You read it here first, and yesterday: how the US Surgeon General’s intervention into the vaping debate has been met with alarm in the UK – not just by tobacco and e-cig users, but by the entire anti-smoking lobby. Still, full credit to the Times for today’s follow-up, which reveals that the research on which the SG based his doom-laden warnings was conducted on our furry friends behind the skirting boards. (See the full text in a separate post on our Facebook page.)
In the article, Professor Linda Bauld of Stirling University comments that, although the American health tsar makes sweeping claims for vaping’s ill effects, these are actually based on predictions made after observing rats and mice.
Is it otiose to observe that bad science destroys the cases it tries to make? And that the boy who cried wolf was eventually ignored?