COLUMNIST Michael Moore’s reputation is on the line. He claims in “E-cigarettes, they’re here to help!” (CN, September 7) the evidence about e-cigarettes is incomplete but has already adopted the position that e-cigarettes are not only ineffective but also a big tobacco plot to undermine public health.
Only time will tell, Michael, but having just finished reading the Royal College of Physicians’ review on electronic cigarettes, I’d be preparing my letter of resignation.
To all the other readers out there I suggest you go visit the submissions to these inquiries that Mr Moore claims to have been “flooded by short, sharp submissions from current or would-be users who want no restrictions”.
What you actually find is completely different – submissions in support of electronic cigarettes from many of the most senior and respected figures in the addictions and medical establishment in Australia.
Strayan, via citynews.com.au
Making sense of e-cigarettes
I DON’T too often find common ground with Michael Moore on drugs, but much of his position on e-cigarettes makes sense (“E-cigarettes, they’re here to help!” CN, September 7).
Governments cannot logically see e-cigarette use as either demand reduction or harm reduction. Many who support such use often also support easing bans on cigarette smoking, increased availability of needles and removal of prohibiting laws against illicit drugs. They say that e-cigarettes are safer than smoking. What kind of a health template would take probably the most harmful man-made product as the yardstick for safety?
In the US medical journal “Pediatrics” in May, 2016, a multi-author study of pediatric exposure to e-cigarettes and nicotine had some shocking results including that from January, 2012, to April, 2015, the National Poison Data System received 29,141 calls for nicotine and tobacco product exposures among children younger than six years. The monthly number of exposures associated with e-cigarettes increased by 1492.9 per cent during the study period, with children less than two years old accounting for 44.1 per cent of e-cigarette exposures.
Colliss Parrett, Drug Advisory Council Australia, Barton
Stirring up the possums
ARE we, as a nation, becoming a bunch of rats following the pied piper? Every time someone gets a screwball idea or follows someone else’s, everyone gets on the bandwagon and follows suit.
People are crying that Cook did not discover Australia so they should remove his statue. Has nobody ever heard the ads stating “Come and discover Tasmania”, “Come and discover Canberra” etcetera? The term can mean find what you have not seen before.
Some person recently said Cook invaded Australia. He did not come with guns blazing; he found it and then went away and told the British government what he found.
It was the First Fleet that finally settled here. This is part of our history and should not be forgotten. How can we advance if we do not learn from our history?
I do not accept that the wording on his monument should be changed because it in no way reflects badly on the Aborigines. Anyone who tries to say it does is just stirring up the possums, which sadly happens a lot these days and usually to score political points. Can’t we just get along without making mountains out of things that aren’t even molehills?
Vi Evans, via e-mail