WebMD: Following the Media’s Anti E-Cig Opinion

The media. It’s in our lives. Everywhere. It may be subtle or it could be in your face. Either way, the media is a powerful ‘tool’ that can control millions of people. Take for example the upcoming USA Presidential elections. The media can determine the outcome, easily. On the one hand, most major media outlets are giving a large helping hand to Hillary Clinton regarding how they present her. On the other hand, Donald Trump receives far more attention (read: TV time) than Hillary Clinton. In this instance, it seems as if the media is erratic. They are endorsing one candidate yet they give the other far more viewing time.

We personally could not care for politics, especially when the media is involved. In fact, we don’t care much about anything the media has to say. But when the media takes aim at our most cherished necessity, we will fight back.

Time after time, when the media here in the UK has (wrongly) gone after e-cigs and vaping, we have fought back, as have tens of thousands of other vapers. The fight will go on and we will never cave. It has been raging on for so long that we are used to it. We expect it. But, when a popular and well-known medical website picks a side, we take notice. Such is the case with the recent WebMD decision to label e-cigs as damaging to children.

When we first came across the headline (“Many Adults Unaware Using E-Cigs Can Hurt Kids”), we didn’t initially shout in outrage. No, on the contrary. This is coming from WebMD – a highly reputable and respectable source in the medical community. Our reaction? “Maybe we were wrong all along?” Turns out WebMD is just another online source looking for clicks – essentially the same strategy as Big Media.

When you read a headline like that from WebMD, you would expect an in-depth analysis with a motherload of medical research to back up that statement, along with detailing exactly how e-cigs are harmful to children with a point by point breakdown. Nope. Rather, the sentence following the headline can sum up the entire article: “Indoor use promotes harmful nicotine exposure, researchers say.”

That’s it. Seriously, that’s basically the entire gist of the article. That any a bunch of random statistics showing the percentage of adults who don’t allow e-cig use in their homes (and among other places).

Perhaps E Cigarette Reviews UK can teach WebMD a thing or two about medical research? Obviously, that is rhetorical, but it shouldn’t even have to be said! WebMD? For real? We all know that nicotine itself isn’t very bad for you. Pure nicotine can be fatal but pure nicotine isn’t found in tobacco cigarettes, let alone e-cigarettes. Furthermore, a heavy tobacco smoker doesn’t smoke 40 cigarettes in one ‘session.’ It is drawn out over the day, much like a person’s eating habits. The nicotine exhaled from e-cigarettes are minimal and are not sufficient to cause harm to anyone, including children. Moreover, there was already research conducted showing that second hand vapour is not harmful.

To be fair, the WebMD article said that e-cigarettes leave ‘nicotine deposits’ on surfaces which could expose children to nicotine (rather than from second hand vapour). But, the only way we see this as being possible is if an irresponsible parent left drippings from when they were refilling e-liquid into their e-cig (or if the parent was deliberately blowing vapour right onto their tables). Otherwise, it seems impossible.

If this was the BBC, we would rip into it but we would ultimately let it slide. It’s what we have come to expect from Big Media. But sites like WebMD? This is simply uncalled for.

      Login/Register access is temporary disabled