This is INDEPENDENT, AD-FREE work that you are certainly NOT going to see in conventional media.
Please help keep JohnsonAndToxin ad-free, online and me working to expose Johnson & Johnson and their 275+ subsidiaries for the benefit of every man, woman and child on the planet - and that INCLUDES YOU and the ones YOU love.
NOTE: November 18,2017:
HAVE NOT HAD A GIFT OF SUPPORT SINCE SEPTEMBER 26, 2017.
I CANNOT AFFORD THIS ENTIRE PROJECT ALONE.
The site ended up going down for two days because I was late with last months' hosting fees. I can't come up with enough money again this month for the hosting fees due on November 26. Without financial support, the site and all content will likely go down again.
PLEASE, PLEASE HELP...
Known harmful, misrepresented drugs. Known harmful, misrepresented devices. Known toxic ingredients in baby products. Do NOT let Johnson & Johnson get control of vaping or e-cigs.
Keywords: vape, vaping, vaper, e-cig, control, regulation, smoking, health
Date Created/Edited: 2014, December 9
Control of the e-cig and vaping market is the latest issue facing consumers. Large pharmaceutical companies, including Johnson & Johnson, are totally against this new market and have already begun lobbying government officials in the UK, and pushed the United States Food and Drug Administration to regulate e-cigs and vape products. President Obama has turned the Democrats against this quickly growing market, leading a movement for a ban. Although the reasons why aren't exactly clear, it appears as though they claim e-cigs and vape products encourage people to become or remain addicted to terribly harmful nicotine. Uh, wuht? The amount of nicotine in an e-cig or vape product per stated dose is no more of a stimulant than a cup of horribly addictive coffee. So, reducing harm can't really be the issue, since there is quite a bit less harm in an e-cig or vape product than a conventional tobacco cigarette.
The e-cig and vape sites that claim JNJ is flat out lying about potential risks associated with e-cigs and vaping devices, well, are likely correct. After losing the Risperdal battle to the tune of $1.2 billion, when they appealed the decision, Johnson & Johnson actually tried to defend themselves by claiming the false marketing used to fraudulently increase sales of Risperdal and other drugs was their Constitutional Right covered under Second Amendment Freedom of Speech. Yes, I'm serious, follow the link to the article I wrote about the Attorney General who tried the case.
As for the claims by Johnson & Johnson that using e-cigs and vaping devices may be a hazard to your health, I seriously doubt they really care. This is a company that numerous organizations fought for over 20 years to remove formaldehyde and other known carcinogens from consumer goods, especially the products intended for use by newborns and children.
Major media is spinning it to appear as though Johnson & Johnson is great for being the first major seller of consumer personal care products to remove all known, and a couple suspected, carcinogens. However, they did not willingly reformulate without carcinogens, they were forced to by Walmart. If you live in the US, you realize that if Walmart refuses to sell it, the product HAS to be bad. If Johnson & Johnson can continue poisoning babies until forced to remove the carcinogens by a corporation that will sell almost any type of cheap crap, I seriously doubt they actually care about the health and safety of the ingredients in e-liquids for e-cigs or vaporizers.
Johnson & Johnson doesn't exactly have a great track record when it comes to reliable devices. Without hesitation they continue selling known defective devices until they run out of stock. They know full well that they will not only profit from the known defective devices, but also the devices that will need to be purchased to replace the defective devices. In their warped minds, a defective product is a good thing, kind of a two-for-one deal. Obviously, they don't really care if anyone becomes injured or dies from the use of the known defective device, the profit is far more important than the health, safety and lives of their trusting customers. It's probably not a good idea to trust them to make high-quality e-cig and vaping devices that deliver an accurate dose of e-liquid (with or without nicotine) every time.
Health organizations appear to be concerned about e-cigs and vaping devices being safe, advertised to children, youth, young adults and never-smokers. Although I don't purchase many print publications, I'm not seeing ads that are obviously intended to entice children, youth, young adults and never-smokers. What I see are advertisements with adults in adult situations who would like a cigarette - not even targeting never-smokers, around 1% of users - as a more convenient, safer alternative to smoking conventional tobacco cigarettes. Johnson & Johnson knowing sold adult dose, untested Risperdal to children - knowing it would cause them long-term health issues, profits from breast removal, etc. E-cig and vaping companies have been acting with ethics since the beginning of the industry. The executives and marketing team are obviously adults showing ethics in marketing and do not need to be told not to market to kids and non-smokers.
Johnson & Johnson advertisements against vaping and e-cigs exclaim, "Don't vape, QUIT!" and then go on to promote one of their boring, doctor visit, prescription and co-pay required products. It's been proven that these products come with a very high relapse rate. Over 90% of e-cig and/or vapor users who had tried a pharmaceutical product, such as nicotine gum, nicotine patch, nicotine spray, etc, responded that the pharmaceutical products were ineffective at helping them quit smoking conventional, tobacco cigarettes. Studies are quickly piling up showing that previous tobacco smokers who try e-cigs or vaping, switch completely to this new, flavorful, cleaner and far less harmful way to maintain their nicotine addiction. Nicotine by itself is no more harmful to the human body than caffeine or sugar, and any of them may be addictive to certain individuals. Shall we make it so ALL have to be boring, require a doctor visit, prescription and co-pay to acquire? E-cigs and e-liquids contain the same dose per use as a conventional tobacco cigarette, not some crazy drug. But without second-hand smoke, without tons of cigarette butts all over the place, without the stench and most importantly - without the extreme health risks associated with conventional tobacco products.
Johnson & Johnson is losing money not only on their close-to-useless, expensive smoking cessation products, but also the profits from the harmful effects of smoking as more nicotine addicts switch to e-cigs and vaping products. They aren't concerned about safety of the devices, safety of the e-liquid, potential lack of ethics in marketing or anything regarding your health.
They're fighting tooth and nail to get control of e-cigs and vaping because they're watching a few billion dollars a year go up, well, um, in a lovely, blueberry, vapor mist :o)
This article is really getting around the net!
Quoted by SpinFuel: The Art of Vaping. Follow on twitter @Spinfuel_News
1. Rick Manning (2014, January 3). Why do nanny-staters hate e-cigarettes? The Hill. Retrieved from http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/state-local-politics/194395-why-do-nanny-staters-hate-e-cigarettes
2. Timothy P. Carney (2013, November 19). Big Pharma, not tobacco companies, wages war on electronic cigarettes Washington Examiner. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/big-pharma-not-tobacco-companies-wages-war-on-electronic-cigarettes/article/2539441
3. Emily Patterson (2012, April 13). Johnson & Johnson Risperdal: Broken Laws and Side Effects Johnson and Toxin. Retrieved from http://www.johnsonandtoxin.com/risperdal.shtml
4. Emily Patterson (2013, June 20). Johnson & Johnson Defense Against $1.2 Billion Arkansas Risperdal: We Have a Constitutional Right to Lie Publication. Retrieved from http://www.johnsonandtoxin.com/right_to_lie.shtml
5. Anne D'Innocenzio (2013, September 12). Walmart To Ban Toxic Chemicals From Some Products Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/12/walmart-hazardous-chemicals_n_3915480.html
6. Emily Patterson (2013, May 6). Will YOU Use Johnson & Johnson Sedation Device? Johnson and Toxin. Retrieved from http://www.johnsonandtoxin.com/jnj_sedation_device.shtml
7. Associated Press (2014, December 19). University of Arizona (US) researchers to study use of e-cigarettes KSWT-TV. Retrieved from http://www.kswt.com/story/27581135/uofa-researchers-to-study-use-of-e-cigarettes
8. E-Cig Germany (Material for February 2015 Conference). Inside the German E-Cigarette Market ECig Germany: Industry Conference. Retrieved from http://www.ecig-germany.com/media/1000686/34921.pdf
9. Google Ongoing Survey (2014, December 10). Canadian Vaping Survey Google database. Retrieved from https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1FUAlD-cvY5gTWRPXEMk-Ttfhwj_CVpFxgAiw3lzEdRQ/viewanalytics?usp=form_confirm
10. Brad Rodu (2014, November 25). Britain: E-Cigarettes Almost Exclusively Used by Smokers and Ex-Smokers The Heartland Institute. Retrieved from http://blog.heartland.org/2014/11/britain-e-cigarettes-almost-exclusively-used-by-smokers-and-ex-smokers/
11. Michael Lindenberger, Alexandra Skillman (2014, August 5). EC Forum Announces Survey Results of More Than 10,000 E-Cigarette Users as the FDA Public Comment BusinessWire. Retrieved from http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20140805006174/en/EC-Forum-Announces-Survey-Results-10000-E-Cigarette#.VIex1MlCz1W
12. Peter Hajek (2014, December 9). Electronic cigarettes have a potential for huge public health benefit Biomed Central. Retrieved from http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/12/225