Complain to the PCC about the Daily Mail

Following previous successful complaints to the PCC ( Press Complaints Commission)  about the Mail publishing false info about e-cigs, now is the time for another round of mass complaints about this article :

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2523175/E-cigarette-smokers-inhale-MORE-nicotine-toxins-regular-smokers-Study-finds-users-unknowingly-inhaling-host-dangerous-chemicals.html

Entitled 'E-cigarette smokers inhale MORE nicotine and toxins than regular smokers'

The article is based on this research here:
http://medicalxpress.com/news/2013-12-dental-hidden-health-impact-electronic.html

It is worth including in the complaint that this research HAS NOT EVEN STARTED YET.
as it clearly says, in the last paragraph "...Saxena and Li will collect saliva and oral mucosa from College of Dentistry patients who are e-cig users to determine the relative abundance of oral bacteria ... "



It is very easy to do.

First go to this page here :
http://www.pcc.org.uk/complaints/form.html

Enter your Name, Address and email into the form.


Then fill in the following:


Newspaper/magazine - Daily Mail

Publication Date (DD/MM/YYYY) - 13/12/2013

Headline - 'E-cigarette smokers inhale MORE nicotine and toxins than regular smokers'


NEXT - tick the box to say where you saw the article.

IMPORTANT - you MUST include a link to the article, or the complaint will not be followed up


The next box is where you explain why you think the code of practice has been breached.

 - It is important to note in the complaint that the article is based on research that has not even started yet



The final box asks - Please add the clause(s) you believe to have been breached

Answer :
1.Accuracy: i) The Press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information, including pictures.




IF YOU THINK THAT THE ARTICLE WAS INACCURATE OR MISLEADING, THEN YOU CAN MAKE A COMPLAINT TO THE PCC.

Do it. Takes 5 mins. The more the better, and ask that the Mail publish a full retraction of this article.

This dangerous, innacurate and misleading article could be quoted for years to come, if a retraction is not published.