Menu
Cart 0

David Sweanor blasts LA Times editorial on vaping as “prohibitionist’

Posted by Matt Rowland on

Shortly after the San Francisco announcement last month of a regional ban on the sales of flavored e-liquids, FDA Commissioner issued a rather earth-shaking statement of his own.  Effective immediately, vendors would have until 2022 to adhere to portions of the FDA deeming regulations.  The timing of Scott Gottlieb’s referendum may simply be a strange coincidence, or it may be a shot across the bow of the Liberal, Anti-Vaping Elite that tend to congregate in California.

Within days of the Gottlieb announcement, The LA Times published an editorial criticizing both the FDA commissioner and the agency itself.  Newspapers often issue “editorials” because they are an effective way to offer “opinions” rather than fact-based research.  And in this instance, The LA Times gets it wrong. 

“Did Gottlieb ... make the nicotine reduction announcement just to distract public attention from a rules change that helps electronic cigarette companies?”

The above statement implies some sort of devious intention behind the recent Gottlieb announcement.  In the original FDA news release of July 28, the newly appointed FDA Chief takes aim at Big Tobacco by announcing a possible implementation of new regulations which would lower the legal nicotine content in combustible cigarettes.  In most cases, regulations such as these would trigger boisterous displays of public support…but not in Liberal Los Angeles.

Related Article:  VAPING CHEERS AS GOTTLIEB EXTENDS FDA E-CIG REGULATIONS TO 2022

In the same press release, Gottlieb than grants the American vaping industry the 5-year reprieve against possible bankruptcy via a million-dollar Pre-Market Tobacco Applications as set forth by Obama-Era deeming regulations.

The LA Times apparently does not find this acceptable.  The editorial begins by praising the move towards nicotine reduction in convention cigarettes, but then it veers off course by claiming that the action “undermines” the notion that tobacco is bad for public health by supporting vapers rights.    

The article further deepens into a sort of Pro-Vaping Conspiracy Theory.  The LA Times editorial wonders if the only reason that Gottlieb decided to possibly regulate the nicotine content in tobacco cigarettes was to cover-up his real intention – to give the American vaping industry some kind of marketing advantage over Big Tobacco.

David Sweanor stands up to The LA Times

Is The LA Times using antiquated logic and fear mongering to push a liberal agenda?  Does The LA Times not keep current with the reams of scientific evidence that prove vaping is up to 95 percent safer and healthier than smoking?  According to David Sweanor in an interview with The Daily Caller, The LA Times editorial staff is missing the bigger picture.

“It looks to me like the editorial was written from a prohibitionist mindset, and I find with people like that is they are arguing more on the basis of faith than on the basis of reason…It doesn’t matter how many times you present the facts, they will use the same data. It’s not because they are engaging in a rational debate. What you’re dealing with is pre-enlightenment reasoning, its faith.”

David Sweanor is a pro-vaping advocate to be sure, but he is also an adjunct professor at the University of Ottawa’s Faculty of Law and Center for Health Law, Policy and Ethics.  As a professional educator, he is also very well aware of recent research conducted by none-other than The University of California which suggests a rapid exodus away from smoking thanks to vaping.  According to research, some 350,000 people quit smoking via vaping in 2014-2015 alone.

Perhaps The LA Times editorial staff didn’t get the memo.

Related Article:  ‘THE TIMES’ BEING SUED FOR DEFAMATION AND LIBEL BY PRO-VAPING SCIENTISTS


Share this post


The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author's and do not necessarily represent the viewpoints, policy or company position of Vapes.com, the rest of our staff, and/or any/all contributors to this site.



← Older Post Newer Post →


Leave a comment

Please note, comments must be approved before they are published.