10 ms·

When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018)

153 points by benpiper 5y ago

keyle 5y ago
Site not accessible from outside the US? lovely.
- lucajona 5y ago
  Mirror: https://archive.is/aAf3K https://archive.is/aAf3K
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
e67f70028a46fba 5y ago
Thank goodness no companies are using doctors to push their products today.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- foolyvaxxed 5y ago
- throwawaylinux 5y ago
  Yes after cigarettes, opiates, and amphetamines I feel that the medical and pharmaceutical industry has now finally learnt their lesson and padded their bank accounts enough that they would never stoop so low again.
  - inter_netuser 5y ago
    The absolute worst part is that all of the above are actually extremely valuable and useful tools, that now have unnecessary hysteria and stigma around them.
    - version_five 5y ago
      How do you see cigarettes as a valuable tool? As an ex smoker, I agree smoking is enjoyable, but it's so addictive and objectively unhealthy I don't really see a place for it (of course I do support people's right to make their own choices, but I'd never call it valuable)
      - csdvrx 5y ago
        Read above, ulcerative colitis. Chemicals are just tools.
        version_five 5y ago
        I'd be very suspicious of a claim that even if some compound(s) in tobacco smoke help with ulcerative colitis or any condition, that the clinical recommendation is to take up smoking cigarettes. But I'm open to being proven wrong
        inter_netuser 5y ago
        You'd probably change your mind as soon as you'd receive a devastating diagnosis, such as parkinson's. if you knew, that nicotine could at least potentially arrest the progression, how sick would you need to get before you would try nicotine patches? would you rather wait until you are unable to walk, talk, eat, wear adult diapers, but never ever attempt anything on your own? "clinical recommendation" is nothing more than an OPINION, not some eternal dogma to be venerated. Marijuana is being used medicinally en masse in many countries today. Still not a "clinical recommendation" in the US, and even an absolutely illegal drug with apparently no known medicinal use, but somehow thousands of epileptic kids manage to control their disease with Charlotte's Webb. Strange how official "recommendation" can be total lies, no?
        version_five 5y ago
        > Marijuana is being used medicinally en masse in many countries today I suspect "medicinal" marijuana is just a ruse to get it legalized. Not to say there are not medicinally beneficial compounds. I also support legalization. But it's a pretty big coincidence that the only medicine with "roll it into a joint and smoke it" as the delivery mechanism happens to be used recreationally in exactly the same way. Just like alcohol was "medicinal" during prohibition.
forgingahead 5y ago
- dewlinedew2 5y ago
  "Trust my cherry-picking!"
- pcdoodle 5y ago
  Not pointed at you OP. I love how highly active internet commenters this we're living in the age of enlightenment. This is the dark ages folks.
- steelstraw 5y ago
  "Experts say..."
- version_five 5y ago
  This is a good reminder of how fallacious the "appeal to experts" really is. Critical thinking is underrated. (At the time of editing, the parent comment is flagged. That's too bad, I think the comment is a succinct reminder why, as I say, you should make up your own mind and not assume "expertise" means someone is acting in your interest)
  - csdvrx 5y ago
    While I agree with you, unfortunately a lot of people saying this do it to cast doubt on vaccines/mRNA/anything they don't like, further cementing the political divide and damaging public trust. Even if I am a firm believer in individual freedom - including the possibility of self informed individuals to refuse vaccination if they think their individual risk is more important than group immunity, I fear we may see the consequence of a lack of trust in science for the next decades to come (while I'd personally be delighted to get a yearly vaccine against the latest strain of whatever, and get vaccines against things we couldn't envision fighting before mRNA technology, such as EBV or HSV)
    - foolyvaxxed 5y ago
Acen 5y ago
Mirror: https://outline.com/Gzv9W6 https://outline.com/Gzv9W6
adultSwim 5y ago
The timing on this story is coincident with the recent outspoken professor.
soheil 5y ago
Easy to look back and make fun of those commercials [0]. It's more sad than anything else if someone does that since they'd be applying their current knowledge of harms of tobacco to people who didn't have said knowledge. This is a cognitive bias called the Curse of knowledge [1]. I see so much of this happening not just on Youtube comments, but even here on HN, it's almost disturbing. The fair thing to wonder about is what things are we doing today that will seem ridiculous and obviously harmful to people in 100 years from now. Staring at a bright flat screen hours a day just to interact with a random stranger who vehemently disagrees with you about petty subjects? [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCMzjJjuxQI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCMzjJjuxQI [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_knowledge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_knowledge
elzbardico 5y ago
In a pure quantitative basis, considering only the deaths and not even the social and economic cost (which indirectly leads to more deaths, or at least impacts quality of life) there's no much reason not to include tobacco into the list of great genocides. Objectivelly, all those executives, salesman, advertisers are guilty of crimes against humanity.
seventytwo 5y ago
Intentional, malicious disinformation campaigns should be viewed as fraud against the American public.
- hypertele-Xii 5y ago
  So, the entire advertizing industry, then?
- rgrieselhuber 5y ago
  Especially when they are in collusion with the healthcare system.
shadowgovt 5y ago
I'm reminded of the Ethyl corporation funding the studies that said lead wasn't very harmful. ... Of course, that's the thing about science. The people doing research are separate from the ones providing the money. And people will put money behind the research that they believe is correct. This does, of course, incentivize some unethical folks to fudge numbers, but in general, the right way to approach this is to separate the funding from the science. See what the science says. Then, if you see an outlier paper and you need to understand why it's so different from the consensus... It might be helpful to see who is funding it to understand. Going the other way (discounting the science based on who is funding it) is forming theories without data.
- solarkraft 5y ago
  > people will put money behind the research that they believe is correct s/they believe is correct/the narrative of which benefits them. Unfortunately it's hard to separate funding from the science. What can one do? Ban privately funded research? Force funders of a study to fund another attempting to find contrary results/pick it apart? While I agree that some source of funding doesn't automatically invalidate a study, but anecdotally (and probably empirically), studies surprisingly often agree with the people who fund them.
  - hypertele-Xii 5y ago
    > Force funders of a study to fund another attempting to find contrary results/pick it apart? That's not a bad idea. The national counter-research unit. Any privately funded research is taxed at some percentage and all proceedings go to debunking that very research!
VonGuard 5y ago
"When asked 'What cigarette do you smoke, doctor?' More doctors said 'Camel' than any other brand." Abbott and Costello were sponsored by Camel. C-AM-EL-s C for Comedy A for Abbott M for Maxwell E for Ennis and L for Lou Costello, put them together and they spell, CAMEL! https://otrr.org/hotrod/hotrod7.html https://otrr.org/hotrod/hotrod7.html for episodes.
- kuzuman 5y ago
MangoCoffee 5y ago
>In the 1930s and 40s smoking was cool back then. it was a social thing to do. you can see that in old Hollywood movies.
- democracy 5y ago
  Why not 1850s? )) I am sure even in the 80s and 90s there were plenty of smokers in the movies
  - asdff 5y ago
    Smoking especially in excess wasn't actually all too common until cigarettes started being mass produced in the early 1900s, and WWI and WWI got two generations addicted to rationed cigarettes (especially fig 1 from this): https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm4843a2.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm4843a2.htm
xyst 5y ago
fun fact: cigarette usage does appear to at least decrease the chance of you getting ulcerative colitis still a shitty habit to pick up though
- Nihilartikel 5y ago
  There are better means to that end.. such as immuno-modulating parasites. The good old hookworm is a fine example. (Not actually kidding)
  - refurb 5y ago
    That trial failed
    - Nihilartikel 5y ago
      Last thing I've read: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4403024/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4403024/ seems to leave it at the very least as an open question. It's not a matter of 'a study' passing or failing. It's not controversial to assert that many parasites are immunomodulating , and there are no shortage of cases where it at least appears on the surface that they may ease some autoimmune maladies. My personal anecdote is from a friend whose allergies were strongly suppressed after getting worms. I don't really have skin in this game, though, and mostly posted to make the humorous juxtaposition of literally getting worms as a preferable and less harmful alternative to smoking for autoimmune relief.
    - inter_netuser 5y ago
      do you have a link? i thought failed studies aren't usually published?
- democracy 5y ago
  A highly addictive habit. If 99% of smokers could enjoy one cigarette a day with morning coffee or afternoon drink then smoking would never become a big issue. Most of them end up with 1-2 packs a day damaging theirs and their family health.
daenz 5y ago
Look at the timeline: 1930 - first cigarette company uses physicians in their ads 1950s - evidence starts mounting that smoking causes lung cancer 1964 - US Surgeon General report on the link between smoking and cancer 1998 - cigarette companies still maintained that the link is controversial So it takes 70 years, or nearly an entire generation, before all of the machinery at play (businesses, government, healthcare, scientists) can effectively come to the conclusion that they messed up badly and sold people poison. Grim.
- version_five 5y ago
  Yeah who knows what unequivocal advice we could be getting from experts right now that will be thoroughly debunked 70 years from now. (Are dairy and grains still food groups... I could easily go on)
  - gruez 5y ago
    >(Are dairy and grains still food groups... I could easily go on) I don't get it. Are you saying that grain shouldn't be a food group? I think for the purposes of categorizing foods, "starchy staples" is a pretty useful categorization, even if the recommendation to eat 8 servings a day or whatever is misguided.
    - programmarchy 5y ago
      He's probably referring to the food pyramid, in which those food groups were put forth as foundational building blocks of a healthy diet according to the USDA. [1] That saga overlapped with the sugar lobby blaming fats for heart issues [2], and using their weight with the FDA to keep % Daily Values for sugars off food labels until very recently. [3] [1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8375951/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8375951/ [2] https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/09/13/493739074/50-years-ago-sugar-industry-quietly-paid-scientists-to-point-blame-at-fat https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/09/13/493739074... [3] https://www.vox.com/2016/5/20/11719796/new-nutrition-label-added-sugar https://www.vox.com/2016/5/20/11719796/new-nutrition-label-a...
  - 5y ago
geodel 5y ago
Yeah, but that is past. Now we can absolutely, truly believe on doctors, as it is all based on science.
- city41 5y ago
  Since you used "absolutely" and "truly" I'm assuming you're being sarcastic? If not, you just need to look at OxyContin to know this isn't true.
  - honkdaddy 5y ago
    I think he is being sarcastic, and you're right, OxyContin is a great example as to why blind trust in medical institutions which are in the pocket of big pharma can be very dangerous.
8f2ab37a-ed6c 5y ago
What is the current state of research into the safety of e-cigs? The things have been around for over a decade now, but I haven't seen studies to show how much of a carcinogen they are for regular users. Has the product not been on the market lot enough for studies to be able to prove much of anything in either direction?
- csdvrx 5y ago
  I read a bit about that, and now that tocopherol is no longer used as an additive, the only questions seem to be 1) if flavorings are not turned into bad things by the vaporization process 2) if nicotine has enough negative side effects when inhaled to warrant restricting what's an efficient and self-directed smoking cessation method. About 1) the solution for the FDA has been to ban flavorings, under the "think about the children" idea. While the risk of childen getting addicted to nicotine could be a concern, given the lack of measured risk, it could be as innocent as enjoying beer. About 2), nicotine seem to have negative effects on arteries and the skin mostly, causing premature aging (increase elastases and metalloproteases). We may have more data in a generation or two, but it would be advisable to plan on reducing your use of e-cigs.
  - encryptluks2 5y ago
    Tocopherol wasn't used as an additive as far as I know, at least any any reputable ejuice vendor, and from I recall the timing on the flavored vape juice ban was oddly around the same time as first COVID cases. It is likely that they jumped to conclusions and then used "some" vendors adding vitamin E as an excuse for such a drastic terrible measure.
    - csdvrx 5y ago
      Maybe I wasn't clear, but tocopherol was not a flavoring agent. It was likely the cause of the mysterious lung issue affecting vapers, that stopped after it was removed.
      - Clubber 5y ago
solarkraft 5y ago
It's a bit funny that some commenters relate this to vaccines. I also see a similarity, but maybe in a slightly different way. The tobacco industry paid doctors to become outliers and promoted them to imply expert consensus and push their product. People not very fond of vaccines also promote outliers attempting to imply some form of consensus or at least scientific validity. Quite a few of them also have products or a whole world view to sell (which often includes buying specific products).
- pstuart 5y ago
  Mercola and RFK Jr both make a good living from their anti-vax positioning.
- fsociety999 5y ago
  Do you really believe the financial and other incentives are greater for the people pushing _against_ vaccines and Big Pharma as opposed to the politicians, “experts“, and doctors who are pushing the vaccines so aggressively to the point where they are okay if you lose your job if you don’t take them? That is a bit of an upside down view of the power structure in society. Pharmaceutical companies are literally making hundreds of billions of dollars off of their products. These companies are not exactly innocent. They have very little morals and are generally okay with mass suffering as long as their profits are increasing (look at the opioid epidemic as an example). If anything, I think it is much more likely that the reverse is happening. The scientists, doctors, etc. are designing studies in a way to paint a more favorable view of the products that they are looking at. They are cherry picking data to show that they are good while ignoring any data to the contrary. It looks a lot more like they are in the pocket of Big Pharma to me. In addition, there is a social stigma where if you take an unpopular view here, you will likely be seen as a “conspiracy theorist”, or face the possibility of losing your job, friends, family members. Most of the people against Big Pharma promote living a healthy lifestyle, taking supplements, going outside, getting sunlight, eating well, exercising, etc. It is not like they are trying to sell you some expensive products. When governments all around the world are providing billions of taxpayer money to pharmaceutical companies who have legal indemnity and can’t be sued if people have adverse reactions to their products, and those same governments are forcing their citizens to take the products (often against their will) in order to be allowed to participate in society, it is probably time to start questioning who the “good guys” really are here.
readingnonsense 5y ago
Bringing these things up during the early days of the pandemic would have gotten you blacklisted/shadowbanned on sites such as this one, as "please don't spread unfounded rumors - dang"
- encryptluks2 5y ago
- dang 5y ago
  That doesn't sound like something I'd post, and there's no occurrence of it in HN Search.
photochemsyn 5y ago
Future possible headlines: When Pharmaceutical Companies Used Doctors to Push Opiates When Pharmaceutical Companies Used Psychiatrists to Push Amphetamines
- seattle_spring 5y ago
  Are you really convinced that, from a medical perspective, those are on the same playing field as tobacco?
  - adamrezich 5y ago
    absolutely. the degree to which amphetamines are pushed on children is insane. I was one such child ~16 years ago. psychiatry in general is a pretty ridiculous field, at least as practiced here in the US. just yesterday I had my every-three-months checkup where I basically tell my psychiatrist everything is still going good, so can I have three more months' prescriptions of the thing you got me dependent on when I was a teenager, please. I was making some small talk about my life as per usual, talking about how work has been a bit stressful but that I've noticed I've become much better at handling work-related anxiety, compared to in the past, and she asked if I wanted to try any kind of prescription to help with it. it seems like the whole job is basically listening to people with issues and prescribing them pills to attempt to fix the problem. if a prescribed pill doesn't do anything after a certain amount of time, or has negative unintended effects, then oh shit stop taking it, let's try something else instead... another pill, of course, not any kind of counseling or literally any other kind of treatment at all, just more pills.
    - carlmr 5y ago
      >so can I have three more months' prescriptions of the thing you got me dependent on when I was a teenager, please. You could try to wean yourself off. Take a bit less every day. Dependencies don't have to last forever.
  - photochemsyn 5y ago
    Curiously enough, there are some legitimate medical uses for nicotine, just as there are some legitimate medical uses for opiates and amphetamines. > Colleen McBride, director of the cancer prevention, detection and control program at Duke University Medical Center... says there is a growing body of evidence that nicotine actually relieves some symptoms of Parkinson's and Alzheimer's disease, and appears to help those with severe depression focus. https://today.duke.edu/2001/08/mm_medicaluses.html https://today.duke.edu/2001/08/mm_medicaluses.html The question is, to what extent are current medical uses of such substances actually necessary, i.e. to what extent has it all been about getting those sales numbers up?
human 5y ago
If it was that bad in the 40s, imagine now with a mountain of student debt. Money is more tempting than ever.
tmule 5y ago
The Sackler family pushed opioids onto middle America in a rather spectacular fashion. In any functioning society - including with a death penalty - they’d be contending with the harshest possible penalty. Just not in America.
- KerrAvon 5y ago
  They killed Tom Petty and Prince and still seem to be getting away with it.
- chihuahua 5y ago
  This makes me think of the Drake meme. Making billions of dollars by selling cannabis (until recently): bad. Making billions of dollars by selling opioids: this is fine.
- tmule 5y ago
  There used to be an old fashioned concept called noblesse oblige. That’s no longer a thing in society, and the elites - barring performative actions and fashionable statements- are not invested in the well-being of average Americans.
ratsmack 5y ago
It seems that lately, questioning the "doctors" in public places can make you a pariah (and I won't go any further with that). On another note, I was prescribed a medicine 20 years ago called Propulsid. When I went to fill the prescription, the pharmacist told me that he would not recommend I take it. I contacted the doctor and he was pissed that the pharmacist had given me that recommendation. In the end I didn't take it, which is a good thing because it was removed from the market several years later for causing heart issues. >WARNING >Serious cardiac arrhythmias including ventricular tachycardia, ventricular fibrillation, torsades de pointes, and QT prolongation have been reported in patients taking cisapride. https://www.rxlist.com/propulsid-drug.htm https://www.rxlist.com/propulsid-drug.htm
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- MeinBlutIstBlau 5y ago
- winternett 5y ago
  I finally learned the term "pill mill" last year when I looked up a doctor I had seen for a physical when they prescribed me over 8 medications when I had never taken nor needed any prior. I didn't fill any of the prescriptions and believe it or not all my vitals with my new doc are just fine for my age without any new prescriptions. Money and fear of losing money has infected almost every profession and business lately, especially due to the pandemic. Even online reviews and advice are hit or miss and even fabricated completely. Getting a second opinions and asking my elders (65+) questions have served me better so far in life than just outright trusting what random professionals on the Internet and TV regularly tell me. I am vaxxed mind you, enough facts were there and I'm pretty reasonable. Pill interactions are also a big big issue... A doctor sees each patient for maybe an hour, its important to be able to make sure you also feel comfortable with following their advice (live or die) of course.
- standeven 5y ago
  It’s fine to question magazine articles that contain lines like “4 out of 5 doctors recommend…”. It’s fine to question individual doctors. It’s fine to question corporate-sponsored think tanks. Is it fine to question a scientific consensus on effective ways to fight a global pandemic?
paxys 5y ago
I have long suspected that all the doctors and studies that confirm that vaping is a perfectly safe alternative are to be taken with a similar grain of salt.
AlexCoventry 5y ago
The statistician R. A. Fisher contributed a great deal to the confusion, as well. https://www.nature.com/articles/182596a0.pdf https://www.nature.com/articles/182596a0.pdf
webmobdev 5y ago
And now Tobacco companies have latched on to, and are promoting Marijuana - something that is even more addictive, and both mentally and physically more harmful (in the long run). > Marijuana also affects brain development. When people begin using marijuana as teenagers, the drug may impair thinking, memory, and learning functions and affect how the brain builds connections between the areas necessary for these functions. Researchers are still studying how long marijuana's effects last and whether some changes may be permanent. Long-term marijuana use has been linked to mental illness in some people, such as: temporary hallucinations, temporary paranoia, worsening symptoms in patients with schizophrenia ... Source: https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana
xelfer 5y ago
> This content is not available in your area. Really making good use of that global network we got goin' here, history.com. https://i.imgur.com/3bPAFQA.png https://i.imgur.com/3bPAFQA.png
- exodust 5y ago
  Where should I book a plane ticket to, so I can view this article? edit: https://archive.is/aAf3K https://archive.is/aAf3K
mastazi 5y ago
Archive link please? Content is geoblocked (connecting from Australia) Edit: here it is https://web.archive.org/web/20220120011739/https://www.history.com/news/cigarette-ads-doctors-smoking-endorsement https://web.archive.org/web/20220120011739/https://www.histo...
stakkur 5y ago
“When Doctors Recommended Smoking As A Science-Based Health Practice” FTFY.
annadane 5y ago
I understand this is only tangentially related, but you can understand with the background of some of the medical profession, that some people are anti-vax (with respect to covid-19). To be clear, I'm very pro-vax - but yeah
oofabz 5y ago
My grandmother was prescribed cigarettes for anxiety in the 1950s. She quit in the '80s after developing emphysema, but it was too late. After years on oxygen her lungs were unable to sustain her and she suffocated.
zeroesandones 5y ago
they used all kind of tactics, political wars, gender wars, cultural wars; name them all. Thanks to the mastermind Edward Bernays.
sproketboy 5y ago
rswskg 5y ago
Japan Tobacco employed scientists to conduct research about the benefits of smoking as recently as 2009. My students when I worked there were said scientists.
nzp7chfjks 5y ago
Drinking fluoride is still good for your teeth right? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_relations_campaigns_of_Edward_Bernays#Water_fluoridation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_relations_campaigns_of_...

153 points by benpiper 5y ago

keyle 5y ago

Site not accessible from outside the US? lovely.

lucajona 5y ago
Mirror: https://archive.is/aAf3K https://archive.is/aAf3K
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

e67f70028a46fba 5y ago

Thank goodness no companies are using doctors to push their products today.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
foolyvaxxed 5y ago
throwawaylinux 5y ago
Yes after cigarettes, opiates, and amphetamines I feel that the medical and pharmaceutical industry has now finally learnt their lesson and padded their bank accounts enough that they would never stoop so low again.
- inter_netuser 5y ago
  The absolute worst part is that all of the above are actually extremely valuable and useful tools, that now have unnecessary hysteria and stigma around them.
  - version_five 5y ago
    How do you see cigarettes as a valuable tool? As an ex smoker, I agree smoking is enjoyable, but it's so addictive and objectively unhealthy I don't really see a place for it (of course I do support people's right to make their own choices, but I'd never call it valuable)
    - csdvrx 5y ago
      Read above, ulcerative colitis. Chemicals are just tools.
      - version_five 5y ago
        I'd be very suspicious of a claim that even if some compound(s) in tobacco smoke help with ulcerative colitis or any condition, that the clinical recommendation is to take up smoking cigarettes. But I'm open to being proven wrong
        inter_netuser 5y ago
        You'd probably change your mind as soon as you'd receive a devastating diagnosis, such as parkinson's. if you knew, that nicotine could at least potentially arrest the progression, how sick would you need to get before you would try nicotine patches? would you rather wait until you are unable to walk, talk, eat, wear adult diapers, but never ever attempt anything on your own? "clinical recommendation" is nothing more than an OPINION, not some eternal dogma to be venerated. Marijuana is being used medicinally en masse in many countries today. Still not a "clinical recommendation" in the US, and even an absolutely illegal drug with apparently no known medicinal use, but somehow thousands of epileptic kids manage to control their disease with Charlotte's Webb. Strange how official "recommendation" can be total lies, no?
        version_five 5y ago
        > Marijuana is being used medicinally en masse in many countries today I suspect "medicinal" marijuana is just a ruse to get it legalized. Not to say there are not medicinally beneficial compounds. I also support legalization. But it's a pretty big coincidence that the only medicine with "roll it into a joint and smoke it" as the delivery mechanism happens to be used recreationally in exactly the same way. Just like alcohol was "medicinal" during prohibition.

forgingahead 5y ago

dewlinedew2 5y ago
"Trust my cherry-picking!"
pcdoodle 5y ago
Not pointed at you OP. I love how highly active internet commenters this we're living in the age of enlightenment. This is the dark ages folks.
steelstraw 5y ago
"Experts say..."
version_five 5y ago
This is a good reminder of how fallacious the "appeal to experts" really is. Critical thinking is underrated. (At the time of editing, the parent comment is flagged. That's too bad, I think the comment is a succinct reminder why, as I say, you should make up your own mind and not assume "expertise" means someone is acting in your interest)
- csdvrx 5y ago
  While I agree with you, unfortunately a lot of people saying this do it to cast doubt on vaccines/mRNA/anything they don't like, further cementing the political divide and damaging public trust. Even if I am a firm believer in individual freedom - including the possibility of self informed individuals to refuse vaccination if they think their individual risk is more important than group immunity, I fear we may see the consequence of a lack of trust in science for the next decades to come (while I'd personally be delighted to get a yearly vaccine against the latest strain of whatever, and get vaccines against things we couldn't envision fighting before mRNA technology, such as EBV or HSV)
  - foolyvaxxed 5y ago

Acen 5y ago

Mirror: https://outline.com/Gzv9W6 https://outline.com/Gzv9W6

adultSwim 5y ago

The timing on this story is coincident with the recent outspoken professor.

soheil 5y ago

Easy to look back and make fun of those commercials [0]. It's more sad than anything else if someone does that since they'd be applying their current knowledge of harms of tobacco to people who didn't have said knowledge. This is a cognitive bias called the Curse of knowledge [1]. I see so much of this happening not just on Youtube comments, but even here on HN, it's almost disturbing. The fair thing to wonder about is what things are we doing today that will seem ridiculous and obviously harmful to people in 100 years from now. Staring at a bright flat screen hours a day just to interact with a random stranger who vehemently disagrees with you about petty subjects? [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCMzjJjuxQI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCMzjJjuxQI [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_knowledge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_knowledge

elzbardico 5y ago

In a pure quantitative basis, considering only the deaths and not even the social and economic cost (which indirectly leads to more deaths, or at least impacts quality of life) there's no much reason not to include tobacco into the list of great genocides. Objectivelly, all those executives, salesman, advertisers are guilty of crimes against humanity.

seventytwo 5y ago

Intentional, malicious disinformation campaigns should be viewed as fraud against the American public.

hypertele-Xii 5y ago
So, the entire advertizing industry, then?
rgrieselhuber 5y ago
Especially when they are in collusion with the healthcare system.

shadowgovt 5y ago

I'm reminded of the Ethyl corporation funding the studies that said lead wasn't very harmful. ... Of course, that's the thing about science. The people doing research are separate from the ones providing the money. And people will put money behind the research that they believe is correct. This does, of course, incentivize some unethical folks to fudge numbers, but in general, the right way to approach this is to separate the funding from the science. See what the science says. Then, if you see an outlier paper and you need to understand why it's so different from the consensus... It might be helpful to see who is funding it to understand. Going the other way (discounting the science based on who is funding it) is forming theories without data.

solarkraft 5y ago
> people will put money behind the research that they believe is correct s/they believe is correct/the narrative of which benefits them. Unfortunately it's hard to separate funding from the science. What can one do? Ban privately funded research? Force funders of a study to fund another attempting to find contrary results/pick it apart? While I agree that some source of funding doesn't automatically invalidate a study, but anecdotally (and probably empirically), studies surprisingly often agree with the people who fund them.
- hypertele-Xii 5y ago
  > Force funders of a study to fund another attempting to find contrary results/pick it apart? That's not a bad idea. The national counter-research unit. Any privately funded research is taxed at some percentage and all proceedings go to debunking that very research!

VonGuard 5y ago

"When asked 'What cigarette do you smoke, doctor?' More doctors said 'Camel' than any other brand." Abbott and Costello were sponsored by Camel. C-AM-EL-s C for Comedy A for Abbott M for Maxwell E for Ennis and L for Lou Costello, put them together and they spell, CAMEL! https://otrr.org/hotrod/hotrod7.html https://otrr.org/hotrod/hotrod7.html for episodes.

kuzuman 5y ago

MangoCoffee 5y ago

>In the 1930s and 40s smoking was cool back then. it was a social thing to do. you can see that in old Hollywood movies.

democracy 5y ago
Why not 1850s? )) I am sure even in the 80s and 90s there were plenty of smokers in the movies
- asdff 5y ago
  Smoking especially in excess wasn't actually all too common until cigarettes started being mass produced in the early 1900s, and WWI and WWI got two generations addicted to rationed cigarettes (especially fig 1 from this): https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm4843a2.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm4843a2.htm

xyst 5y ago

fun fact: cigarette usage does appear to at least decrease the chance of you getting ulcerative colitis still a shitty habit to pick up though

Nihilartikel 5y ago
There are better means to that end.. such as immuno-modulating parasites. The good old hookworm is a fine example. (Not actually kidding)
- refurb 5y ago
  That trial failed
  - Nihilartikel 5y ago
    Last thing I've read: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4403024/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4403024/ seems to leave it at the very least as an open question. It's not a matter of 'a study' passing or failing. It's not controversial to assert that many parasites are immunomodulating , and there are no shortage of cases where it at least appears on the surface that they may ease some autoimmune maladies. My personal anecdote is from a friend whose allergies were strongly suppressed after getting worms. I don't really have skin in this game, though, and mostly posted to make the humorous juxtaposition of literally getting worms as a preferable and less harmful alternative to smoking for autoimmune relief.
  - inter_netuser 5y ago
    do you have a link? i thought failed studies aren't usually published?
democracy 5y ago
A highly addictive habit. If 99% of smokers could enjoy one cigarette a day with morning coffee or afternoon drink then smoking would never become a big issue. Most of them end up with 1-2 packs a day damaging theirs and their family health.

daenz 5y ago

Look at the timeline: 1930 - first cigarette company uses physicians in their ads 1950s - evidence starts mounting that smoking causes lung cancer 1964 - US Surgeon General report on the link between smoking and cancer 1998 - cigarette companies still maintained that the link is controversial So it takes 70 years, or nearly an entire generation, before all of the machinery at play (businesses, government, healthcare, scientists) can effectively come to the conclusion that they messed up badly and sold people poison. Grim.

version_five 5y ago
Yeah who knows what unequivocal advice we could be getting from experts right now that will be thoroughly debunked 70 years from now. (Are dairy and grains still food groups... I could easily go on)
- gruez 5y ago
  >(Are dairy and grains still food groups... I could easily go on) I don't get it. Are you saying that grain shouldn't be a food group? I think for the purposes of categorizing foods, "starchy staples" is a pretty useful categorization, even if the recommendation to eat 8 servings a day or whatever is misguided.
  - programmarchy 5y ago
    He's probably referring to the food pyramid, in which those food groups were put forth as foundational building blocks of a healthy diet according to the USDA. [1] That saga overlapped with the sugar lobby blaming fats for heart issues [2], and using their weight with the FDA to keep % Daily Values for sugars off food labels until very recently. [3] [1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8375951/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8375951/ [2] https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/09/13/493739074/50-years-ago-sugar-industry-quietly-paid-scientists-to-point-blame-at-fat https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/09/13/493739074... [3] https://www.vox.com/2016/5/20/11719796/new-nutrition-label-added-sugar https://www.vox.com/2016/5/20/11719796/new-nutrition-label-a...
- 5y ago

geodel 5y ago

Yeah, but that is past. Now we can absolutely, truly believe on doctors, as it is all based on science.

city41 5y ago
Since you used "absolutely" and "truly" I'm assuming you're being sarcastic? If not, you just need to look at OxyContin to know this isn't true.
- honkdaddy 5y ago
  I think he is being sarcastic, and you're right, OxyContin is a great example as to why blind trust in medical institutions which are in the pocket of big pharma can be very dangerous.

8f2ab37a-ed6c 5y ago

What is the current state of research into the safety of e-cigs? The things have been around for over a decade now, but I haven't seen studies to show how much of a carcinogen they are for regular users. Has the product not been on the market lot enough for studies to be able to prove much of anything in either direction?

csdvrx 5y ago
I read a bit about that, and now that tocopherol is no longer used as an additive, the only questions seem to be 1) if flavorings are not turned into bad things by the vaporization process 2) if nicotine has enough negative side effects when inhaled to warrant restricting what's an efficient and self-directed smoking cessation method. About 1) the solution for the FDA has been to ban flavorings, under the "think about the children" idea. While the risk of childen getting addicted to nicotine could be a concern, given the lack of measured risk, it could be as innocent as enjoying beer. About 2), nicotine seem to have negative effects on arteries and the skin mostly, causing premature aging (increase elastases and metalloproteases). We may have more data in a generation or two, but it would be advisable to plan on reducing your use of e-cigs.
- encryptluks2 5y ago
  Tocopherol wasn't used as an additive as far as I know, at least any any reputable ejuice vendor, and from I recall the timing on the flavored vape juice ban was oddly around the same time as first COVID cases. It is likely that they jumped to conclusions and then used "some" vendors adding vitamin E as an excuse for such a drastic terrible measure.
  - csdvrx 5y ago
    Maybe I wasn't clear, but tocopherol was not a flavoring agent. It was likely the cause of the mysterious lung issue affecting vapers, that stopped after it was removed.
    - Clubber 5y ago

solarkraft 5y ago

It's a bit funny that some commenters relate this to vaccines. I also see a similarity, but maybe in a slightly different way. The tobacco industry paid doctors to become outliers and promoted them to imply expert consensus and push their product. People not very fond of vaccines also promote outliers attempting to imply some form of consensus or at least scientific validity. Quite a few of them also have products or a whole world view to sell (which often includes buying specific products).

pstuart 5y ago
Mercola and RFK Jr both make a good living from their anti-vax positioning.
fsociety999 5y ago
Do you really believe the financial and other incentives are greater for the people pushing _against_ vaccines and Big Pharma as opposed to the politicians, “experts“, and doctors who are pushing the vaccines so aggressively to the point where they are okay if you lose your job if you don’t take them? That is a bit of an upside down view of the power structure in society. Pharmaceutical companies are literally making hundreds of billions of dollars off of their products. These companies are not exactly innocent. They have very little morals and are generally okay with mass suffering as long as their profits are increasing (look at the opioid epidemic as an example). If anything, I think it is much more likely that the reverse is happening. The scientists, doctors, etc. are designing studies in a way to paint a more favorable view of the products that they are looking at. They are cherry picking data to show that they are good while ignoring any data to the contrary. It looks a lot more like they are in the pocket of Big Pharma to me. In addition, there is a social stigma where if you take an unpopular view here, you will likely be seen as a “conspiracy theorist”, or face the possibility of losing your job, friends, family members. Most of the people against Big Pharma promote living a healthy lifestyle, taking supplements, going outside, getting sunlight, eating well, exercising, etc. It is not like they are trying to sell you some expensive products. When governments all around the world are providing billions of taxpayer money to pharmaceutical companies who have legal indemnity and can’t be sued if people have adverse reactions to their products, and those same governments are forcing their citizens to take the products (often against their will) in order to be allowed to participate in society, it is probably time to start questioning who the “good guys” really are here.

readingnonsense 5y ago

Bringing these things up during the early days of the pandemic would have gotten you blacklisted/shadowbanned on sites such as this one, as "please don't spread unfounded rumors - dang"

encryptluks2 5y ago
dang 5y ago
That doesn't sound like something I'd post, and there's no occurrence of it in HN Search.

photochemsyn 5y ago

Future possible headlines: When Pharmaceutical Companies Used Doctors to Push Opiates When Pharmaceutical Companies Used Psychiatrists to Push Amphetamines

seattle_spring 5y ago
Are you really convinced that, from a medical perspective, those are on the same playing field as tobacco?
- adamrezich 5y ago
  absolutely. the degree to which amphetamines are pushed on children is insane. I was one such child ~16 years ago. psychiatry in general is a pretty ridiculous field, at least as practiced here in the US. just yesterday I had my every-three-months checkup where I basically tell my psychiatrist everything is still going good, so can I have three more months' prescriptions of the thing you got me dependent on when I was a teenager, please. I was making some small talk about my life as per usual, talking about how work has been a bit stressful but that I've noticed I've become much better at handling work-related anxiety, compared to in the past, and she asked if I wanted to try any kind of prescription to help with it. it seems like the whole job is basically listening to people with issues and prescribing them pills to attempt to fix the problem. if a prescribed pill doesn't do anything after a certain amount of time, or has negative unintended effects, then oh shit stop taking it, let's try something else instead... another pill, of course, not any kind of counseling or literally any other kind of treatment at all, just more pills.
  - carlmr 5y ago
    >so can I have three more months' prescriptions of the thing you got me dependent on when I was a teenager, please. You could try to wean yourself off. Take a bit less every day. Dependencies don't have to last forever.
- photochemsyn 5y ago
  Curiously enough, there are some legitimate medical uses for nicotine, just as there are some legitimate medical uses for opiates and amphetamines. > Colleen McBride, director of the cancer prevention, detection and control program at Duke University Medical Center... says there is a growing body of evidence that nicotine actually relieves some symptoms of Parkinson's and Alzheimer's disease, and appears to help those with severe depression focus. https://today.duke.edu/2001/08/mm_medicaluses.html https://today.duke.edu/2001/08/mm_medicaluses.html The question is, to what extent are current medical uses of such substances actually necessary, i.e. to what extent has it all been about getting those sales numbers up?

human 5y ago

If it was that bad in the 40s, imagine now with a mountain of student debt. Money is more tempting than ever.

tmule 5y ago

The Sackler family pushed opioids onto middle America in a rather spectacular fashion. In any functioning society - including with a death penalty - they’d be contending with the harshest possible penalty. Just not in America.

KerrAvon 5y ago
They killed Tom Petty and Prince and still seem to be getting away with it.
chihuahua 5y ago
This makes me think of the Drake meme. Making billions of dollars by selling cannabis (until recently): bad. Making billions of dollars by selling opioids: this is fine.
tmule 5y ago
There used to be an old fashioned concept called noblesse oblige. That’s no longer a thing in society, and the elites - barring performative actions and fashionable statements- are not invested in the well-being of average Americans.

ratsmack 5y ago

It seems that lately, questioning the "doctors" in public places can make you a pariah (and I won't go any further with that). On another note, I was prescribed a medicine 20 years ago called Propulsid. When I went to fill the prescription, the pharmacist told me that he would not recommend I take it. I contacted the doctor and he was pissed that the pharmacist had given me that recommendation. In the end I didn't take it, which is a good thing because it was removed from the market several years later for causing heart issues. >WARNING >Serious cardiac arrhythmias including ventricular tachycardia, ventricular fibrillation, torsades de pointes, and QT prolongation have been reported in patients taking cisapride. https://www.rxlist.com/propulsid-drug.htm https://www.rxlist.com/propulsid-drug.htm

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
MeinBlutIstBlau 5y ago
winternett 5y ago
I finally learned the term "pill mill" last year when I looked up a doctor I had seen for a physical when they prescribed me over 8 medications when I had never taken nor needed any prior. I didn't fill any of the prescriptions and believe it or not all my vitals with my new doc are just fine for my age without any new prescriptions. Money and fear of losing money has infected almost every profession and business lately, especially due to the pandemic. Even online reviews and advice are hit or miss and even fabricated completely. Getting a second opinions and asking my elders (65+) questions have served me better so far in life than just outright trusting what random professionals on the Internet and TV regularly tell me. I am vaxxed mind you, enough facts were there and I'm pretty reasonable. Pill interactions are also a big big issue... A doctor sees each patient for maybe an hour, its important to be able to make sure you also feel comfortable with following their advice (live or die) of course.
standeven 5y ago
It’s fine to question magazine articles that contain lines like “4 out of 5 doctors recommend…”. It’s fine to question individual doctors. It’s fine to question corporate-sponsored think tanks. Is it fine to question a scientific consensus on effective ways to fight a global pandemic?

paxys 5y ago

I have long suspected that all the doctors and studies that confirm that vaping is a perfectly safe alternative are to be taken with a similar grain of salt.

AlexCoventry 5y ago

The statistician R. A. Fisher contributed a great deal to the confusion, as well. https://www.nature.com/articles/182596a0.pdf https://www.nature.com/articles/182596a0.pdf

webmobdev 5y ago

And now Tobacco companies have latched on to, and are promoting Marijuana - something that is even more addictive, and both mentally and physically more harmful (in the long run). > Marijuana also affects brain development. When people begin using marijuana as teenagers, the drug may impair thinking, memory, and learning functions and affect how the brain builds connections between the areas necessary for these functions. Researchers are still studying how long marijuana's effects last and whether some changes may be permanent. Long-term marijuana use has been linked to mental illness in some people, such as: temporary hallucinations, temporary paranoia, worsening symptoms in patients with schizophrenia ... Source: https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana

xelfer 5y ago

> This content is not available in your area. Really making good use of that global network we got goin' here, history.com. https://i.imgur.com/3bPAFQA.png https://i.imgur.com/3bPAFQA.png

exodust 5y ago
Where should I book a plane ticket to, so I can view this article? edit: https://archive.is/aAf3K https://archive.is/aAf3K

mastazi 5y ago

Archive link please? Content is geoblocked (connecting from Australia) Edit: here it is https://web.archive.org/web/20220120011739/https://www.history.com/news/cigarette-ads-doctors-smoking-endorsement https://web.archive.org/web/20220120011739/https://www.histo...

stakkur 5y ago

“When Doctors Recommended Smoking As A Science-Based Health Practice” FTFY.

annadane 5y ago

I understand this is only tangentially related, but you can understand with the background of some of the medical profession, that some people are anti-vax (with respect to covid-19). To be clear, I'm very pro-vax - but yeah

oofabz 5y ago

My grandmother was prescribed cigarettes for anxiety in the 1950s. She quit in the '80s after developing emphysema, but it was too late. After years on oxygen her lungs were unable to sustain her and she suffocated.

zeroesandones 5y ago

they used all kind of tactics, political wars, gender wars, cultural wars; name them all. Thanks to the mastermind Edward Bernays.

sproketboy 5y ago

rswskg 5y ago

Japan Tobacco employed scientists to conduct research about the benefits of smoking as recently as 2009. My students when I worked there were said scientists.

nzp7chfjks 5y ago

Drinking fluoride is still good for your teeth right? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_relations_campaigns_of_Edward_Bernays#Water_fluoridation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_relations_campaigns_of_...