The American Council on Science and Health has just published a position paper in which it endorses smokeless tobacco as a harm-reducing alternative to cigarettes. Based on a longer report by University of Louisville researcher Brad Rodu and Smoke-Free Pennsylvania founder Bill Godshall (which I reviewed and commented on prior to publication), it clearly lays out the huge difference in risk between oral snuff and cigarettes, correcting a record that has been deliberately muddied by public health officials and anti-smoking activists. The paper's policy recommendations generally seem sound to me, although it's sad they are necessary. "Government agencies and private health organizations should provide accurate and complete information about the health risks of tobacco," says the first one, "including information about the differential risks of different types of tobacco use." A less diplomatic way of putting it: Anti-smoking groups and their allies in government should stop lying.
"I chose to be that guy who didn't issue the apology," says Daniel Elder. "Things went from there and it wasn't good."
And as many as 75 percent of middle income households face a tax increase under Biden's plan, even though the highest-earning households will pay the vast majority of the costs.
The Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids railed against cops for enforcing the same kind of anti-vaping rule they help pass.
It’s a jobs plan that isn’t about jobs, and an infrastructure plan that isn’t about infrastructure.