Do any of these groups think for themselves, or do they simply copy the deceptive rhetoric from the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids without paying attention to what they are saying?
Um, you know the answer to that. Brainwashing 101. Evidently, they teach kids in school the same thing: Research what I tell you and only use the sources that I like, then regurgitate everything to the letter.
No thinking. Just regurgitating.
Reduced lung function in 'healthy' children of smokers:
http://www.reuters.com/article/
h...L15339520070521
What say you, doctor?
.
May 21, 2007
Binghamton, N.Y.
Group wants smoking ban expanded to all parks
In the wake of the Broome County legislature’s decision last week to ban smoking in playground areas of Broome County-run parks, a coalition of local health groups is promoting an initiative to expand the ban to all parks in the county.
The “Young Lungs at Play” initiative will provide informational materials and signs for Broome County municipalities that choose to make their park playgrounds tobacco-free. ...
"Young Lungs at Play" -- I love it! (And now a moment of silence for all those moms and dads who have to work three jobs just to put food on the table.)
.
Of course nobody wants to ban smoking in the home.
http://www.news-medical.net/?id=25238
Excerpts
The study confirms that household smoking restrictions are more strongly associated with better health status than workplace smoking restrictions. "As the policy environment continues to move toward comprehensive protection at the workplace, the household increasingly will become the main and perhaps the only significant source of exposure among nonsmoking adults as it is among children,"
Smoking restrictions have a dual goal, to protect the health of nonsmokers and to increase smoking cessation among smokers. Since smoke-free public places appear to facilitate the adoption of smoke-free homes, and as smoke-free air legislation spreads, a rise in protection from secondhand smoke at home can be expected. "However, this does not, preclude the need to take a proactive approach to increasing adoption of household bans,"
TC get out of my life.
GreatScot
Profit before health? FDA approval before checking?
http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/
...1415041.0.0.php
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/busin...ess/
6678757.stm
Big Pharma does it again.
GreatScot says: "Big Pharma does it again."
I should point out that the studies probably mean a Relative Risk (RR) of 1.64 for death from cardiovascular causes for people who take the diabetic drug. This is statistically insignificant. No big concern.
Of course, since TC managed to get everyone to worry about RRs of about 1.30 for ETS for lung cancer and heart disease, it is no wonder the public is concerned. Gotta love the junk science. It does bring a smile to my face hearing Big Pharma trying to explain away the study. If this had been an ETS study, no questions would be asked. My guess similar studies could be produced by any drug big Pharma puts out that show the RRs of sometime increasing by statistically insignificant risks. Boy would it be funny if they got put through the same litigation that Big Tobacco went through. I would be laughing my ass off. Of course that already happened with silicon breast implants.
Still I hate when the press just parrots everything the medical community says. In "real scientist" experimental results are not taken seriously unless they can be replicated and verified. Someone needs to teach reporters not to report statistically insignificant findings. Generally, RRs of less then 3 should not be taken seriously. The medical sciences do not seem to be held to a high standard. Any junk can get published.
Dan,
My point exactly. TC have set new low standards and I will join you in a mass laugh in with a few beers and a smoke if Big Pharma get cought up in a trap of their own making.
BTW RR's less than 3 can be statistically significant if the CI does not straddle 1. However they are statically insuffient below 3 unless fully randomised double blind studies.
Doctor Marla Shapiro the medical guru for CTV part of one of the largest media groups in Canada and an ardent antismoking crusader, has been telling Canadians for years of the concerning numbers derived from exposures to ETS, including casual exposures while walking near a smoker. Yesterday she advised Diabetics not to stop taking their medicine. She said the numbers were derived from a long-term observation and the increased risk is “extremely small”?
The maker of this medicine GSK tells the story as to where her professionalism finds direction. Insignificant increased risk is highly concerning when it sells the same companies alternative smoking products and with double the risk the figure is extremely low and should not facilitate a rush to judgment.
The good news is, the media is jumping on the new bandwagon; research enablers AKA drug company research fails in current regulation and the process needs to be improved significantly across the board.
TC has afforded us a multitude of examples in how the system fails to provide reliable Health Relevant Information to the public. Failing in a basic international human right to Autonomy.
Anyone could make a fortune advising the investigators how the systems fail and you can bet they will.
Kevin quotes...."Diabetics not to stop taking their medicine. She said the numbers were derived from a long-term observation and the increased risk is “extremely small”?
and an increased risk (extremely small) is just okie dokie when it fits your agenda "dr Shapiro", right?
Not again!
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_re...ts-
cw051407.php
~snip~
'Dr. Arets speculated that in the future, the growing number of smoking bans in public places might cause parents to smoke more in their own homes, thereby increasing the harm to the developing lungs of children. "We may see an increase in diminished lung function in children of smokers because of this trend," he said.'
What I think is more harmful to 'developing lungs'(and the minds of those) is having them institutionalized all day in schools with no excercise, studing the effect of the latest thing they "need to fear".
Doctor Marla Shapiro the medical guru for CTV part of one of the largest media groups in Canada and an ardent antismoking crusader, has been telling Canadians for years of the concerning numbers derived from exposures to ETS, including casual exposures while walking near a smoker. Yesterday she advised Diabetics not to stop taking their medicine. She said the numbers were derived from a long-term observation and the increased risk is “extremely small”?
Regurgitating press releases. See? It all comes down to barf.
Jerry Thomas,
In case you're here, here is the complete quote of CS Lewis:
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims
may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber
barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s
cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be
satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us
without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier
to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable
insult. To be ‘cured’ against one’s will and cured of states which we
may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have
not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be
classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals. But to be
punished, however severely, because we have deserved it, because we
‘ought to have known better,’ is to be treated as a human person made
in God’s image." - C.S. Lewis
Just thought it worth reposting. 
Hey DTB Thought you would enjoy this site http://www.heartland.org/IssueSu...sId=4&
istId=396
Lots of good stuff there.
Thanks, Sunz, I've visited that site before. They have some things that are good.
Love the CS LEwis quote!
When I read through this legislation. A scary part of it I noticed is the FDAs ability to further strenghten Big Cigarette makers ability to gain complete control of the market. FDA and congress could easily eliminate the small tobacco companies such as bulk producers that cater to the RYO consumers. Regulations can be enacted that would make it all but impossible for them to compete. Even though many of these tobacco companies may put few or no additives in their product. If regualtions were passed for them to reduce nicotene. The small companies would most likely not have the resources to do so. This is not about making the product safer but making it easier to control. As the past few years have shown the scheme of the MSA has backfired and more consumers have turned to the small companies to buy in bulk to make their own cigarettes. The Big Cigarette makers have lost market share and this trend continues. The states and TC have seen their illicet funding drop. As TC pushed and the states complied to raise taxes. The cycle has continued as consumers find ways in what is left of the free market to lower their costs. Eliminating the small companies and forcing everyone to go Big cigarette makers seem to be the plan. Big Tobacco Control knows as long as Big Tobacco is assured of its profits they will stay out of the way. When it comes time to lobby the politicians to remove the small companies and bulk purhases from the market. Big Tobacco Control knows from its smoking ban tactics and a complient media the politicians will be a push over. Neither government or BTC understand the market. I am afraid what will be created is a large black market. Which we all know will bring its own problems. I am sure the cost of expanding law enforcemnt and the courts will be in the billions of $$s at the local, state, and federal level (like the ATF doesn't have enough to do). Not to mention turning what used to be law abiding citizens into criminals. Lets not forget the illegal booze trade in the USA is still in the billions of dollars. This whole thing is a disaster in the making. Another war on something with bad results.
nemo31-
A very astute analysis. And indeed, I think you're right. I think that the ability of Philip Morris to respond most easily to any changes would help that company and hurt the smaller companies. This is why Dr. Alan Blum and I have dubbed this the "Marlboro Monopoly Act."
Harry -
While I've seen the abstract, I haven't seen the actual article. I need to reserve judgment and comment until I see the complete article (unlike many anti-smoking groups, the science actually does matter to me -- I'm not going to take the headline and just jump at that).
Dr. Siegel, I don't know about anyone else, but I am still waiting to see/hear where I can find this list of 4,000+ chemicals along with the amounts in each cigarette that renders SHS so deadly that it only affects non-smokers?
Another definitive study hits the news...
Could Viagra Put the Brakes on Jet Lag?
By Will Dunham
Reuters
WASHINGTON (May 21) - The male impotence drug Viagra may be useful for treating jet lag as well, according to Argentine researchers who gave it to hamsters made to feel like rodent globe-trotters.
The researchers manipulated the schedule of turning lights on and off to induce jet lag in the laboratory animals, they reported on Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Adult male hamsters given Viagra, also called sildenafil, recovered from jet lag up to 50 percent faster than hamsters that were not given it, the researchers said.
The scientists stopped giving the hamsters the highest dose they had been using in the experiment due to a certain side effect.
Per the 2006 press release by the head of the US Department of Public Hysteria (US Surgeon General):
Tobacco smoke, whether inhaled directly by the smoker or by exposure to the smoke, is the deadliest delayed-effect toxin (DDET?), legally and readily available to the public, in the history of mankind.
Worse, it has to be the invention of the Devil or some other cunning, malevolent entity, because despite the efforts of our finest physicians, coroners and medical technologies, we have been unable to positively identify even one victim of DDET - despite having millions of corpses to work on.
This deadly toxin has killed and will kill more victims than any other disease, weapon of mass destruction, natural disaster or famine...and we don't know who they are.
The stuff of nightmares, much worse than that of Stephen King's "The Stand." Chilling!
Thanks, Dr. Siegel. I hope you'll get back to us on it.
.
PURSUED BY THE HOUNDS OF HELL
You’re not going to believe this (oh, YES you are!):
http://www.forbes.com/
forbeslife...cout604748.html
Now we’ve got an assistant professor of Public Health saying (what with smokers now driven to the curb) “what we found is that the level of secondhand smoke in front of restaurants and bars was several times higher than the safety standards established by the EPA's Clean Air Act."
Excerpts:
“In their study, Naeher's group measured the level of pollutants in the air outside several drinking and eating establishments in and around Athens, Ga.”
“On two consecutive Friday and Saturday afternoons, air sample readings were taken directly outside each locale every 30 seconds. Each of the four establishments had a designated smokers area with or without seating, either outside the main entrance or in an internal courtyard.”
“The result: the more smokers present in the smoking zones, the greater the amount of carbon monoxide and PM2.5.” (Thank God an assistant professor pointed this out; otherwise, we’d all have remained in complete ignorance!)
“Smoking areas outside bars had the highest substance readings, followed by those outside restaurants. Compared with the location away from any of the four establishments, PM2.5 readings were nearly three times as high outside bars and twice as high outside the restaurants.”
“Naeher stressed that the study readings seemed to correlate exclusively with smokers, not nearby car traffic.”
“In the meantime, one longtime anti-smoking advocate said moves to ban indoor smoking in restaurants and bars are still important. The fact is that you're better off having it outside than inside," said Stanton A. Glantz ... “ (Our old and faithful buddy, always on the job.)
“Naeher agreed.’
“"It's not illegal to smoke, and when you have smokers, you're going to have secondhand smoke," he acknowledged.” (BRILLIANT! GIVE THAT MAN A CIGAR!)
And then there’s this for a finale:
“For more on secondhand smoke, visit the American Lung Association.”
Sorry, pal, been there, done that.
.
“For more on secondhand smoke, visit the American Lung Association.”
Or visit the American Cancer Society!
From Peer Review to Fear Review
For years, self-appointed "environmental advocates" have generated press releases claiming that "chemicals" in our air, water, food, and consumer products such as cosmetics pose a risk of cancer. Nearly twenty years ago, the Natural Resources Defense Council caused a national panic by asserting that the agricultural chemical Alar posed a cancer risk to children (a claim that was later determined to be false). Advocates on Long Island have long claimed -- with a paucity of evidence -- that the elevated breast cancer rate in that area is the result of exposure to environmental chemicals like PCBs and DDT. These assertions can be dismissed as pure scare tactics, as they are not based on scientific data which have survived the rigor of the peer review process and been published in a professional medical journal.
The American Cancer Society has done the cause of breast cancer prevention a disservice by publishing this article. ACS has tarnished the much-touted image of the peer review process as something superior to the "science by press release" approach. The article diverted attention from scientifically-based ways of reducing breast cancer risks (including using FDA-approved medications as a means of chemo-prevention -- an approach that shows great promise).
http://www.acsh.org/
healthissues...ssue_detail.asp
Hmmmm, my post about the ALA's ad campaign that could be found on YouTube seems to have disappeared. I posted it last night. Was it the internet gods or was it intentionally removed?
I had said that while we're talking about the ugly doings of ALA in this blog entry that this ad by them is most despicable and asked Dr. Siegel to comment on it.
This is the link where it's first discussed on Adrants: http://www.adrants.com/2007/05/s...aryland-
ala.php
And here is the direct link to the video -- one that equates smoking around your kids with child abuse:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c...h?
v=ciFbuL9aPyo
Off topic but couldn't resist (and know that you'll all forgive me for this one)
Before I start... Hey Bill! According to you whatever a court says goes, right?
[Allegheny]County's smoking ban in ashes
Commonwealth Court rules only Legislature has authority over indoor air quality
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette - May 23, 2007
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/0...3/788180-
85.stm
A smoking ban passed by Allegheny County last October was struck down yesterday by the state Commonwealth Court, which ruled that county exceeded its authority.
According to the court's 16-page opinion, the state's Clean Indoor Air Act, passed in 1988, "shall preempt and supersede any local ordinance or rule," pertaining to smoking in public places, including restaurants that seat 75 or more people.
The Commonwealth Court found that the General Assembly's use of that language was specifically intended to prohibit local legislation on smoking in restaurants.
But William Godshall, the executive director of SmokeFree Pennsylvania, said the commonwealth is way behind on the issue.
"It's unfortunate our state Legislature has to be shamed into doing what's right," Mr. Godshall said. "The cigarette companies have done a very effective job of mobilizing opposition to this. Those two restaurateurs were the puppets, and the tobacco industry held the strings."
Bill, you are the only puppet in those parts. Parroting the anti line that these owners do it to help the tobacco companies' business
and that none of these owners could possibly be in it for their own business' bottom line. Do you know how stupid that sounds?
"It's unfortunate our state Legislature has to be shamed into doing what's right," Mr. Godshall said. "The cigarette companies have done a very effective job of mobilizing opposition to this. Those two restaurateurs were the puppets, and the tobacco industry held the string"
It is unfortunate No one is prosecuting paid extortionists any more especially those who threaten the peoples elected voice; comply or be personally attacked in the media by a collection of moralist busy bodies who profit from smoking bans.
The competing addictive product vendors have done a very effective job of mobilizing support to this. TC enthusiasts were the puppets and the Drug companies pulled the strings.
Keep banging that Tambourine Bill.
Harry, was there any clue given as to when that study in Georgia was done? There are several wildfires burning in Georgia and Florida and I was wondering if they were really testing the air quality of those fires and not secondhand smoke?? What better chance to test smoke and blame it on the smoker?
As for Bill and Allegheny County, and law suits. Sorry Bill, but those business owners did the suing, not the tobacco companies. In the future, business owners would be wise to sue the person who proposed and pushed these bans rather than trying to prove it to be unconstitutional. Let Bill and friends prove the ill health effects and produce those death certificates in a Court of Law. They could be running with their tails between their legs then.
ASH and arrogance
http://no-smoking.org/may07/05-2...05-22-07-
6.html
Harry--
“In their study, Naeher's group measured the level of pollutants in the air outside several drinking and eating establishments in and around Athens, Ga.”
Athens, Ga huh? The home of the UGA Bulldogs. Hmmm, no partyin' goin' on there! LOL!! Polutants in Athens? Never would have guessed.
“"It's not illegal to smoke, and when you have smokers, you're going to have secondhand smoke," he acknowledged.” (BRILLIANT! GIVE THAT MAN A CIGAR!)
Harry, you're great! Luv it!
I haven't yet read through the rest of the musings, but I couldn't let this one slide without comment. 
JTF
You're right ALA ad is disgusting. What level will they NOT stoop to?
Bill bellows....."Those two restaurateurs were the puppets, and the tobacco industry held the string"
You mean Bill, just like you are for TC/Big Pharma and Big Brother?
Little, little man.
.
From Great Scots link:
13. Finally, some companies are going even further, insisting upon a workforce which is both smoke free as well as drug free – and refusing to employ or promote workers who smoke, even off the job – since the dramatically-increased health care costs are the same whether they smoke on or off the job.
ASH is defending that practice, one which has now been adopted by many leading companies, as well as by the World Health Organization.
Wasn't Bill whining that NO TC groups were condoning this action?
ENVIRONMENTAL: With all the recent and apparently growing concern about Global Warming and Environmental Harm, we might want to take advantage of that movement to stress how much smoking contributes to both:
obviously not just the heat generated by smoking, but by the deforestation it contributes to, the fossil fuel used to grow, transport, and even cure tobacco and to make cigarettes, etc.
Well, we knew it was just a matter of time before we got blamed for global warming too.
LITTER: A closely related problem which also adversely affects nonsmokers is that of tobacco-related litter
in many areas, such as beaches, cigs are the major cause of litter
Not only can we use this as an additional argument for banning smoking in many outdoor areas,
but perhaps even move towards requiring a deposit on cigarette filters such as many states have for soft-drink soda bottles.
They can't enforce the existing litter laws, so of course the next thing is to steal even more money from smokers.
And from Germany:
http://www.innovations-report.de...icht-
84743.html
oops posted before I was finished.
~snip~Women smokers who become pregnant have long been encouraged to reduce or eliminate their nicotine intake. A new study being published in the June 15th issue of Biological Psychiatry provides further reason to do so, as it presents new evidence that in utero exposure to smoking is associated with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) problems in genetically susceptible children.'
"
What say you on this, Doctor?.
How have we ever survived.....?
JTF,
That ad is really bothering me in that if these folks ever saw ACTUAL child abuse, they would know how badly that is minimalized by such nonsense!! I recall a case I worked on years ago of a 2 yr old girl who was left in the care of a "friend" while her parents went shopping. She messed her pants, which annoyed the friend so he help her under a tub spout with only the hot water running, thus 'melting off' her entire genitalia. She died after about three month and the abuse charges were changed to murder.
Now that is child abuse.
GreatScot, from that article, "As you may know, the US Surgeon General has estimated that smoking costs the American Economy about $140 BILLION a year, and that most of it is paid by nonsmokers in the form of higher taxes and bloated insurance premiums."
We all know that's a crock. (Everybody's seen the reports, right?) What I'd like to know is when do we start charging these antismoking groups for the economic costs incurred from *their* activites?
Well, no sense in getting upset about it. They really do behave like bratty children, don't they?
Geez, Sunz. I was appalled by that ALA ad, too. But, thankfully, I've never been confronted with a real case of child abuse. (I don't think that I could handle it. I really don't.) When you put it into perspective like that...I wonder how the average nonsmoker feels about watching one of those ads. I wonder how nonsmoking social workers who deal with child abuse feel about it. Might be interesting to forward it to some of those agencies.
Personally, I came back to visit because the link from GreatScot stuck in my head. That ASH report needs to be handed out to every smoker, nonsmoker, ex-smoker, occassional smoker, closet smoker....*everybody*. What stuck with me was toward the end. The "new frontiers". I read the bit about animals. After thinking about this, it really struck a chord with me. If somebody tried to take my "babies" from me because I *smoke*...life on this Earth would change drastically. After what I went through with my first baby--what was done to him in the name of "good for you" vaccinations--how he was tortured to death beacuse nobody would admit that they'd made a HUGE mistake--what was done to that sweet little boy...and then accuse me of animal cruelty because I smoke. I realized something. I can't fully relate to raising children or having them taken away. I can't fully relate to many of the smoking ban issues because I just don't share those circumstances. But that report from ASH has something to tick *everyone* off. If everyone saw this, I think it wouldn't be long before everyone opposed this "social engineering".
That video is beyond disturbing...it's real nice how they used the screams of children to make that emotional appeal. Again not a fact to stand on.
Unfortunately DTB, I can relate, I have 4 kids. 4 healthy kids...it's terrifying. Right now it's worrying about when they will demand removing my healthy, happy children...if they are going to work them into anorexia harping on them about weight...I work my butt off to some extent every day trying to undo the damage these people are doing constantly. I've got one girl on the edge of those teenage years when all the girls gotta be thin walking a fine line between encouraging obesity and encouraging obsession of weight. Trying to enforce the idea of SAFE sex and that yes, condoms are a BIG help. They are undermining every lesson I try to teach my children. If this was about health they would be doing NONE of these things.
They can remove my children for my SMOKING as soon as they start castrating first time offenders for pedophilia. If this is really about reducing the risk of children being harmed...then no one will object...
What gets me is while they are telling me smoking is child abuse a judge is actually entertaining the idea of letting a man plead "Satan" as the cause of him microwaving his baby. (it won't be allowed, but considering even?) Whawhawhat? They are actually having a custody hearing..even though the mom is the one who started claiming "Satan" was scared of her husband and it's "Satan's" fault the baby got stuck in there. A custody hearing...you mean THIS is debatable??? But it's not the slightest bit debatable that my healthy happy children are obviously in trauma from my severe abuse of being a smoker.
Yes, i too had a laugh about the Avendia Glaxo statistics re heart attack and death.
Glaxo, who supports smoking bans, was quoted as saying the cleveland clinic study was a meta-ananlysis and those cannot be trusted, with respect to claiming their drug increases death due to ami 64%. Yet, when meta-analysis of shs studies, are done, glaxo, Pfizer and J&J all support groups which claim the meta-annaysis of shs studies are valid.
So they're trying to have it both ways.
Need any more evidence this is just a thinly veiled money grab? Glaxo supposedly profits from smoking bans, so there shs meta-analysis is good...when their profits are threatened by a meta-analysis of Avendia pateints, then meta-analysis is bad.
Then what really grabbed my gizzard, is 2 nights ago, Dr. Jon Whats-his-name, chief medical correspondent for seeBS News, said in an interview to Katy Curic that the only real way to tell if Avendia increases the risk of heart attack is to start with a large group of heart healthy Avendia patients and compare them to a lagre group of heart healthy non-Avendia patients and follow then for many years to see if the Avendia patients have more heart attacks. ( cohort study)
This is kinda like the approach Enstrom /Kabat used in their 35,000 californians study and their subsequent meta-analysis of all US cohort studies on shs and CVD which found an excess of 5%.
it's funny how intelligent these medical correspondents can be when the issue is not SHS. dave K
off topic but related to the MPAA discussion.
Last night I was watching a new CSI episode (new to the UK, series 7, episode 1
.
Set in LA the black CSI agent goes to tell a grandma that her granddaughter had been murdered. The grandma told how her daughter had died the previous year of lung cancer, had never smoked a day in her life although her lazy good for nothing husband smoked like a chimney and he was as fit as a horse and there was no justice in the world.
Well what an unsubtle message.
Innocent people get LC
Smokers are lazy good for nothings
ETS kills non-smokers
smokers deserve LC non-smokers don't.
I am sure this script would get the ASH seal of approval as it portrays smoking in the "right" way.
GreatScot
Diane,
Sorry, the only information I have is in that article. Yours is a great thought, though!
.
Jalestra--That's the reason that *everyone* needs to see that ASH report. If the part about pets hits me dirctly, then I'm better able to empathize with someone who is hit directly by the apartment discrimination. For you, there is a very real and present threat to your children--not from smoking but from antismoking. That serves to make the rest of it more personal.
Sometimes, I think that these over-the-top ads serve to push people *away* from the antismokers. I think that might be the Doc's complaint about over-the-top claims and overly emotional ads; ultimately, they undermine everything.
JTF - Those two restaurateurs were the puppets, and the tobacco industry held the strings."
................
It's time to quit turning the other cheek to these people who constantly use "Big Tobacco," paid shill of the tobacco industry, stooge, puppet, etc.
If anyone in the future calls you any of the above, just retort:
"You're just a NAZI."
(Pushing crackpot science and the Fascist belief that an individual's body belongs to the state.)
"You're just a paid shill of Big Tobacco Control and Drug Pushers."
(Big Tobacco has almost zero influence on the ETS issue. Big Tobacco Control is a multi-billion dollar industry in alliance with Big Pharma)
"You're just an innocent, ignorant stooge (or Puppet)the new NAZI movement. So sorry you fell for its lies.
Am I advising tit-for-tat name calling? Yes. If nothing else, it may make someone wonder what you mean. Then you can explain it.
And, you can ask: "Where are the bodies?" So far, this whole thing is an unproven and unprovable theory until you can.
No bodies, no blood, no DNA, no fingerprints, hundreds of possible causes, hundreds of suspects, no crime scene, no known date of the crime, unreliable witnesses, hearsay evidence. Arresting officer, judge, prosecutor, expert witnesses for the prosecution and jury all receive income from the same sources.
I tend to favor very blunt reactive stuff: Got a corpse? Prove it. You better hope I don't quit, you might actually have to work and pay taxes. Rude stuff hehe
The Martyred Body: http://
surrealitytimes.blogspot....01_archive.html
"That means, if SHS is causing lung cancer in non-smokers, they should be developing Squamous Cell tumours! Unfiltered tobacco smoke = squamous cell tumours, filtered tobacco smoke = andenocarcinoma tumours, according to the American Cancer Society."
The way this woman was used and paraded is disgusting.
Jalestra -I tend to favor very blunt reactive stuff: Got a corpse? Prove it. You better hope I don't quit, you might actually have to work and pay taxes. Rude stuff hehe
.....................
Well, one favorite trick used by opportunists in medieval Europe was to spread the word that two Christian children were found dead near a Jewish temple.
Whipping up anti-semitic hatred (already implanted for generations), mobs would storm the Jewish Ghetto, raping and pillaging (good booty there).
Hitler and his NAZIs merely amplified what had been engendered for a very long time: Corrupt and inefficient governments would point to the Jews as the source of every ill, plague and economic misery.
So, one of the next steps would be to find two dead children of a non-smoking family near a smoker's home.
So, one of the next steps would be to find two dead children of a non-smoking family near a smoker's home.
-------------------
Don't worry...a kid will have an asthma attack and a smoker will be somewhere within a few miles and there ya go.
Jalestra - Don't worry...a kid will have an asthma attack and a smoker will be somewhere within a few miles and there ya go.
......
Another scenario:
Police are questioning "a person of interest" who was carrying concealed, unregistered cigarettes.
An alert citizen had called the police when he noticed a dark-haired, hook-nosed, unshaven person lurking in an alley. He gave credit to his 10 year old daughter who had brought home from school the profile characteristics of child molesters.
"I really have to thank the Glantz Foundation for all its efforts to protect our children from these predators," he said.
If anyone is not persuaded that Glantz, Big Tobacco Control are Neo NAZIs, you just need to look at the NAZI propaganda techniques to demonize smokers and smoking.
Here's just one example:
See the graphic (scroll down):
'Tobacco capital' raining down to spoil the people's health."
BMJ: The anti-tobacco campaign of the Nazis: a little known aspect of public health in Germany, 1933-45
URL: http://tinyurl.com/3ddm36
From Rod's link;
" Stanton Hitler was dead but also many of his anti-tobacco underlings either had lost their jobs or were otherwise silenced. Karl Aster, head of Jena's Institute for Tobacco Hazards Research (and rector of the University of Jena and an officer in the SS), committed suicide in his office on the night of 3-4 April 1945.Reich Health Fuhrer Leonardo Conti, another anti-tobacco activist,committed suicide on 6 October 1945 in an allied prison while awaiting prosecution for his role in the euthanasia programme. Hans Reiter, the Reich Health Office president who once characterised nicotine as "the greatest enemy of the people's health" and "the number one drag on the German economy"(27) was interned in an American prison camp for two years, after which he worked as a physician in a clinic in Kassel, never again returning to public service. Gauleiter Fritz Sauckel, the guiding light behind Thuringia's antismoking campaign and the man who drafted the grant application for Astel's anti-tobacco institute, was executed on 1 October 1946 for crimes against humanity. It is hardly surprising that much of the wind was taken out of the sails of Germany's anti-tobacco movement. "
I say if they hadn't let them off so easy last time we wouldn't have to be pestered by their cultist activities today.
This time around I hope they get it right and these terrorists get their just rewards, All of them.
Reformed Asthma Sufferer Picks Up Disgusting Habit!
"If the smoking ban in Scotland had not been introduced I would still be a non-smoker," says Andy Hughes of Edinburgh, where the ban came into force in March last year. "I started because I was being left in pubs and clubs alone for long periods of time, while the rest of my group were outside chatting and having a smoke.
"I put up with it for a few weeks but in the end I decided to join them. Being an asthmatic, I had always been against smoking. I never used to let anyone smoke in my car or house. When someone smoked in my company in a pub, I couldn't wait until they had finished their cigarette. It was still something I had a real dislike of and a habit I considered to be disgusting."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_ne...ine/
6664871.stm
I'm glad that some of you took a look at, and commented on, that ALA ad. Now I'm still waiting to hear Dr. Siegel's opinion. Especially in light of this blog entry being about the bad behavior of the ALA.
As for Banzhaf's ASH page -- and not to minimize it at all (it IS disturbing) -- it does call for this response (among many others):
Bans and threats do NOT equal compliance. Banzhaf can initiate anything he wants and gloat over being responsible for them and claim victory for having gotten it put on the books. It still won't amount to a hill of beans when compliance is near non-existent -- equal to spitting on the sidewalk laws.
This, out of Spain this week:
Spanish bars smoky as ever despite laws
Reuters - May 23 2007
http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?
s...21336968C368605
Madrid - Spanish smokers are still puffing away furiously in the nation's bars and restaurants despite a law designed to create smoke-free spaces, a study showed on Tuesday.
A minimal 10 percent of small bars and 15 percent of small restaurants opted to ban smokers from their premises under the law which came into effect last year, according to the study by Spain's Consumers' Organisation.
In larger premises, which are obliged to limit smokers to 30 percent of available space, the rule is being flouted in 85 percent of cases, the study showed, pointing out that smoking is even permitted in hospital cafeterias.
JTF- Bans and threats do NOT equal compliance. Banzhaf can initiate anything he wants and gloat over being responsible for them and claim victory for having gotten it put on the books.
JTF, if TC are ever called to task and held accountable for the social devastation caused, will Banzhaf's gloating count as a confession of guilt?
JustTheFact/Sunz/Everyone-
That ad from the American Lung Association is simply disgusting. I will blog it momentarily.
That ad from the American Lung Association is simply disgusting. I will blog it momentarily.
Thanks, Doc.
GreatScot - I'm always astonished (though I shouldn't be) that Banzhaf et al put their opinions, goals, deeds and responsibility in writing. But they are THAT arrogant and so full of self-righteous superiority that they apparently feel they are recording great things rather than incriminating evidence that will come back to bite them at trial.
Normally I'd refrain from stating that opinion in fear that it would cause them to stop and think and then stop such recordings. I've learned it does not.
2 Visitors Online
Commenting by HaloScan
