Monday, 14 October 2013

The weasel words of Jeremy Mean !

Now, there are some people that would say that a subject with this title could fill an entire book rather than just a blog post, but this time I will just limit myself to the article that appeared in yesterdays Telegraph newspaper entitled E-cigarettes, all you need to know.

Leaving aside that the Telegraph feels that we "need to know" that Kate Moss is a fan of e-cigs and various other (perhaps, more important) issues with that article, lets have a look at the words of Jeremy Mean, the e-cig spokesman for the MHRA.

The article informs us that the MHRA wants to see e-cigs regulated as a medicine because "there is a problem with quality control" - is there ? Where is the evidence that quality control is a "problem" ?
It continues by saying that these regulations should come in by 2016, yes they should have done if everything had gone to plan, but the MHRA did not count on MEPs thinking for themselves and concluding that e-cigs were not medicines and therefore medical regulation would be absurd.

Mr Mean is quoted as saying "Our tests show that different products vary in how much nicotine they deliver" - Firstly, lets be correct here, wasn't it BATs tests that the MHRA used ? And, of course products vary in terms of nicotine, that is the whole point - people choose what works for them, but Jeremy Mean presents this as if it is some kind of problem.

More twisted double-speak comes in his next paragraph.

There are also fears that e‑cigarettes could “renormalise” smoking and promote nicotine addiction. “This is precisely why they need regulating as medicines, so that they are not sold to under-18s or targeted at non-smokers,” he says.

E-cigs do not re-normalise smoking, that is supposition, opinion without evidence - the reality much more simple - e-cigs normalise the use of e-cigs for smokers, nothing more nothing less, it really is that easy.

The double-speak gets worse when he says that they "need regulating as medicines" so that they are not sold to under 18s or targeted at non-smokers - Jeremy Mean misleads Telegraph readers into thinking that only medicines regulations can achieve this - and deliberately fails to mention the fact that the MEPs voted for amendment 170 to protect e-cigs from Mr Mean and that this amendment specifically states that sale to under 18s and marketing at non-smokers would be prohibited, without any medical regulation required.


1 comment: