Here is a repost from 2016 … on the topic of poisons and the general ignorance of folk concerning their hidden effects … remember the ‘safe and effective’ mantra that wasn’t? EWNZ
Tag Archives: Cigarettes
From Tobacco to Vaccines: the Playbook Perfected
In December 1953, tobacco executives gathered at the Plaza Hotel in Manhattan to confront an existential crisis. The scientific evidence linking cigarettes to lung cancer was becoming undeniable. From this meeting emerged what would become known as the Frank Statement—a masterpiece of manufactured doubt that appeared in 448 newspapers reaching 43 million Americans. “We believe the products we make are not injurious to health,” they declared, announcing the creation of the Tobacco Industry Research Committee. This wasn’t mere denial; it was the birth of industrialized epistemic capture.
The tobacco industry’s genius wasn’t in refuting science but in corrupting it from within. They created their own research institutes, funded friendly scientists, ghostwrote papers, and transformed medical journals into marketing vehicles. They manufactured a “controversy” where none existed, keeping their product on the market for decades after its dangers were known. By the time of the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement, tobacco had killed millions while generating trillions in profits.
Yet tobacco’s playbook, brilliant as it was, contained a fatal flaw: addiction itself became evidence of harm. Smokers trying to quit, yellowed teeth, blackened lungs—the damage was visible, undeniable, personal. The industry could delay recognition but never prevent it entirely. They created customers who defended their addiction but ultimately knew they were addicts.
Pharmaceutical companies studying this model recognized both its power and its limitations. What if, instead of selling a product that visibly harms, you sold one that prevents invisible future harm? What if, instead of creating addicts who might someday want to quit, you created true believers who would enforce the product on others? What if the customers themselves became your most passionate marketers, your most vigilant police, your most faithful evangelists?
The transformation from tobacco’s playbook to vaccine orthodoxy represents an evolution in control so perfect that those trapped within it will violently defend their imprisonment. Where tobacco created dependence, vaccines create devotion. Where cigarettes generated customers, vaccines generate congregations. The innovation wasn’t just in the product but in the systematic transformation of medicine into theology, patients into prophets, and public health into public faith.
The Tobacco Template
The Brown & Williamson documents, leaked in 1994, revealed the architecture of deception in stunning detail. “Doubt is our product,” wrote one executive, “since it is the best means of competing with the ‘body of fact’ that exists in the minds of the general public.” The strategy was elegant: you don’t need to prove your product safe, merely maintain enough uncertainty to prevent action. Fund research that asks the wrong questions. Create institutes with academic-sounding names. Transform “no evidence of harm” into “evidence of no harm.”
The Tobacco Institute, founded in 1958, perfected the art of institutional capture. They didn’t just buy scientists; they bought entire departments. Harvard’s tobacco-friendly research wasn’t corruption—it was investment. The Council for Tobacco Research distributed over $282 million to 1,000 scientists at 350 institutions. They created what historian Robert Proctor calls “agnotology”—the deliberate production of ignorance. Studies examined everything except what mattered. Research into genetic predisposition to cancer, the role of personality in disease, atmospheric pollution—anything to deflect from cigarettes as the cause.
Most brilliantly, they corrupted language itself. “Safe cigarettes” became “reduced harm products.” “Addiction” became “habituation.” “Cancer-causing” became “statistical association.” They pioneered what Orwell predicted: controlling language to control thought. When Philip Morris’s own research showed cigarettes were carcinogenic, they classified it as “privileged attorney-client communication,” hiding science behind legal doctrine.
The pharmaceutical industry observed this infrastructure and recognized its potential. But where tobacco had to build its scientific apparatus from scratch, pharma could colonize existing institutions. Medical schools already existed; they just needed funding. Journals already published; they just needed advertising revenue. Regulatory agencies already governed; they just needed revolving doors. The Centers for Disease Control, founded in 1946, had originally focused on malaria. By the 1980s, it had become the Vatican of vaccination, its leaders rotating seamlessly between government and pharmaceutical posts.
The 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act marked pharma’s improvement on tobacco’s template. Where tobacco fought liability in court for decades, vaccines achieved complete legal immunity preemptively. Where cigarette makers faced thousand of lawsuits, vaccine manufacturers faced none. The legislation created a captive market through mandates while eliminating the primary mechanism—litigation—through which tobacco’s crimes were eventually exposed.
The Genius of Prevention vs. Treatment
Tobacco’s fundamental weakness was temporal: harm followed use, inevitably and visibly. A smoker’s cough today predicted cancer tomorrow. The causation, while denied, was ultimately undeniable. But vaccines operate in the realm of counterfactuals—preventing diseases most people would never get anyway. You cannot see a disease that didn’t happen. You cannot prove a negative. This invisibility of benefit, combined with delayed and diffused harm, creates the perfect product.
Consider the numbers that should shock but don’t: in 1970, autism affected 1 in 10,000 children. Today it’s 1 in 36. The childhood vaccine schedule expanded from 3 vaccines to 72 doses during this same period. Correlation isn’t causation, the defenders cry, yet when tobacco critics pointed to correlation between smoking and lung cancer, the same defenders called it proof. The difference isn’t scientific—it’s theological. Vaccines occupy sacred space in the medical pantheon where questioning becomes heresy.
The genius manifests in how adverse events are interpreted. When a child regresses into autism after vaccination, it’s coincidence—even when it happens 277 times every single day. When thousands of parents report identical patterns of immediate regression following MMR vaccines, they’re dismissed as confused, emotional, or attention-seeking. The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System captures perhaps 1% of actual injuries, yet even this fragment is dismissed as “unverified” and “anecdotal.” Tobacco never achieved such perfect invisibility of harm.
Prevention creates its own epistemological bubble. To question vaccines, you must imagine alternate realities: What if my child wouldn’t have gotten measles anyway? What if the decrease in disease came from sanitation, not vaccination? What if the risk of injury exceeds the risk of disease? These questions require complex probabilistic thinking that can always be countered with fear. One photo of a child with measles—a disease that killed 400 Americans annually before vaccination—justifies injecting millions with dozens of doses whose cumulative effects have never been studied.
The masterstroke is making the absence of disease proof of vaccine necessity rather than success. Polio is gone, therefore we must continue vaccinating. Measles is rare, therefore we must maintain vigilance. The logic is circular and unassailable: vaccines work because disease is absent; disease is absent because vaccines work. Anyone pointing out that scarlet fever and typhoid disappeared without vaccines is ignored. The counterfactual nature of prevention makes the product intellectually unfalsifiable and emotionally irresistible.
Manufacturing Consensus Through Credentials
Where tobacco had to create scientific controversy, vaccines inherited scientific authority. The white coat that once advertised Camels now administers vaccines, but with a crucial difference: the doctor genuinely believes. Medical schools, two-thirds of whose department chairs have pharmaceutical ties, produce graduates who’ve never seen measles but have seen their careers destroyed for questioning vaccines. They emerge from training $200,000 in debt and epistemologically lobotomized—capable of complex technical procedures but incapable of questioning foundational assumptions.
The American Academy of Pediatrics, which receives millions from vaccine manufacturers, publishes guidelines that become gospel. Doctors who deviate face not just professional consequences but personal ones—ostracism from their community, investigation by medical boards, loss of hospital privileges. Dr. Bob Sears was brought before the California medical board not for harming patients but for writing medical exemptions. Dr. Paul Thomas had his license suspended for publishing data showing his unvaccinated patients were healthier. The message is clear: apostasy will be punished.
This manufactured consensus extends through every medical institution. The CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, which sets vaccine schedules, is staffed by members with pharmaceutical ties so extensive they require special waivers. The Institute of Medicine, tasked with investigating vaccine safety, declares vaccines “safe and effective” before beginning their reviews. Medical journals, dependent on pharmaceutical advertising and reprint purchases, publish industry ghostwritten studies while rejecting research showing harm. The peer review process, supposedly science’s quality control, becomes an enforcement mechanism for orthodoxy.
The brilliance lies in making dissent appear not just wrong but impossible. “The science is settled” becomes a thought-terminating cliché that prevents investigation. “Vaccines save lives” becomes an axiom requiring no evidence. When Dr. William Thompson, senior CDC scientist, admitted they destroyed data showing MMR vaccines increased autism risk in African American boys, the confession vanished from mainstream discourse. When the documentary “Vaxxed” tried to present his evidence, it was pulled from the Tribeca Film Festival after pharmaceutical pressure. Consensus isn’t manufactured through evidence but through the systematic exclusion of counter-evidence.
Medical students learn immunology from textbooks written by vaccine patent holders. They memorize antibody responses while never studying the unvaccinated. They recite vaccine schedules while never questioning why American children, the most vaccinated population in history, have the worst health outcomes in the developed world. The consensus they join isn’t scientific—it’s theological, complete with saints (Salk, Sabin), miracles (polio’s disappearance), and excommunication for heretics.
The Parent as Enforcer
Tobacco created individual users who might pressure friends to smoke. Vaccines create something far more powerful: parents who believe refusing vaccination is child abuse. The transformation of customers into enforcement agents represents pharma’s greatest innovation. A mother who vaccinates doesn’t just consume; she evangelizes, monitors, reports. She becomes an unpaid agent of pharmaceutical surveillance, policing other mothers with religious zeal.
The mechanism is profound: parents make irreversible decisions about their children’s bodies, injecting them with dozens of substances they don’t understand based on trust in authority. This trust, once given, becomes psychologically impossible to withdraw. To question vaccines after vaccinating your children means confronting the possibility you harmed them. The cognitive dissonance is unbearable. Better to defend the practice with increasing fervor than face that abyss.
Social media amplifies this enforcement. Mothers post vaccination photos like religious sacraments—their infant surrounded by syringes, band-aids on tiny thighs, captions about “protecting the community.” They join groups dedicated to mocking “anti-vaxxers,” sharing memes that portray vaccine-hesitant parents as child killers. They demand unvaccinated children be excluded from schools, parks, birthday parties. They’ve become willing agents of pharmaceutical apartheid, enforcing segregation with moral certainty.
The school system institutionalizes parental enforcement. Mandatory vaccination for school attendance turns every parent into a compliance officer. Those seeking exemptions must navigate bureaucratic labyrinths, submit to ideological re-education, endure public humiliation. California’s SB277 eliminated personal belief exemptions entirely, forcing parents to choose between education and bodily autonomy. Parents who comply become invested in the system’s legitimacy—admitting coercion would mean admitting their own violation.
The genius is that enforcement appears grassroots rather than corporate. When a mother demands unvaccinated children be banned from her child’s classroom, she’s not seen as a pharmaceutical agent but a concerned parent. When parents organize to eliminate vaccine exemptions, they appear as citizen activists rather than corporate pawns. The industry doesn’t need lobbyists when it has millions of parents convinced that forced vaccination is child protection. Every parent becomes a salesperson, every playground a marketplace, every conversation a potential conversion.
The Liturgy of Vaccination
Vaccination has achieved what tobacco never could: sacred status. The ritual begins before birth with maternal vaccines, continues through “well-baby” visits scheduled with religious regularity, and extends through school, college, employment. Each injection is a sacrament in the church of public health, complete with ceremonial elements that bypass rational thought and engage primitive belief.
The white coat serves as priestly vestment, the syringe as sacred implement. The vaccine schedule becomes holy writ, deviation from which constitutes mortal sin. Parents bring their children to the altar of the examination table, where they’re held down—sacrificial offerings to the god of prevention. The brief pain, the tears, the fever that follows—all transformed into signs of protection rather than harm. “It means it’s working,” parents are told, teaching them to interpret injury as benefit.
Language itself becomes liturgical. “Safe and effective” is repeated like a mantra, requiring no evidence, permitting no question. “Vaccines save lives” functions as a creed, recited without thought. “Herd immunity” becomes a moral imperative, transforming individual medical decisions into collective obligations. Those who refuse are not just wrong but selfish, dangerous, evil. They threaten not just physical health but the moral fabric of society.
The ritual calendar of vaccination creates temporal structure similar to religious observances. Two months, four months, six months, twelve months—each appointment a station of the cross in the passion of prevention. Parents who miss appointments receive calls, letters, threats. The schedule itself, increasing from 3 vaccines in 1970 to 72 doses today, is never questioned. Like prayers added to a rosary, each new vaccine joins the liturgy without examining the cumulative effect.
The transformation of vaccination into sacrament makes rational discussion impossible. You cannot debate the Eucharist with someone who believes it’s literally Christ’s body. You cannot discuss vaccine risk with someone who believes vaccines are miracles. The religious framework precludes evidence-based discussion. Faith, not facts, drives the ritual. Parents who refuse vaccines aren’t making medical decisions—they’re committing blasphemy.
This liturgical framework explains why evidence doesn’t matter. When studies show unvaccinated children are healthier, they’re dismissed like Protestant criticisms of Catholic doctrine. When vaccine court pays billions in damages, it’s ignored like church abuse settlements. The faithful don’t need evidence; they have belief. The vaccine liturgy, performed millions of times daily across the world, reinforces itself through repetition, ritual, and the powerful psychology of sunk cost.
When Damage Strengthens Belief
Tobacco’s model collapsed when harm became undeniable. But vaccines achieve something paradoxical: harm strengthens belief. When a child regresses into autism after vaccination, the parents face two possibilities: they injured their child, or it’s coincidence. The psychological pressure to choose coincidence is overwhelming. Accepting vaccine injury means confronting not just personal guilt but social exile. Better to become vaccination’s fiercest advocate than its victim.
This psychological trap creates the perfect product—one where injury increases advocacy. Parents of vaccine-injured children who accept the injury often become the movement’s most passionate critics. But those who deny it become its most zealous defenders. They must, to maintain their sanity. Every defense of vaccines becomes a defense of their own choices. Every attack on vaccine critics becomes an attack on their own doubts. The more their child suffers, the more fiercely they must believe the suffering is unrelated to vaccines.
Autism organizations exemplify this phenomenon. Autism Speaks, founded by grandparents of an autistic child, focuses exclusively on genetics, early intervention, and acceptance—never prevention. They receive millions from pharmaceutical companies and promote vaccination despite autism’s correlation with vaccine schedule expansion. Parents seeking answers are diverted into fundraising walks, awareness campaigns, and genetic studies—anything but examining the environmental trigger staring them in the face.
The medical system reinforces this denial through careful language. Children don’t become autistic after vaccination; they “manifest symptoms that were always present.” They don’t regress; they “enter a developmental phase.” The regression parents observe—loss of speech, eye contact, bowel control—is reframed as revelation of underlying conditions. Parents who insist their child changed immediately after vaccination are told they’re mistaken, confused, seeking someone to blame. Their testimony is invalidated, their experience denied.
The financial structure deepens the trap. Parents spending $50,000 annually on autism therapies cannot afford—economically or psychologically—to refuse further vaccines for younger siblings. Schools require vaccination for special education services. Therapy centers mandate compliance. Insurance covers autism treatment but not vaccine injury. The system ensures that accepting vaccine causation means losing support systems. Parents must choose between truth and survival. Most choose survival, and their choice strengthens the system that harmed them.
The Perfect Crime
Pharmaceutical companies have achieved what tobacco executives could only dream of: a product mandated by law, immune from liability, that transforms its victims into advocates. The crime is perfect because the criminals are sanctified, the victims silenced, and the witnesses blinded. Where tobacco faced journalists, lawyers, and scientists united in opposition, vaccines enjoy protection from the very institutions meant to provide oversight.
The legal immunity granted by the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act created moral hazard on an unprecedented scale. Manufacturers can’t be sued regardless of negligence, fraud, or contamination. The vaccine court, which has paid over $4 billion in damages, operates in secrecy with special masters instead of juries. Cases take years, require proving causation to standards impossible to meet, and cap damages below actual costs. Most families never file claims, unaware the system exists. Those who do are bound by gag orders, their stories buried in sealed settlements.
The media, dependent on pharmaceutical advertising (70% of news advertising revenue), won’t investigate vaccine harm. Journalists who try face editorial rejection, career destruction, personal attacks. Del Bigtree, Emmy-winning producer of “The Doctors,” was blacklisted after producing “Vaxxed.” Sharyl Attkisson, five-time Emmy winner, was pushed out of CBS after reporting on vaccine injuries. The message is clear: investigate anything but vaccines. The result is information darkness where even parents of injured children don’t recognize patterns hidden in plain sight.
The regulatory capture surpasses tobacco’s wildest achievements. Julie Gerberding, CDC director who oversaw vaccine schedule expansion, became president of Merck’s vaccine division. Scott Gottlieb moved from FDA commissioner to Pfizer board member. The revolving door doesn’t just spin; it’s motorized. The agencies meant to protect public health have become pharmaceutical subsidiaries, their function inverted from protection to promotion.
The perfection of the crime lies in its invisibility. Tobacco harm was eventually undeniable—lung cancer, emphysema, death. But vaccine harm hides behind complexity, delayed onset, and diagnostic manipulation. Autism is genetic. SIDS is unexplained. Autoimmune diseases are environmental. Allergies are hygiene-related. Each condition with exploding prevalence is explained by everything except the obvious: the 72 injections every child receives. The crime is so perfect that victims thank their assailants, witnesses deny what they’ve seen, and investigators refuse to investigate.
This is the playbook perfected: create a product that prevents invisible disease, causes deniable harm, generates its own enforcement, and transforms medicine into religion. Where tobacco took decades to build its apparatus of deception, vaccines inherited and improved it. Where cigarettes faced eventual justice, vaccines enjoy perpetual immunity. The student has surpassed the teacher, creating not just addiction but devotion, not just customers but congregations, not just profit but power. The tobacco playbook was impressive. The vaccine playbook is perfect.
References
“Agnotology.” Lies are Unbekoming, April 2023.
“Epistemic Capture.” Unbekoming, September 2025.
“The Post-Truth Era: Reality vs. Perception.” UNO Magazine, Issue 27, March 2017. Developing Ideas by LLORENTE & CUENCA.
“The War on Knowing.” Unbekoming, July 2025.
I appreciate you being here.
If you’ve found the content interesting, useful and maybe even helpful, please consider supporting it through a small paid subscription. While 99% of everything here is free, your paid subscription is important as it helps in covering some of the operational costs and supports the continuation of this independent research and journalism work. It also helps keep it free for those that cannot afford to pay.
Please make full use of the Free Libraries.
Unbekoming Interview Library: Great interviews across a spectrum of important topics.
Unbekoming Book Summary Library: Concise summaries of important books.
Stories
I’m always in search of good stories, people with valuable expertise and helpful books. Please don’t hesitate to get in touch at unbekoming@outlook.com
Baseline Human Health
Watch and share this profound 21-minute video to understand and appreciate what health looks like without vaccination.
Is Vaping Better Than Smoking? New Evidence May Surprise You
From Dr Mercola
Story at-a-glance
- Many have been misled to believe that vaping is healthier than cigarette smoking, but chemical analyses have found e-cigarette liquids, aerosols, cartridges and the heating coils within the e-cig tank can contain many toxic and carcinogenic ingredients
- Carcinogenic compounds found in e-cigs include diethylene glycol, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), nitrosamines, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and radioactive polonium-210
- Polonium-210 is often found in traditional tobacco products because tobacco plants absorb it from soil and high-phosphate fertilizer. While cigarette smoke contains a wide variety of toxins, the presence of polonium appears to be one of the primary reasons why cigarette smoking causes lung cancer. Since polonium is also found in e-cigs, they too may cause lung cancer in long-term users
- E-cigs also contain toxic metals and metalloids, including lead, chromium, nickel, manganese, aluminum, antimony, arsenic, cadmium, cobalt, copper, iron, selenium, tin and zinc
- When heated, the chemicals in e-liquids also produce a variety of toxic degradation products, including aldehydes such as acrolein, formaldehyde and acetaldehyde
Many have been misled to believe that vaping is far healthier than cigarette smoking, but nothing could be further from the truth. As noted in one scientific review,1 e-cigs may be a safer option than conventional cigarettes, but they’re “not that safe.” Chemical analyses have found e-cigarette liquids, aerosols, cartridge, and the heating coils within the e-cig tank can contain many toxic ingredients, including:2,3,4
| Antifreeze chemicals such as propylene glycol and diethylene glycol, the latter of which has been linked to cancer5 |
| Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), associated with throat irritation, headaches, liver, kidney and central nervous system damage, and, potentially, cancer6 |
| 2-chlorophenol, which is classified as “harmful if inhaled”7 |
| Nitrosamines, which have been linked to cancer, Non-Hodgkin lymphoma, Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease, fatty liver disease and DNA damage8 |
| Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, which has been linked to cancer, cataracts and damage of the liver and kidneys9 |
| Radioactive polonium-210, a recognized carcinogen |
E-cigs also contain toxic metals and metalloids, including lead, chromium, nickel, manganese, aluminum, antimony, arsenic, cadmium, cobalt, copper, iron, selenium, tin and zinc.10,11
In one test,12 nearly half the vapor samples were found to have lead concentrations above the limits set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. As noted by the researchers, the heating coils are made of nickel, chromium and several other metals, making this the most obvious source of contamination. However, the source of the lead remains a mystery. Arsenic was also detected in 10 of the 56 devices tested.
Toxic Degradation Products
When heated, the chemicals in e-liquids also produce a variety of toxic degradation products, including aldehydes such as:13
- Acrolein, used as a chemical weapon during World War I and later as an herbicide
- Formaldehyde (embalming fluid)
- Acetaldehyde, a carcinogen. It’s thought to contribute to cancer by damaging your DNA and preventing DNA repair14
A study commissioned by Japan’s Health Ministry found both acetaldehyde and formaldehyde in the vapor produced by several types of e-cig devices,15 and at least one brand had more than 10 times the level of carcinogens found in a traditional cigarette.
The Clean Air Act of 1990 defines formaldehyde and acrolein as hazardous air pollutants subject to regulation by the Environmental Protection Agency. As noted by the EPA:16
“At concentrations exceeding usual outdoor levels, aldehyde inhalation can alter breathing patterns by narrowing airway openings (airway constriction). It can also damage cells lining the airways, prompting white blood cells to enter the lungs.”
E-cigarette aerosols also contain organic byproducts such as carbonyls, carbon monoxide and free radicals, albeit at lower concentrations than tobacco smoke.17 The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has noted that second-hand smoke or vapor from e-cigs may contain at least 10 chemicals that are on California’s proposition 65 list of reproductive toxins and carcinogens.18 So, vaping does not mean you’re not exposing others to toxic second-hand smoke.
Polonium Is the Main Reason Cigarette Smoking Causes Cancer
Polonium-210 is often found in traditional tobacco products19 because tobacco plants absorb it (as well as other radioactive materials) from the soil. High-phosphate fertilizer used on tobacco crops also contains it and adds to the plants’ uptake.
While cigarette smoke contains a wide variety of toxins, the presence of polonium appears to be one of the primary reasons why cigarette smoking causes lung cancer. The fact that polonium-210 is also found in e-cigarettes raises the very definite possibility, then, that they too may cause lung cancer.
As explained in a 2022 analysis of the polonium-210 content of conventional cigarette smoke and the IQOS Heets cigarette (an electronic smoking device that uses real tobacco rather than an e-liquid):20
“Polonium-210 (210Po) and lead-210 (210Pb) are natural radionuclides of the uranium (238U) decay series, which are present within and on the surface of tobacco leaves.
A large part of the 210Po and 210Pb activity in tobacco originates from the capture of radon-222 (222Rn) progeny aerosols by the trichomes of leaves, whilst a smaller part originates from root transfer.
Owing to the significant volatility of Po and Pb in aerosol particles, both radionuclides are present in mainstream cigarette smoke, 210Po, as an energetic α-particle emitter, has readily been recognized as a potential carcinogenic component of the tobacco smoke.
As early as 1964, Radford and Hunt hypothesized that the presence of 210Po in tobacco smoke, and its preferential localization in the bronchial epithelium, would be a cause of lung cancer … 210Po in tobacco smoke commits an effective radiation dose to the lung, which could be close to the annual dose limit of 1 mSv for heavy smokers.”
Download this Article Before it Disappears
Flavor Chemicals Are Largely a Mystery
As noted in an August 10, 2023, Conversation article,21 it’s extremely difficult to assess the health risks of vaping for the fact that there are so many different devices and e-liquids on the market. Chemicals can also behave differently when heated and can have synergistic effects with other chemicals.
Contamination issues also complicate matters. For example, a 2019 study22,23 found 27% of the 75 single-use and refillable vaping cartridges tested contained microbial agents and 81% contained glucan, a substance found in the cell walls of most fungi.
Exposure to these impurities has been associated with asthma, chronic obstructive lung disease, reduced lung function and inflammation of the lungs. They also found endotoxin, and concentrations were higher in fruit-flavored products, suggesting raw materials used in production may be the source of contamination.
Flavors can contain more than 35 different chemicals,24 none of which is listed on the label, and they too may have toxic interactions with each other. Many of the health hazards associated with vaping appear to be related to flavor chemicals in particular, and “fun” flavors is what’s attracting many children and teens to take up the habit. The Conversation reports:25
“One example is benzaldehyde (an almond flavoring). When this is inhaled, it impairs the immune function of lung cells. This could potentially reduce a vaper’s ability to deal with other inhaled toxins, or respiratory infections.
Benzaldehyde is one of only eight banned e-liquid ingredients in Australia. The list is so short because we don’t have enough information on the health effects if inhaled of other flavoring chemicals, and their interactions with other e-liquid ingredients.”
Illegal Vaping Products Are Flooding the Market
In January 2020, the FDA finalized its enforcement policy on unauthorized flavored cartridge-based e-cigs that appeal to children. In a press announcement,26 the agency warned that companies must immediately cease manufacture, distribution and sale of all flavored cartridge-based e-cigarettes, with the exception of tobacco flavor and menthol.
As of August 8, 2016, all cartridge-based e-cigarette products are required to apply for and receive premarket authorization from the FDA’s tobacco authority.27 Since then, the FDA has received some 26 million applications,28 a volume the agency simply hasn’t been able to handle.
As a result, illegal products have flooded the market. Many manufacturers never even bother to apply for authorization. They simply cash in for as long as they can. What’s more, since the FDA’s policy only applies to cartridge-based vaping products, sale of disposable products, which were foolishly exempted from the flavor ban, have skyrocketed by 1,500% since early 2020 alone.29
According to the FDA, it has rejected all but 23 premarket review applications received so far, and all the approved products were for traditional tobacco flavors intended for adult smokers.30
To rein in the rise of illegal vaping products, the FDA also recently ramped up its enforcement efforts, issuing warning letters to 1,500 manufacturers and 120,000 retailers for selling illegal products or selling to customers under 21.31 It also fined a dozen e-cig manufacturers around $19,000 each,32 and ordered an import ban on three disposable brands (Elf Bar, Esco Bar and Breeze).33
In October 2022, the Justice Department also launched lawsuits against half a dozen e-cig manufacturers on the FDA’s behalf.34 Still, the three import brands banned and the six manufacturers sued are but a drop in the bucket, as there are hundreds of brands selling unauthorized/illegal products.
Tobacco- and Menthol-Flavored E-cigs Aren’t Safe Either
It’s important to recognize that just because tobacco- and menthol-flavored e-cigs are excluded from the FDA’s ban, that doesn’t mean they’re “safe.” The ban on flavored e-cigs has more to do with curbing vaping among children and teens than it has with safety.
According to a 2017 study35 published in the Environmental Health journal, which assessed the contents of aerosols from tobacco- and menthol-flavored e-cigs, these flavors contained several toxic compounds, including nicotine, fine particles, nanoparticles, carbonyls, and VOCs such as benzene and toluene.
Vaping Associated With Serious Health Risks
According to a 2021 scientific review, the harmful effects of vaping include:36
• Respiratory complications resulting from:
◦ Respiratory irritation and abnormalities in respiratory function
◦ Lung edema
◦ Airway epithelial injury and lung injury
◦ Sustained tissue hypoxia
• Cardiovascular health risks, resulting from:
| Cytotoxicity | Oxidative stress | Increased inflammatory markers |
| Impaired endothelial function | Increased platelet aggregation | Increased arterial stiffness |
One of the largest studies conducted on the health effects of vaping, presented at the 2019 American College of Cardiology’s Annual Scientific Session,37 found that adult e-cig smokers have a significantly higher chance of heart disease and mental health problems than nonsmokers, even after controlling for known risk factors such as body mass index and high blood pressure. Compared to nonsmokers, vapers were:
- 34% more likely to have a heart attack
- 25% more likely to have coronary artery disease
- 55% more likely to suffer from depression or anxiety than nonsmokers with the same risk factors
How to Make Quitting Smoking Easier
Whether you’re smoking combustible cigarettes or e-cigs, please consider quitting. I believe the “secret” to quitting smoking is to work on other aspects of your health first, which will make quitting mentally and physically easier.
Exercise, for example, is an important part of this plan. Research has shown that people who engage in regular strength training double their success rate at quitting smoking compared to those who don’t exercise.38 Healthy eating is another crucial factor to improving your health and strengthening your ability to quit. In short, if you want to quit, here are three basic tips to get started:
• Eat real food — Detailed guidance can be found in my free comprehensive nutrition plan.
• Develop a well-rounded exercise regimen — This is your ally to fighting disease and to quitting smoking. Strength training is an important part, but also remember to incorporate high-intensity interval exercises, core-strengthening exercises, stretching and regular non-exercise movement like walking, along with cutting back on sitting.
• Find a healthy emotional outlet — Many use exercise, meditation or relaxation techniques for this, and these are all great. I also recommend incorporating Emotional Freedom Techniques (EFT). This can help clear out emotional blockages from your system (some of which you might not even realize are there), thus restoring your mind and body’s balance and helping you break the addiction and avoid cravings.
Once you are regularly doing these three things, then you can begin to think about quitting smoking. At this point many are ready to try quitting “cold turkey.” And, again, if you’re a parent, talk with your children about the risks of smoking, smokeless tobacco and e-cigarettes. The easiest path to not smoking is to avoid starting in the first place.
– Sources and References
- 1, 36 Respiratory Research 2021; 22 Article number 151
- 2, 13, 21, 24, 25 The Conversation August 10, 2023
- 3, 35 Environmental Health April 27, 2017; 16 Article number 42
- 4 Chemical Research in Toxicology 2020; 33(9): 2374-2380
- 5 CNN, February 26, 2018
- 6 EPA VOCs
- 7 Pubchem 2-chlorophenol
- 8 Naturalpedia Nitrosamines
- 9 Cancer in Illinois, PAH Fact Sheet
- 10 Environmental Health Perspectives March 18, 2020; 128: 3
- 11 Environmental Health Perspectives, 2018;126(2):027010
- 12 Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, February 21, 2018
- 14 CDC Acetaldehyde
- 15 The Guardian, November 28, 2014
- 16 EPA Inhalation of Aldehydes and Effects on Breathing
- 17 Toxics 2022; 10(12): 714
- 18 American Nonsmokers Rights Foundation, Electronic Cigarettes and Secondhand Aerosol
- 19, 20 Scientific Reports 2022; 12: 10314
- 22 Environmental Health Perspectives, April 24, 2019; doi: 10.1289/EHP3469
- 23 EurekAlert! April 24, 2019
- 26, 27 FDA January 2, 2020
- 28, 30 FDA March 15, 2023
- 29, 33 Boston.com June 27, 2023
- 31, 32, 34 KFF Health News June 26, 2023
- 37 EurekAlert! March 7, 2019
- 38 Nicotine and Tobacco Research, 2011, 13(8), 756-760
10 things you’ll never buy once you know what’s inside
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HijzWYPXHwQ
Published on Jun 16, 2017
If Fukushima’s ‘all good’ – why have Japanese citizens been gagged?
“Implemented in October 2013, Japan’s new secrecy law will incriminate and imprison any Japanese for speaking of their illnesses, deaths and losses from Fukushima’s ongoing radiation release … and the IAEA, the International Atomic Energy Agency, has the whole world and all scientists silenced on the actual truth about this world-wide nuclear event … The majority of the people world-wide have no idea about Fukushima’s ongoing deadly release of lethal, man made weapons grade radiation.”
The powers that be are blaming asbestos, cigarettes and alcohol for the rising cancer, heart attack and birth deformity statistics world wide.
This 10 minute clip condenses the quintessential on Fukushima’s fallout. We have been lied to.
To learn more follow the links in the info section below our comment here, or below the video by suziq977 at its source on Youtube. Check out also our Fukushima page.
EnvirowatchRangitikei
Published on Nov 29, 2015
Originally Published by Ysalys (Kate) on Apr 25, 2014
This is to help understand this radiation release in a way that everyone will be able to “get it” so the Mainstream Media will NOT be ABLE to lie to you any further and have you become confused over their lies.
source video http://youtu.be/bYqh5vvreaY
(Disclaimer at about 8:30, Japan IS asking for help). Fukushima News 4/25/14: Tepco’s Pleads For Help; Is Fuku Radiation A “State Secret”? http://youtu.be/VihFnI3qWAA
~~~~~~
April 25th, 2014
NY Times Reporter: Untold story of Fukushima is the radiation issue, gov’t doesn’t want us talking about it; A lot going on that’s never reported by media — Afraid of being imprisoned under Japan’s new secrecy law; All officials have to do is say the info is secret (AUDIO) http://tinyurl.com/l9n4ykk
March 20th, 2014
KPFA: Dr. Helen Caldicott threatened with death while in Japan for speaking about nuclear power — Students being charged with disturbing the peace for handing out flyers (AUDIO)http://tinyurl.com/plolh3d
February 8th, 2014
Professor: U.S. personnel destroyed thousands of documents to prepare for evacuation of Japan after 3/11 — Bloomberg: “Near-Chernobyl experience” for Tokyo even though 200+ kilometers from Fukushimahttp://tinyurl.com/ken4vhv
January 7th, 2014
Secrecy agreement between Fukushima and IAEA revealed by Tokyo newspaper — They hid health effects in Chernobyl… same thing could happen to Fukushima” http://tinyurl.com/mqbl95m
December 6th, 2013
Japan enacts state secrets law late Friday night amid revolt — “It criminalizes investigative journalism” — Terrorism defined as “imposing one’s opinions on others” http://tinyurl.com/ks4krzv
December 5th, 2013
Japan Official: “This is the way the reign of terror begins!” — Lawmaker is “physically restrained”; Outrage as secrets bill rammed through — Final passage expected within hours (PHOTOS)http://tinyurl.com/lhlnckg
December 4th, 2013
Top Official: Protesting secrecy law is act of terrorism — Japan gov’t promotes idea that you’re racist if avoiding Fukushima produce — Bloomberg: “The entire process has echoes of George Orwell” — Nuclear activists to be constantly spied on? http://tinyurl.com/n4julqp
November 29th, 2013
Insiders: State secrets bill meant to suppress Fukushima news — Japan public stunned as citizens could face years in prison — Man’s mouth “stuffed with cloth” after voicing opposition — Toxic leaks into ocean seem unstoppable, gov’t must plug the information instead (PHOTO) http://tinyurl.com/pt9l7st
November 26th, 2013
Japan’s secrecy law passes lower house — AP: Prison for ‘inappropriate reporting’ — Official: We’re on path to be fascist state — Fear Fukushima cover-ups to worsen http://tinyurl.com/o9pnw6t
bonus links
: FUKUSHIMA RADIATION REPORT, April 25, 2014 http://youtu.be/FHvb2w2Ozbc WIPP report and Fukushima
Radioactive decay is the disintegration of an unstable atom with an accompanying emission of radiation. As a radioisotope atom decays to a more stable atom, it emits radiation only once. To change from an unstable atom to a completely stable atom may require several disintegration steps and radiation will be given off at each step. However, once the atom reaches a stable configuration, no more radiation is given off. For this reason, radioactive sources become weaker with time. As more and more unstable atoms become stable atoms, less radiation is produced and eventually the material will become non-radioactive.
The decay of radioactive elements occurs at a fixed rate. The half-life of a radioisotope is the time required for one half of the amount of unstable material to degrade into a more stable material. For example, a source will have an intensity of 100% when new. At one half-life, its intensity will be cut to 50% of the original intensity. At two half-lives, it will have an intensity of 25% of a new source. After ten half-lives, less than one-thousandth of the original activity will remain. Although the half-life pattern is the same for every radioisotope, the length of a half-life is different. For example, Co-60 has a half-life of about 5 years while Ir-192 has a half-life of about 74 days. http://www.ndt-ed.org/EducationResour…
Measures Relative to the Biological Effect
of Radiation Exposure http://www.ndt-ed.org/EducationResour…
