However, via Argvargen, it appears that I was reading from the altered version of the ADFUCKERS' tripe. On the 23rd December their answer to question 12 on e-cigs read ...
... whereas it now reads ...
As Argvargen notes:
So we’ve gone from “Ecigs are a gateway” to “surveillance is required to assess the possibility that ecigs may prove to be a gateway.”
Evidence matters, eh?
[T]he Scottish Government might do well to take anything they say on the subject of e-cigarettes and vaping in public places with a huge pinch of salt. The evidence clearly shows that they are not to be trusted.Indeed, but this apparent error offers a glimpse as to how 'public health' advocacy works, especially when it comes to tobacco and e-cigs. Following the example of The Godber Blueprint, the plan has always been to commit to an outcome or conclusion and then construct the 'evidence' to bring said outcome or conclusion to fruition. Generally known as policy-based evidence-making, it is Advocacy 101 for every state-funded 'public health' quango and fake charity in existence.
In the case of e-cigs, it is clear that 'public health' don't like them because vaping messes up their plan. So they have decided that they'd like the public to believe that vaping is a gateway into smoking. It doesn't matter that this isn't the case - research thus far finds no basis whatsoever for the theory - because it will only be a matter of time before they create bent studies to 'prove' that it is. This won't be done with sober analysis of the facts by detached scientists, it will instead be via manipulation of data by carefully-selected career prohibitionist sociologists and aircraft mechanics reporting to a pharma-funded World Health Organisation. 'Twas ever thus.
ADFUCK's real mistake was merely to be a bit premature in declaring what they and their industry pals intend to make the public believe.
It's the political equivalent of the loss-making factory owner whose friend expresses their sorrow on hearing about the fire which burned down the business. "Shh", he replies, "that's next week!".
