Anti-vaping posters in high schools bathrooms?

Within the new FDA campaign to "warn kids about the dangers of e-cigarette use", there is a provision to place posters in at least 10,000 high school bathrooms. 

I asked Kathy Crosby to give me more details about those “snarky and irreverent” posters with messages such as “Strangely enough, some kids come here to put crap into their bodies”. She told me: 

"While we didn't test every single execution of our new advertising campaign, we conducted two rounds of qualitative research with teens at-risk for, or already experimenting, with e-cigarettes.  During this research, it was evident that youth did not believe there was any harm to vaping.  The teens also repeatedly mentioned the frequency of use in schools and in particular, school bathrooms.  We tested different scientifically accurate health consequence messages and tones, some that were irreverent and snarky.

The Real Cost posters you’re referring to use the facts that tested well with youth. Based on this research and our four plus years of experience with "The Real Cost," where we’ve talked with thousands of teens via qualitative and quantitative studies, we feel these messages will be effective as part of the larger vaping prevention campaign effort which is hyper-targeted to teens where they spend their time, both online and in school. 

We are proactively distributing the posters over the next month through both a paid media vendor and a partnership with Students Against Destructive Decisions, or S.A.D.D. After that distribution is complete, we will make unbranded posters available on the Center’s Exchange Lab for schools and public health organizations to download and provide to their local youth organizations for distribution. We will also work with the media vendor to determine the best ways to monitor and conduct research on how the bathroom ads are being received by the schools and students.

Importantly, teens are not shy about talking with FDA regarding The Real Cost ads. In just one week, we’ve had over 500 social media conversations with teens who are asking questions about the health consequences, nicotine addiction and how harmful vaping is compared with smoking.

I hope this addresses your question. I read the article you shared and our messaging is very different from the posters featured in the article, primarily because they are scientifically accurate and based on insights with teens at-risk for vaping. I included an example, as requested. Thanks again for reaching out."

When I asked Kathy if there would be any illustrations on the posters she replied there would not be any. All would be on the model attached. She also said:

"The posters are 18x24 and will need to be secured with tape, I believe."

I had asked because I wondered and I am still wondering about the possibility that they are going to be easily ripped off or defaced. I am curious to see how they'll be received. I think I would have pretested this in real high school's bathrooms before deciding to go ahead. I also would have tried to get some direct input from the students themselves about the whole idea, including the content and eventual images.  Why? From previous experiences, I don't put much trust in advertising agencies and having students involved would have made sense (for me). We'll see. I still would like to engage high school students and older youth about how to communicate pro/against vaping, like I did with Cornish School of the Arts students about paid leave for temporary workers. Don't hesitate to contact me: philippeboucher2 at gmail.com
Thank you in advance.

PS: I looked at the number of schools with secondary grade: there are 30.828 such public schools and 12.669 private high schools for a total of 43.497 schools. How/why was 'at least 10.000' chosen as a target?

From NBC News

Seduction of smoking, a documentary by Peter Taylor

Seduction of smoking, Are e-cigarettes less harmful is the latest documentary by Peter Taylor who was the reporter in the 1976 classic Death in the West. He also authored in 1984 the excellent book The Smoke Ring. I, therefore, had high expectations but I was a bit disappointed as I feel he avoided detailing the gap within the public health community about vaping. He does interview people in both camps but not really in depth. There is no mention of the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World, nor of the Juul controversy. He visits East Timor, Argentina, Uruguay, Australia (but without a word about the prohibition of vaping there), Ireland: all places where the tobacco industry is fighting to maintain its old marketing tactics and opposes the implementation of the FCTC, including plain packaging. Plain packaging is now the rule in France (since January 1, 2017) but I don't think I saw any effort by the tobacco industry to litigate about it.  Maybe because its impact was not obvious, contrary to what was expected and keeps being touted? Not that I am against plain packaging, I am not so sure about its impact. Plain packaging also became the rule in Belgium very recently, without legal threats from the industry. What remains more effective is raising prices via taxes, although Australia that has the highest price seems to have reached a limit and as the prevalence among poor people remains the highest, the tax regressivity is getting worse without having more poor people quit. A thorough documentary about the pro-against vaping debate in the Juul era remains to be made. I still wonder what the most prohibitionist people would say to smokers who quit combustibles for e-cigs. Tough luck?

What concerns the US Surgeon General: ignoring alcohol to focus on e-cigs?

Several THR advocates sent a letter to US Surgeon General Adams to invite him to include THR in his tobacco control strategy. Looking at how e-cigs are presented on the Surgeon General's website does not incite to optimism. I found interesting to compare this very active stance against vaping to the quasi absence of concern for underage drinking during the last 10 years (date of the last documents I found) despite the fact this is a very serious health issue for youth (and their families) that as not decreased during this period, and is still preeminent.Why this extreme double standard?
Visiting the blog of NACD I have to go to April to get one post about alcohol (April being Alcohol awareness month). 
According to the NCADD, "Alcohol is the most commonly used addictive substance in the United States. 17.6 million people, or one in every 12 adults, suffer from alcohol abuse or dependence along with several million more who engage in risky, binge drinking patterns that could lead to alcohol problems. More than half of all adults have a family history of alcoholism or problem drinking, and more than 7 million children live in a household where at least one parent is dependent on or has abused alcohol."
Is the attention given to alcohol abuse and especially underage drinking proportionate to the epidemic? I wonder...

Why my thr journey?

About one year ago, on September 12, 2017 I learned that Derek Yach had launched the Foundation for a Smoke Free World, financed by a yearly contribution of $80 million by ... Philip Morris International. Derek was immediately labeled by many as an infamous traitor to the cause of tobacco control he had previously been one of the most prominent advocate. I did not join this crowd (that included many people I had known for years) as I could not believe for one moment Derek had not made this decision for good reasons and I certainly would not start stoning him without giving a chance to explain and try. As he asked for suggestions I submitted a few and attended in February 2018 in Bethesda a meeting of people having made proposals for the Foundation. I finally decided on June 18, to join the Foundation as a staff member, to help organize an online community. 
I resigned from this position on January 2nd 2019.
I'll try to keep producing, THR-rendezvous and write this blog.
The content of my blogs and the views expressed are strictly my own.