eLetters

98 e-Letters

published between 2006 and 2009

  • Scientific buffoonery
    Kevin M. Mulvina

    It would have to be seen as the most intriguing question of our era; to understand how, with all the most educated of scholarly voices abdicating for world wide smoking bans, how not one of those participants has the vision to see outside the box. To understand with very little imagination how beneficial it could be to society as a whole to simply look at the product before punishing it’s victims. When we view tobacco a...

    Show More
  • A CALL TO ACTION
    VICTOR O KOLADE

    I read the article by Offen et al with great interest. It is an excellent elucidation of the concepts of ‘boycott,’ ‘buycott,’ and ‘perimetric.’ One opportunity for perimetric action not mentioned is the option each academic has to boycott and/or draw attention to universities and medical schools that accept tobacco industry funds or hold tobacco stock. (1) The converse is equally appropriate; ‘buycott’ centers that hav...

    Show More
  • Re: Courtrooom expert opinions should be published
    Frederic Grannis

    The trial testimony of Sanford Barsky, offered by David Egilman in his email letter to Tobacco Control, provides an illustrative example of why tobacco industry sponsored research should not be published in Tobacco Control or other responsible scientific periodicals. In the testimony Barsky argues for non-tobacco causation of a case of squamous cancer of the lung. Examination of tobacco industry documents housed in the...

    Show More
  • "Harm reduction?" seduction
    Stephen L. Hansen,MD

    While I'm delighted that these tobacco industry trial products of unproven merit continue to "taste like s__t" (-a reference to the RJR president's famous quote in "Barbarians at the Gate"), I hope that we'll not see much more of OSH's time spent on what amounts mostly to market research valuable to the tobacco malefactors.

  • Hookah or water pipe ?
    Mostafa K. Mohamed

    I certainly agree with most of the comments of Dr Kamal Chaouachi but the need to develop one generic name for the different types of this form of tobacco smoking is definite and we tend to prefer the term water- pipe smoking as it denotes the similarity that links all these forms and shapes and local names. Certainly these different names are associated with local geographical languages and idenified best in the reps...

    Show More
  • Some Misconceptions in a Good Alert Paper
    Kamal Chaouachi

    Dear Editor,

    We wish to draw your attention to some misconceptions in the following study:

    Rima AFIFI SOWEID. Lebanon: water pipe line to youth. Tobacco Control 2005;14:363-4.

    >"In Lebanon, youth and women are the target of a marketing campaign featuring a new tobacco product for use with the more traditional water pipe."

    The caption for the embedded picture is a an erroneous int...

    Show More
  • Response to Impact vs. Efficacy for Pregnant Smokers
    Paul Aveyard

    Prochaska and Velicer have commented on this trial(1), and, having been alerted to this comment elsewhere, we feel we need to respond belatedly. They suggest the study had important flaws but do not name them. We drew attention to those flaws in the conduct of the study in the report. The major flaw was that midwives in the control arm were less enthused about the intervention and complied with the protocol less well,...

    Show More
  • Courtrooom expert opinions should be published
    David Egilman

    As Professor Chapman has noted some have questioned the merits of publishing papers that the tobacco industry funded. In the spirit of Justice Brandeis who noted that, “Sunlight is the best disinfectant” I believe that more not fewer tobacco industry consultants opinions should see the light of day. For example I believe that court room opinions offered under oath, by tobacco hired historians, physicians and others sho...

    Show More

Pages