Except smoking is harmful even if only done for a short period of time, while he alleged harm in these services only happens if they're around for a while.
Yes, looks like you don't get the point. The exact opposite is true, this is harmful from the time it get implanted, and the harm only grows with time.
Also, just like smoking, once the harm is big enough, there's no easy coming back.
Why is it harmful right away? Right away, you have people getting online who otherwise would not be online at all. The harm is only later, if they end up not getting fully online because they're satisfied. If that happens, and the benefits of internet.org no longer exceed the costs, then would be the time to ban it.
How is allowing internet.org now and stopping to allow it if and when it starts causing people to have less internet than they would otherwise (assuming that extra choice is bad here, which I do not concede) a bad thing?
"Nah, just keep smoking, once you have cancer you can still stop."
I hope you see the problem with that rationale.