All this blathering about menthol and everything else anti-tobacco has to come up with to look relevant, to be noticed, reminds me of a couple of lines from the movie, Jaws.
Hooper:
Mr. Vaughn, what we are dealing with here is a perfect engine, ah, an eating machine. It's really a miracle of evolution. All this machine does is swim and eat and make little sharks. And that's all. Now why don't you take a long close look at this sign. Those proportions are correct.
Vaughn:
Love to prove that wouldn't ya? Get your name into the National Geographic!
Amendment 13 - Slavery Abolished. Ratified 12/6/1865. History
1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
***************************
Apparently 'ASH' wants to keep people down on the plantation.
Next thing you know they will be regulating fried foods. Fried Tofu will be OK, fried chicken will be banned.
Oh the poor stupid people.....
TC is the new Master.
I swear I'm gonna start calling you and the rest of the TC cultists "Revrund" with the same dripping sarcasm as I apply to those other racebaiters known as Jackson and Sharpton.
BTW Doc, don't you mean "gaffe" not "guffaw?" I realize all of TC is laughable, but really now.........
Incredible: Countless hours, days, months spent discussing whether a natural product may be included in a cigarette or not. Don't they have anything else to do?
Banning menthol IS racist, because it aims people belonging to a specific race.
Doctor Siegel, - "There are two important implications of this story."
No, ..not really.
There is only one extremely important implication here, and that is that ASH is trying to save face.
That's all.
Why did they, like so mnay other TC Gestapo members wait so long to condemn the proposed legislation?
It's not like they weren't aware.
How could they have NOT known?
Afterall, it's for our own good,..isn't it, and ASH is all about caring,...isn't it?
They, like the rest of the TC mafia were silently hoping (probably drooling at the prospect) that it would continue to move forward unnoticed.
You know it, and we know it.
Once it passed, they could then move on to the next intrusive piece of eventual prohibition legislation.
One small step at a time.
Set a precedent, then pile on from there.
This aspect of the "rest of the story" is sure to go unnoticed, and unreported in deference to ASH "expertise" in the matter.
But if they really are the experts on all things tobacco related, why didn't they speak up 6 or 8 months ago? As stated above, they are attempting to appear relevent.
What they actually are is a pack of traitorous thugs that would clearly sacrifice a brother member of the cult in order to keep it alive.
TC organizations are the equivalent of cannibals doing whatever it takes to propel the lie ever forward.
TC eats their young.
TICAP MOVING PRINCIPLES
TICAP on the State, its duties, its limitations
The State is the guardian of its citizens’ culture, traditions, choices and habits as they come from the people. Its duty is to protect such treasure without interference, as the state and its officers are the servants of the people, rather than the other way around, which would define a tyrannical state.
It is the duty of the State to respect the individual as a sovereign entity.
It is not the duty of the State to change, impose, prohibit, steer, influence, normalize, denormalize, or engineer values, habits, culture, beliefs and traditions through propaganda, institutions, taxation, regulations, laws or coercion of any kind.
It follows that it is not the duty or obligation of the State to regulate or mould values and lifestyles, except when for actions like violent attacks and theft that are demonstrably harmful to the rights of others according to rigid, clear and inflexible parameters.
Consequently, the State has no duty to forbid or mandate what substance goes into the body of a person by his own will, regardless of consequences for the user. The involvement of the State ends with the obligation to make the information available to the citizen without pressures, paternalism and pedagogy, as no referendum ever has appointed the State as a father or a teacher. When multiple views on particular information are present, all must be made available with equal importance and respect, as the State is not a generator of knowledge but merely its custodian.
TICAP on social designing
TICAP vehemently opposes social engineering and social designing, where “experts” intend to manipulate the choices, tastes, values and the sense of normality of the people through laws, bans and propaganda, renamed today as “education”. That is an extremely dangerous social experiment of the scale of the Fascist or Communist experiments and with the same devastating consequences, thus it has to be condemned always and without hesitation.
A State that believes in the “top-down” approach is inevitably an authoritarian state regardless of its proclaimed social and political credo. On the other hand, a people that invokes such approach is a servant people, regressed in its maturity and self-esteem and no longer able, at the individual or collective level, to manage its affairs. Historically, that has always been the prelude of dictatorships – what colour, face or moral excuse being irrelevant.
TICAP stands for "The International Coalition Against Prohibition"
"ASH wrote: "While the bill would ban the use of virtually all substances (e.g., clove, peppermint) used to flavor cigarettes, and to mask the harsh taste most young children experience when they first try smoking, the bill exempts menthol. But menthol is used overwhelmingly be African Americans, and makes it much harder for users to quit smoking once they get hooked" FIRSTLY where did TC get the notion that menthol masks the harsh taste of tobacco ? It is CONSTANTLY quoted BUT WHERE DOES IT ORIGINATE ? Where has it been proven that menthol MAKES TOBACCO MORE ADDICTIVE AND HARDER TO QUIT ? You keep spouting these "facts" SO PROVIDE THE EVIDENCE ? If you can't shite get off the pottie.
"makes it much harder for users to quit smoking once they get hooked"
And I was always led to believe that nicotine was the addictive substance in tobacco. Why not ban nicotine then?
benpal
Give it ten years and there will be menthol replacement therapy patches, full of beneficial menthol to ween you off the toothpaste.
ASH has to make these statements mainly because they need to save face when this legislation doesn't pass. As do all the other tobacco control freaks, the Doctor and Bill included. Unfortunately, they are taking and playing the racist card when they claim that only African Americans smokes menthols or that is the reason so many African Americans continue to smoke as they enjoy the menthol taste. Let's face it, African Americans are such easy targets so why not point fingers at them? If the menthol is removed and there is any sort of backlash from the African American population, ASH's founder will be the first to point a finger and call them lowlife, smoking "N" words. This is what he and all of tobacco control secretly wants. One more thing to divide a community.
Off topic:
I know what planet Mork and Alf was from, but could someone tell me which planet tobacco control came from? For so many people who knows what is best for everyone else, who know when we will die, when we will murder, when we will rape, they certainly can not be from the planet earth. Is Banzaff the head master or is it Glantz?
Uranus?
Or in Uranus's native tongue
Theiranus!
Sorry, couldn't help it 
A twisted mean little planet, so far away that the sun is only occasionaly seen, as a dimly glowing speck through the shifting fogs.
"as a dimly glowing speck through the shifting fogs." Would that be ETS ?
Extra Terrestrial Smog
Meanwhile
Smoking linked to decrease in uterine cancer risk
"The benefit of smoking was observed almost exclusively in postmenopausal women and not in premenopausal women," principal investigator Dr. Bin Wang of Nanjing Medical University told Reuters Health"
"Their findings, which appear in The American Journal of Medicine, suggest a history of cigarette smoking decreases the risk of endometrial cancer by 18 to 29 percent. This association was significant for both current and former smokers"
http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/...-UTERINE-
DC.XML
Odd association to study
Another article on stigmatization as a tobacco control policy.
Health Policy and Ethics
Tobacco Control,Stigma and Public Health
Rethinking the Relations
"What we need is a national campaign that results in the stigmatization rather than the glorification of the smoker.
This in my opinion, would be the most effective way of reducing the number of smokers and confining their smoke to the privacy of their own homes"
Quote from a psychiatrist no less.
http://www.ajph.org/cgi/reprint/...int/96/1/
47.pdf
Interesting reading.
"the argument that the exception of menthol from the bill does not discriminate against African Americans seems inconsistent with clearly established American law which recognizes that actions or laws which have the “effect or consequence” of having a discriminatory impact on Blacks may violate civil rights laws prohibiting such discrimination."
What? This is unreal! How is it discrimination to ALLOW ADULTS to make their own choice as to which brand of LEGAL cigarettes they want to buy? They are concerned about violating CIVIL RIGHTS? Yeah, right.
This is beyond grasping at straws, it's plain unbelievable.
But it's OK to encourage and push for discrimination against smokers as a whole? Get them outside, no, we can still see them. Get them in the alleys, no, we can STILL see them, get them in their homes...no we STILL know they are there. Denormalize them, tax them, call them child abusers, tell them their breath is toxic, tell them their faces are ugly, tell them they kill 340 YOUNG CHILDREN a day? Get them out of the site of our children. Tell them our "toxic" emissions cause heart attacks in "innocents" in 30 seconds. Lie about SHS at every opportunity to get the "nice" people angry and hateful towards them. If that is not discrimination I don't know what is.
TOBACCO IS LEGAL.
I don't think race has anything to do with this, I think you and all Anti's are against this because you are not GETTING WHAT YOU WANT. So someone decided to bring race into it to assure that it fails so that you can go back to your drawing board to get what you want. Nevermind that - according to your own statistics - seventy-five percent of smokers DO NOT SMOKE MENTHOL, you want it out, so you stomp your feet and play the race card. Pathetic.
I would be happy to build that ship for you, I have a lot of cardboard in the garage.
I am getting so sick of seeing just how low antis can get.
If you limit the perspectives of TCs attempts to depreciate and deliberately minimize autonomy protections, In light of the denormalization campaign as strictly a "positive effort" banning menthol could be actually seen as a positive. Done to "protect" Blacks even at a higher level than Whites are being "protected".
However in light of the personalized rendition of "anti smoker" hatred as opposed to "anti smoking" as stated, what has developed by an open door to stakeholders who could profit from a campaign strategy, and now in a shameless effort to deliberately ignore the more than obvious turn, TC has taken, in their determination to paint themselves in unity as saints, they have finally exposed themselves as hateful, Inhumane and mean spirited to the core.
By banning menthol both bigotry and racism is intensified, in application of coercive preasures applied inconsistently, more callously in the case of blacks if indeed more blacks do prefer menthol.
It would have to be seen as a racist act to ban menthol, in applying more of your processed and created mean spitted pressures of the openly declared and well documented plan, one of forcing the targeted demographic to make personal choices they would not normaslly make, without those applied preasures, in fact making smokers lives as difficult and painful as humanly possible, through denormalization.
A strategy process which can have only one perspective and that is of abuse to achieve the goals at hand.
Inconsistent application of personal abuse, based in a racial division can not be defended, no matter how the cult movement convinces themselves another perspective can possibly exist.
First by promotion of a Black only preference, you enhanced a stereotype and second by the same mean spirited strategy, you seek to rally the White Bigots among you, to glorify an action which will be perceived to be a punishment applied only against Blacks.
You can not justify the menthol ban unless you can prove Menthol hurts non smokers more than other tobacco smoke.
Your rally cry we have heard around the world, in a declaration there is no safe level of tobacco smoke seems to eliminate any hope of selling the Menthol differential at this point, so you are left with limiting preferences, and controlling people with no political side slippage available, to defend what can only be considered abuse.
To attack menthol or the use of a legal product prepared in the way people prefer to use it, has no moral validity. It is simply abuse in order to force your will on others.
SuperCallousSi asked the right question. "Where has it been proven that menthol MAKES TOBACCO MORE ADDICTIVE AND HARDER TO QUIT ?"
Is someone in the anti-smoker cartel confusing menthol with the ammonia based "impact boosters"?
It may be both hypocritical and immoral to deflect attention from an important issue, (impact boosters), by fabricating a very convoluted expression of "lethal" concern over a flavoring found in chewing gum and breath mints.
The anti-smoker cartel has made it very clear by their silence that "impact boosters" are of absolutely no importance to them. And it's the "impact boosters" that make tobacco unneccessarily more addictive. Without them tobacco is only mildly habituating.
CASH, the Campaign Against Smoker Harrassment issued another unscientific statement today in response to this unscientific claim.
"Hey Banzhaf! It's the ammonia - not the menthol, loser!"
E=MC^2
Advocate for CASH
Chutzpah on loan from John Banzhaf
If black leaders are so concerned about menthol, why don't they push for local bans on menthol sales? If Newports were unavailable, smoking rates would plummet, right?
We have dry counties for booze, the same concept should work for menthols.
OT:
"Science" descends further into the crapper.
Kidney Stones Tied to Global Warming
http://news.aol.com/health/
story...715111309990001
ES;
I repeat whether Menthol makes smoking more dangerous to smokers is beside the point. They can't as Michael states take actions to make smoking safer by reducing nitrates and histamines through relatively simple means, because "there is no safe cigarette" in the same perspective there is also no more dangerous cigarette, Menthol or not.
Their complaint is the damage smokers do to others, as the mainstay of their punishments and abuse of smokers.
If there is no evidence Menthol is harming non smokers more than other types of cigarette smoke and they believe more Blacks smoke them than Whites, they are targeting Blacks deliberately.
By the race card they are hoping to persuade a majority of whites, to help them punish those perceived to be "dangerous Blacks", who TC claims by the preference of what they smoke, are more dangerous than White smokers.
All with nothing to sustain that bigotry, aside from highly exaggerated speculation and irresponsible fear mongering.
"Kidney Stones Tied to Global Warming"
I'll see your Global warmed kidney stones, and raise you asthma attacks caused by thunderstorms.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/
rele...80710131424.htm
Why do I get the distinct impression the "Reveruuuuuuund" Siegel realizes he and TC have really screwed up here by dealing the race card?
The continual lies (YES THEY ARE LIES, by ANY, and ALL definitions of the word) byt the TC cultists is going to come to haunt them and I mean BIG TIME.
Dr. Siegel: ”People are willing to stay on a sinking ship only so long. Once they can actually see the water pouring into the ship, they head for the lifeboats”.
You’re right Doc. Rats will desert a sinking ship.
But, I really don’t understand your opposition to menthol. The FDA bill, as I understand it, would allow menthol to be banned if it can be proven to be harmful. And, menthol has been around for three-quarters of a century.
Banning menthol will not force users to quit in any great numbers. Most will simply switch to regular cigarettes. Many will switch to contraband. I’m told Smokin’ Joes make a very good menthol product, though I never touch them myself. And, if tobacco is addictive (I’m not convinced), it won’t be the menthol they’ll be craving.
I suspect you’ve taken these things into consideration, but the vehemence with which you attack this legislation and Tobacco Free Kids suggests to me you have some other reason for wanting the bill to fail. And, if you’re ready to welcome support from Banshaf’s bullies, it must be important.
What am I missing?
From the Times.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/
tol...icle4327222.ece
Headline
A drop of nicotine may do you good, say scientists
Excerpt
Scientists pointed out, however, that the effect was very small and the health risks of smoking and toxic effects of using nicotine patches would outweigh the benefits in healthy people. Pharmaceutical companies are hoping to amplify the positive effects of nicotine to benefit dementia patients, while minimising the risk of addiction.
Are we seeing the emergence of an ulterior motive? NRT Patches acknowledged as "TOXIC" but big pharma are working on "good" nicotine treatments?
GreatScot
My head is spinning.
You say you personally don't agree with removing menthol, yet you write stinging editorials against those in your movement who didn'tdemand that menthol be removed, and are now praising the elsewhere damned ASH for...righteously demanding that menthol be removed--a position with which you personally disagree?
Now that I've got that one straight...
It's racist to NOT take pleasure away from blacks because-- after all, if you're taking it away from whites, then... blacks are being favored and we need to have a general equality of deprivation? Oh wait, no. It's racist to NOT take pleasure away from blacks because pleasure is bad for them and, hey, they're so childlike and hedonistic, they especially need the patronizing paternalism of whitey. Oh wait, no. It's racist TO take pleasure away from blacks, but TC, in typical inimitable fashion, turns the truth on its head as it does when it victimizes smokers of all races while itself screaming "Victim!" Yeah; I think I got it
And as Si just challenged: please offer proof that menthol counters harshness (since half of us here have attested that menthol IS harsh) and b) offer proof that menthol is addicting or even the lure of smoking. (If all a kid actually wants is some mint, he can go suck... a mint.)
I again suggest you screw up your courage and take a few puffs of a menthol cigarette against a non menthol smoke. An empirical experiment in the name of Science. Instead of just mouthing a bunch of nonsense spewed by other non (and anti) smokers.
It's such an easy experiment. Get back to us with your personal experience of menthol if you want any credibility on this front.
:
There is no longer even a pretense of protecting workers.
http://
www.eveningtelegraph.co.u...11656387t0.shtm
Paul Ballard, NHS Tayside’s deputy director of public health, who has driven forward policies to reduce smoking, has said the aim is to create a culture of no smoking. Over time, he hopes, people will no longer expect to smoke in public.
A word to the wise, if you stick your interfering TC nose too far into my life it will be forcibly retracted on the end of my fist.
I have had enough!
GreatScot
These are really scary cancer risk numbers much more decisive and credible than anything coming out of Tobacco control. The race card rears it's ugly head yet again...
http://www.pubmedcentral.gov/art...i?
artid=1257593
Census tracts in the highest quartile defined by the fraction of African-American residents were three times more likely to be high risk (> 90th percentile of risk) than those in the lowest quartile (95% confidence interval, 2.0–5.0). Conversely, risk decreased as the proportion of whites increased (p . Census tracts in the lowest quartile of socioeconomic position, as measured by various indicators, were 10–100 times more likely to be high risk than those in the highest quartile. We observed substantial risk disparities for on-road, area, and nonroad sources by socioeconomic measure and on-road and area sources by race. There was considerably less evidence of risk disparities from major source emissions. We found a statistically significant interaction between race and income, suggesting a stronger relationship between race and risk at lower incomes.
Consider the CPS11 study for perspective.
. Lung cancer death rates, adjusted for other factors, were 20 percent higher among women whose husbands ever smoked during the current marriage than among those married to never-smokers (relative risk [RR] = 1.2, 95 percent confidence interval [CI] = 0.8-1.6). For never-smoking men whose wives smoked, the RR was 1.1 (CI = 0.6-1.
. Risk among women was similar or higher when the husband continued to smoke (RR = 1.2, CI = 0.8-1., or smoked 40 or more cigarettes per day (RR = 1.9, CI = 1.0-3.6), but did not increase with years of marriage to a smoker.
Most CIs included the null. Although generally not statistically significant, these results agree with the EPA summary estimate that spousal smoking increases lung cancer risk by about 20 percent in never-smoking women. Even large prospective studies have limited statistical power to measure precisely the risk from ETS.
The SG also failed to mention in assessing indoor to outdoor air risk and total exposures when smoking is not a factor indoor air presents 3 times the cancer risk as outdoor air. Simply working indoors presents a much higher risk than ETS measured indoors or out.
http://www.pubmedcentral.gov/
art...bmedid=15064166
Some of the personal measured exposures are interesting to note. The EPA and CDC can be shown the errors in their ways, in assessing and portraying to the public the ETS soup as a whole, devoid of measurements of the known ingredients or expressed as individual levels actually existing. The term “ETS causes 3000 cancer deaths annually” in a 320 million population this would represent in a 1 excess death per million standard 9.375 per million in comparison in evaluation of air toxins the "clean" air soup, containing 10s of thousands of potentially toxic ingredients, only 168 were determined worthy of monitoring by the EPA. The results of measurements showed a number of ETS ingredients when measured alone in non smoking environments were proven in many instances to be much more toxic than the total of ETS assessments.
This is the most significant and compelling of all the facts presented here;
http://tc.bmjjournals.com/cgi/
co...fb51ee231739f0c
“The right to health relevant information derives from the principles of autonomy and self direction and has been recognized in international declarations. Providing accurate health information is part of the basis for obtaining “informed consent” and is a recognized component of business ethics, safety communications, and case and product liability law.”
TC seems to be more focused in "ethics cleansing" although there is a decisive bigotry and discriminatory racial overtone, to their actions, even they can never truthfully deny.
"For this reason many National Health Groups oppose this legislation. For example the National African American Tobacco Prevention Network, which previously supported the legislation, has withdrawn its support because the legislation does not ban menthol cigarettes, which are primarily used by African American smokers. The NAATPN views this as throwing African Americans off the raft in order to ensure tobacco industry profits.
In addition to not banning menthol-flavored cigarettes, the legislation contains loopholes that the tobacco industry knows will thwart any effective FDA regulations. The industry also knows that most of the advertising restrictions proposed in the legislation have already been declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. That is why Philip Morris is strongly supporting this legislation.
Congress needs to reject this particular legislation and introduce meaningful tobacco control legislation in the next session of Congress.
John H. O’ Hara, Bowie
The writer is president of Maryland Group Against Smoker’s Pollution."
"Smoker's pollution" sounds like such an endearing campaign, suited to the blissful respect of all in society.
Defense of a minority by an obvious Bigot seems somewhat disingenuous from the outset. This complaint seems to find much more credibility as blatant emotional blackmail by a manipulative scumbag.
And of course Michael needs no reminder; You are known by the company you keep.
Tobacco Control?
you may be able to control the industries who supply it, or you may be able to control the consumers who use it, however you can not control tobacco it is simply another of the gifts of nature which has no capability of making choices good or bad. Therefore your claim to control is only an illusion or displaced figure of emotional speech.
The entire group has decided to side with Industry. In doing so they sold out their claimed principles and seek to control only people. By no legitimate or elected authority, aside from the limited and scrutinized power, allowed them by industry.
They can never truthfully claim to represent an unbiased opinion, legitimate Science, learned intelligence or moral authority because they sold those rights of opinion and credibility to the many Industries they represent.
Whats up? the posts counter shows over 30 posts left and when I click on the comments section to read them, all I get is the ability to leave a new post/comment, where are all the other's?
I got the same thing this morning Biker.
Must of been a glitch in Haloscan.
I can read everything now.
Are we seeing the emergence of an ulterior motive? NRT Patches acknowledged as "TOXIC" but big pharma are working on "good" nicotine treatments?
Possibly, but as they still seem to believe the nicotine deception which relies for any small effect, for nicotine to be converted to nicotinic acid within the body, rather than before.
They probably won't have very good results.
Theres only so much nicotine anyone can stomach!
From 1941
How to oxidize nicotinic acid from nicotine and still have something to show for it.
http://www.orgsyn.org/orgsyn/pre...p?
prep=cv1p0385
Great info. I learned a lot of new things here...
Mexican Fire Opal
http://mexican-fire-opal.blogspot.com
Commenting by HaloScan
