Don't our laws about exploiting children cover this? Don't our laws about false advertising cover this? I don't understand how if so many so-called important people and possibly media journalists read this blog, that no one has picked up on any of this.
If I tried "training" kids to think for themselves, showing them all sides to a situation, I'd bet some hot shot lawyer would find a way to have me locked up for exploiting children and doing so with deceit as an extra bonus.
I'm so fed up with this crap, excuse me while I go expel some disgust.
The perceived integrity of everyone in tobacco control is zero anyway doc. You show a glimmer now and then, but then go off into drivel like ETS CAUSES heart disease. Then try to tell us "Cause" has a special meaning.
I am wondering when they will lock these creeps up. The fraud and racketeering is so blatant it is amazing someone hasn't pulled them up. Surely someone in America has some backbone.
Bravo. "Kids" shouldn't be used by either side of this fence and I applaud you for saying so.
However, I also question the legality of this enterprise. If they're soliciting money for the upfront purpose of "training" lobbyists, what does that do to their tax exempt status? The case can't be made that this is neutral "education" since it's clearly indoctrination with a purely political end.
I seriously suggest that they've violating the law and deserve to be ratted on. Anyone know the way to report them, and to whom?
That's the only way to stop this. Subtly sounding off doesn't do a damn thing.
:
Doc, I am one all for people making informed decisions but those informed decisions must be made by giving people accurate information. Why would you expect TC to allow our youth to make informed decisions when TC and people in government are not giving adults the right to make informed decisions. Smoking bans being passed due to almost non existant risks takes the decision making process out of the adults hands in the world. My observations is that if you are against taking an informed decision making process away from children and youth. The same also has to be said for adults deciding to work at or enter smoking allowed facilities.
"The reason I wouldn't do that is because I have some ethical principles."
Yes, doctor, it appears that you have 'some.'
.
Dr. Siegel,
I, m not sure what age bracket your talking about here. Nevertheless, it would seem to me that before any child were to be subjected to this type of “training”. It would be important to know that the parents of these children are fully aware of both sides of this issue. Lets face it we're not just talking about kids here. We’re talking about parents as well.
I understand the topic here. But if we have parents being fed misinformation day and night, I don’t see how the subject could rise to this level. That is , I can’t imagine an informed, and concerned parent willing to allow their child to be “brainwashed”.
In reality we are talking about parents likely exposed to the same misleading and one sided information regarding this bill, which is so often the subject here. So in essence the child is at a disadvantage, one by having uninformed or misinformed parents and two by the politically driven agendas and hyper exaggeration’s of certain groups pushing the bill.
Stunning!
It’s become the norm to target the credulous as well as the foolish. Its all about the agenda. Smoking bans FDA bill, you name it. Why should there be exception’s. Imagine that at one time in this country we protected people against this type of BS. This is not something that we should turn our backs on it’s a serious issue that should be investigated.
Sorry for being so long winded, but this one ticked me off, slightly.
It is ashame it took so long for this to be removed. It is FAR too late and the damage has been done. This article and many others like it have been quoted all over the country as how Science proves how bad Second Hand Smoke is.
Geez, a few waifs of SHS (or smoking itself) is not anyway near as dangerous as this stuff.
I guess these days it's just more convienient for the state (schools) and now charities to raise your children.
What are they thinking? Where is Jerry Thomas when we need him?
.
Can anybody say, Hitlers Youth?
.
And the anti-smoker cartel as the gall to refer to smokers as child abusers?
Other topic--but interesting re: ALA
Seems Mr. Kirkwood ALA has lost control of the tribe indeed. But then why would he care he is retiring in June. I guess that explains why we have not heard further from him.
http://www.lungchicago.org/site/
...May_10_2007.pdf
.
I just don't understand the parents who allows their children to be exploited with this newest education. Don't they care or don't they have the time to sit with them and define 2 sides to a story? These kids are being used as a sympahetic ploy and people are donating money to make it happen? Unreal. No wonder there is childhood obesity, these kids are spending to much time in anti-tobacco education classes and not enough time outside playing a game of baseball, or hopscotch or running off those calories. If there is a parent out there reading this today, I am begging you to send the kid outside to play and forget this brainwashing game. They are destroying our kids, our future.
Need to run now, but I will be back soon with a couple of off topic items. Sorry Doc, but I have some nagging thoughts today.
Do as I say.....
WHO me???
http://www.upi.com/International...t_honored/1526/
.
TC has been promoted (even by the good doc) 'for the children' when they were using them as political/public health ploys. They've just taken the 'next step'.
And the anti's wonder why we always ask, what's next? There is ALWAYS a 'next' with these imbecils. Enough never seems to be enough.
They must be so proud of themselves.
.
I'm right here Sunz, shaking my head with the rest of you.
This isn't going away, but it is far from over. I believe there was an old curse that went something like "May you live in interesting times", well, we sure do, now the question is, will we survive living in interesting times, and will we retain the freedom to make any choices for ourselves?, Only if we take a stand and decide to make those choices, even at great cost to ourselves. Of those that signed the Declaration of Independence, almost to a man, they ended up either killed or ruined for their stance, do we have those with the courage and convictions to do the same today? we'll see.
Shaking my head is making me dizzy.
.
Jerry Thomas,
BTW how did your daughter make out on her project? Was she graded fairly? How about the school board, any news there?
.
Quote from Forces today: Lead story re vegetarians.
"Liberty is a dangerous bomb: it has to be disarmed carefully."
""Gently". "Phase in". Push -- then let “them” get used to it. Then push more, always more. “Phase out”. Call it "progress", make it seem inevitable. Convince "them" that it is "scientific", "right" and "for their good" -- and especially that there is nothing "they" can do about it. Then make it “socially unacceptable”. Then ban it. One step at the time. For total control. Liberty is a dangerous bomb: it has to be disarmed carefully."
Well TC has done wonders in perverting all sorts movements 'for our own good'
.
Dr. Siegel--
The latest I've read shows that the FDA bill is in trouble, or at least not going to move as quickly as CTFK hoped, right?
They have yet to get a committee vote anywhere or guarantee floor time in either chamber.
I don't think that's how they pictured it going once control of Congress changed.
Okay, I am back with a couple of nagging questions. First of all, why is it said that there is no ventilation system made that can filter out smoke in a bar or restaurant, yet that guy who has TB but flew to Europe and back, infecting God knows how many people is in a special hospital for TB patients in Colorado and is in a room with special ventilation that sucks up all the germs and bacteria from his disease, yet smoke doesn't get sucked up? Maybe good old Jim Repace can answer that one or maybe he has already explained it to you Doctor during your brainwashing seminar.
Question 2 pertains to ear infections. Why is it that TC continues to hammer away at kids with smoking parents are proned to more ear infections when the truth is, some kids are born with an ear canal that does not slope properly, causing them to suffer ear infections and possibly sinus infections. Several steps can be taken to correct this matter, one being antibiotics, but if the problem persist, tubes can be placed in the ears. If antibiotics can relieve the problem, no more need be done as by the age of 8, the canal will grow into the proper position and is done so as the child ages and their head grows with their body. Smoking before, during or after childbirth has absolutely no effect on ear infections. Sorry TC folks, but I had a long discussion last night with an ENT Doctor who has abit more education and experience than some of you claim to have! I bet that even our host here knew this all along.
First of all, why is it said that there is no ventilation system made that can filter out smoke in a bar or restaurant, yet that guy who has TB but flew to Europe and back, infecting God knows how many people is in a special hospital for TB patients in Colorado and is in a room with special ventilation that sucks up all the germs and bacteria from his disease, yet smoke doesn't get sucked up?
That’s easy to answer, Diane. IF they can SMELL it, that means it’s still there. Didn’t you get that memo? The good Doc even explained that ventilation doesn’t suck up the smoke fast enough to keep it away from poor, weak, defenseless non-smokers. But even if it did, if they can still SMELL it, they will get ill. Can we say HYPOCHONDRIAC?
Question 2 pertains to ear infections. Why is it that TC continues to hammer away at kids with smoking parents are proned to more ear infections when the truth is, some kids are born with an ear canal that does not slope properly, causing them to suffer ear infections and possibly sinus infections. ~snip~ Sorry TC folks, but I had a long discussion last night with an ENT Doctor who has abit more education and experience than some of you claim to have! I bet that even our host here knew this all along.
They do that because they know the minute you mention “the children” they get to paint smokers are more evil than a nuclear bomb. And yes, I’d bet the good Doc did know all that too………………however, we all know how those with biases and agendas just love to exaggerate, twist, gyrate, etc.
Sorry Doc, but as long as you keep spouting the same twisted data that TC does, as long as you insist on clinging to the brainwashing you find comfortable, that puts you in their class. You yourself have shown how you use words differently to suit your agenda knowing full well how the rest of us common folks will read it and take it literally.
N.H. smoking ban passed 224-117 in the Live Free or Die state.
One ‘libertarian’ speaks out:
One “legislator argued that the state should go further and ban smoking in social, fraternal and religious clubs. Rep. Steve Vaillancourt, started by saying that he was a libertarian but that he was convinced - ‘enough to convict O.J’ - of the dangers of secondhand smoke.
“‘If we are going to do it, we should do it in these filthy little bars that masquerade as social, fraternal and religious organizations,’ said Vaillancourt, a Manchester Republican. ‘The pope, if he smokes, will hurt you as much as a sailor on shore leave.’ (“Permission to not go ashore, sir.”)
“[Rep. Tara] Reardon said the House Commerce Committee considered adding smoking rooms to the bill, but rejected the idea.
“She said such rooms do not protect the health of people in non-smoking sections of a restaurant and said that according to the U.S. Surgeon General, ‘it is impossible to separate people from second-hand smoke.’”
All in all, a sad case of dim-witted kids in charge of legislative matters.
.
What's scarier is that it is quite obvious that these politicians do NOT ever read or research the "studies" behind any of the media announcements.
These people are voted into office on the basis of trusting them to KNOW right from wrong.
What little faith I've had is now gone, totally.
N.H. needs a new state motto "Live Free or Die" no longer is applicable, NOR true.
New Motto suggestion:
Live Free---Smokers be damned!
“‘If we are going to do it, we should do it in these filthy little bars that masquerade as social, fraternal and religious organizations,’ said Vaillancourt, a Manchester Republican."
Here we are again with 'filthy' this is what you call a Conservative (R) of Convienience----don't like---must ban. That is what this person thinks of freedom.
Anon was to Harry from Sunz.
"First of all, why is it said that there is no ventilation system made that can filter out smoke in a bar or restaurant"
It seems that in Bloombergs New York they have accepted the the use of the ventilation system in the basement of the UN building. The system was installed at a cost of $130,000 so that members could carry on smoking. The UN are the parent of that wayward child, the WHO. You may recall that they have just called for a global indoor ban. (But not at the UN building. God forbid).
It has just come to Joe's notice that the EU Parliament-you may remember that they instructed all other governments in the EU to enact smoking bans-enacted their own ban in the Parliament building but ignored it just 43 days in. MEP's (Members of European Parliament) can now smoke openly. A contract was recently issued to a cleaning company to come in and empty the ashtrays. The contract value is 200,000 Euros.
Conveniently for British MP's, the House of Commons is a Palace, and is therefore exempt from any smoking bans. Smoking hoods complete with extraction/ventilation devices are employed to remove the smoke and render the air safe for HoC personnel.
Joe believes that US Congressmen & women also have smoking rooms complete with ventilation devices.
Joe wonders why this ventilation equipment works for these governmental buildings, buy are considered inadequate for bars and restaurants.
Buy = but.
Damn these hooves....
Lynda, I have 5 representatives from my district to whom I sent packets and packets of information that if it didn't convince them should at least have made them not vote either way. But guess what? Only one of them voted against the ban, and he didn't need any convincing.
An earlier poll showed that 79% of voters supported a ban, and that fact was cited by Rep. Reardon. Obviously the woman is beyond civics lessons (it wasn't a question of what the state vegetable should be, after all, but interference in the operations of private businesses). So I suspect that that poll heavily influenced my 4 as well.
So first you propagandize and brainwash the citizenry and then run a poll, which forces cowardly legislators to vote according to the wishes of a brainwashed majority. Neat and tidy.
.
Joe Camel is correct.
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/...816/
detail.html
The person reporting this was the same one that insisted on being sworn into office using the Koran rather than the Bible.
.
So diversity is wonderful as long as it's to 'YOUR diverse' way of doing things.
BTW--I wish Tancredo would come out in support of us---and stop hiding in his office enjoying a smoke. 
.
Sunz, she got a pass, and later, her class was assigned to make "Anti smoking" poster's, I helped her make one that showed you shouldn't smoke because of the high cost of paying for everyone else's tax burdens, LOL, the school wasnt very amused, nut they did have to give her good marks for originality. She is now out of that school and that district as well, we'll see if she needs to be home schooled at the start of next year.
This is why I think we should push for a total ban. It's not I WANT to quit smoking, I enjoy it. But I'm a big fan of "give them what they want and watch them die from it". Why don't we let them have it? WE push for a total smoking ban, get all our non-smoking friends. We won't accomplish anything by fighting them. But we can sure screw them over by denying all the taxes that goes with our habit. CUT THEM OFF, and watch them scream. C'mon, I'LL give up smoking to watch them scream.
We have two choices here, fight a losing battle against hatred or let them "win". We all know we can't fight an idea (terrorism for example), but we can lose the battle and win the war.
Look, I don't like the idea either, but here's what we're looking at, years of misery for us and our families and probably losing anyhow, or lose to win. It takes a lot of guts to lose to win, but hey, I'm in.
Jalestra,what is the fundamental difference between anti tobacco and terrorism ?Ideology and hatred are both root factors.
True, but anti tobacco is an easy fight. They have a definitive ONE thing they hate, and they also live off of it. Terrorists don't hate one thing, if we had ONE thing they hated, we could do the same and cut them off too. But they don't, they hate to hate. We could stop doing *everything* terrorists hate about us and they'd just find a new reason. The majority of anti-smokers is the public that's too stupid to look something up, they hate ONE thing. We can use their stupidity against them and watch them all just collapse.
We slap them in the face with a SUDDEN decrease in the money coming (including what we pay in cigarette taxes) and in two years they could care less if we smoke. They'll be too busy trying to dig theirselves out of a hole. They'll also learn, pardon my crassness, not to "poop where they eat".
Jalestra, I've been calling for the total ban on tobacco for years...............not a single member of the anti-smoker cartel cult has been willing to go along with my position. There is one reason and one reason only for that and that reason is $$$$$$
There is not a single paid professional anti-smoker cultist that would ever agree to tobacco prohibition. They know damned well they would be out of a job.
Jerry Thomas,
Glad to hear she made it through, and with your input and very clever ideas, she didn't have to be a stooge!! 
She probably learned some lessons she has no idea she knows yet. But in time she can put those lessons to use with the human wrecking balls that run the world we live in today.
.
That's why you take a play from their book. Prey on the stupid, you can easily pull half the anti-smoking crowd...not the ones up top, but just about every anti-Tom, Dick, and Harry. Between 75% of those, a good portion of non-smokers, and the majority of the smokers we can bully the politicians into either making it illegal or getting off the smoker tit.
Off-topic but too funny:
USA: injuries in the smoking room when a nuclear sub crashes.
In January this year a US nuclear powered attack submarine, the USS San Francisco, crashed into an undersea mountain that was not marked on the navigation chart being used. A total of 99 crew members were injured, particularly in the areas that were relatively open: the smoking room, the crew’s mess, and the engine rooms. The one crew member who sustained fatal injuries was smoking in the smoking room at the time.
http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/cg...xtract/14/4/
221
Aren't they told that smoking kills?
Your taxpayer dollars at work:
http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/05...ork-down-fatty/
.
“‘If we are going to do it, we should do it in these filthy little bars that masquerade as social, fraternal and religious organizations,’ said Vaillancourt...
I'm struck, too, by the open contempt for the citizens and the implicit "class-ism" This almost seems to have as much to do with his contempt for "social, fraternal and religious organizatins" as well as the people (whether smokers or not) who might belong to them.
This fits in with my theory that once they're elected, all politicians believe they're "the elect."
On the other hand, to the extent that citizens allow themselves so easily to be manipulated, indoctinated, and encouraged to act on the well known worst in human nature, to that extent they justify the contempt of the (soi-disant) elites who find them such pushovers.
Sheesh.
:
From Harry's link
'The smoking ban movement, largely successful, has brought into the public consciousness a perception that health decisions are supposed to be part of public policy. In that realm, they could at least pretend to hide behind the effects of second-hand smoke, though anyone who watched close enough knew it was really about sticking to smokers, not about second-hand smoke.'
This near-daily encroachment by the elites in telling us plebes how to live is as meddlesome as it is dangerous. The idea that somehow bureaucratic busy-bodies are better equipped to judge and prescribe our dietary intake is absurd. The key to healthy living is to get the people involved motivated to do it. You can't control peoples' food intake unless you toss them into prison; personal responsibility is key
In a universal health care system, the government and society at large have a vested interest in how you live your life - what you eat, how much you workout, your drinking and smoking habits, and so on. You're spending their money, after all.
Government, on one hand, can't be trusted to wiretrap terrorist conversations, but on the other, not only can they be trusted with all of your medical records, but also with authority to make medical decisions regarding your care - indicating how little people have thought through "single payer" health care
Harry it makes you wonder when people will WAKE UP!! People are simply too lazy to think for themselves. Thanks for the post.
.
Hitler once said "your politics are unimportant I have your children."
Here is a pretty good article describing what the fanatics are doing to this generation and why Chaos is the preferred rule of the day.
http://www.canadafreepress.com/
2...liams060207.htm
" The generations before handed us the greatest nation on earth built upon principles nobody seems to like anymore. A generation that follows will one day look back through history and see that our generations threw it all away."
Kevin,
Great article. How sad that it is so very true.
Well worth reading. We are all too familiar with the tactics employed.
The Great Global Warming Swindle
A DVD of the film, The Great Global Warming Swindle, will be available in the next few weeks (despite the strenuous efforts of those who support the theory of global warming to prevent its release). The DVD version will be an expanded and improved version of the film broadcast in the UK on Channel Four. A great deal more interview material has been added, covering a broader range of subjects than was possible in the broadcast film..
However, we urge those interested in hearing the case against the theory of man made global warming to dig deeper. The main purpose of this site is to point people towards key scientific papers, books and other relevant material.
We have received literally thousands of emails scientists and others expressing their support and encouragement. These emails are also often very useful, steering us towards new studies in many different areas. Please keep sending them.
The email address is: gw@wagtv.com
The general reaction to the film has been overwhelmingly and enormously encouraging. As Channel Four reported in Broadcast magazine, they received a record number of phone calls following the first transmission. They calculated that the calls were 6 to 1 in favour of the film.
It would be nice to claim that the explosion of interest was due to the film itself, but in fact the fuss started before the film went out. The reason, we suspect, is that the coverage of ‘global warming’, on TV, radio and in the press, has been, broadly speaking, fawning and uncritical. In Britain, hours and hours of programmes have been broadcast by the BBC on the subject, much of it scientifically absurd. The very fact that a science documentary dared to challenge the orthodoxy was itself news.
Why? Why have journalists been so craven or biased? How has a theory which demonstrably lacks really solid supporting evidence become an undisputable fact? What of the impressive, much talked about scientific ‘consensus’ which is meant to forestall any awkward questions? [Rod note: Gee, this sounds familiar]
The film made a humble stab at suggesting some possible answers. When the theory of man made global warming finally dies, as we believe it will, there are many important questions to be asked. About the relationship between science, the media, politicians and the rest of us.
Most worryingly, the scare over man made global warming may prove to be the first great example in the modern Western world, when science was betrayed by scientists themselves. [Rod note: Wrong! ETS was the first.]
We had not intended to establish an ‘official’ web-site for the film. But such is the demand for more information that we have no alternative. Over the coming days and weeks we will add more information, more links, more analysis, in the hope that the site may provide some focus for those who are still able to think independently and critically on this subject.?
We thank the countless people who have sent encouraging messages of support and to the many scientists who have helped us.
URL: http://tinyurl.com/2uv65o
This a an excellent description of what is happening in ETS, obesity, global warming, salt intake...it goes on and on.
Junk Food Science
March 25, 2007
Sunday Matinee
How do we come to know what we “know to be true?”
Do we question what we hear, go to the original sources of the information and check the facts carefully, consider alternative viewpoints and think about it? That can be a scary thing to do today. Not knowing what the evidence might reveal, means we could find ourselves thinking outside the box. Or, in this case, left outside a circle of people we want to be a part of and who we’ve come believe know the truth. Popular beliefs have a natural way of growing into ideologies so big and strong, that it takes a brave soul to question them. Wagons circle around the belief and to be inside the folds, one must close one’s mind to other evidence.
But the evolution of how an entire planet of smart people can come to believe something completely unsupportable is an amazing thing to watch. Regardless of what one chooses to believe, this profound new television documentary will leave you questioning everything you hear from the media and the organizations and experts you believe know what’s right.
This is the story of obesity, although the film makers didn’t set out to make a film about fat. Still, the parallels between these issues are breathtaking. Here are my notes on this documentary, as an illustration of how we can so easily be led so far astray.
Each day the news reports grow increasingly more apocalyptic. This is no ordinary scientific theory. It is presented in the media as having the stamp of scientific consensus and being an undisputed fact. We’re told that “since no scientist disagrees, we shouldn’t either.”
Yet as the frenzy grows shriller, the doom-laden predictions more extreme, many scientists point out that none of the evidence actually supports the popular theory. In fact, the evidence behind the very premise is crumbling. But the one thing one can’t say publicly is that all of this might not really be a problem. To doubt the orthodoxy is heretical and those who don’t agree with the polemic receive spitting fury, censorship and intimidation.
There are too many vested interests in creating panic. It makes the money flow. Countless careers and an entire economy have come to revolve around this belief. Never mind the distortion of an entire area of science.
This is a cautionary tale of how a media scare became the defining idea of an entire generation. The entire business has become like a religion. One that has taken away a sense of safety and appreciation of the good that is all around us. Instead, we are to believe we are all doomed and that the benefits we enjoy today are slowly killing us.
This is an example of the politicization of an issue. A major government official said there’s money on the table to prove this stuff. So of course, the research community went out and did just that. The moment politicians put their weight behind something and attach their names to an issue, money will flow. Research, development and an entire institution bubbles up with the specific focus to support the predefined issue. When grant applications are written, those that reference the popular agenda get the money. If your field is in the area of political and popular concern, you have much less work to do to rationalize the money spent in your work. The huge surge in the percentage of research money devoted to this issue is out of proportion to the area of science this issue should support.
Huge amounts of money have been spent in computer modeling. But a computer model and its statistically-derived conclusions are only as good as the assumptions that go into it. A bad prediction can be worse than none at all. All models must make basic assumptions and in this issue they assume the cause for the problem — a cause that’s incorrect and ignores of the other factors. The science is that bad.
Mathematical models are so complicated that it’s simple to tweak something and make them show something entirely different from real life. Modelers are less concerned with producing a model that is accurate, as one that is interesting. There is a powerful bias within media and the scientific community for results that are dramatizable. Drama sells. Attracting media attention brings more research money.
And to the untrained eye, models look impressive and supply an endless source of spectacular stories for the media. But the most elemental principles of journalism have been abandoned on this issue. It is now common to lay the blame on the same things — based on that same basic, yet incorrect, assumption — which appear in every story and in every textbook.
The reporting has to get more and more hysterical, though, for the reporter to keep his/her job and to keep viewers. The same goes with the experts. News reports speculate that even a small change could be catastrophic. They never look back through history or examine the bigger picture and see that such a crisis is never evident. Natural, biological variations and changes are always happening but today we’re to believe those are evidence of something we’re doing wrong and of something horrible befalling us all.
Incredibly, the ideas and scare stories are simply invented. Hysterical alarms have been encouraged by the government with clearly untrue statements, such as mosquitos don’t survive in cold climates. Scientists’ statements pointing out the errors and lack of evidence are censored out during the peer review process from publications and official reports. Scientists who don’t agree with the polemic can only resign from professional organizations. And scientists who speak out have a lot to lose. Taking a public stand means losing funding for research or jobs. Going along means professional survival. Those who speak out are often accused of being funded by some big company but in actuality, there is almost no private sector investment in any ideas that go against what’s popular. (If there is a sponsor who would like to prove this wrong, please contact blog owner. 
There is a huge constituency of people dependent on those dollars that come from following the bandwagon and they want to see that carried forward. It happens in any bureaucracy. Consensus building becomes the goal, not science. Anyone who challenges the popular theory is ostracized, vilified by the community, and it gets nasty and personal. Skeptics certainly don’t speak out for their health as they’re treated like Holocaust deniers.
The precautionary principle is often called upon, believing it’s better to be safe than sorry. What could be wrong by promoting health? And let’s not forget “the children.” Yet, never part of the risk equation or even mentioned, is the harm caused by following precaution in the name of health and safety. It’s even okay to have hundreds of thousands of people hurt, die or go blind.
Underlying the ideology is a belief that humans are bad, irresponsible and lazy. And those who exemplify the ideology are better people somehow. Sadly, the rhetoric is cleverly cloaking agendas that really don’t have anything to do with the actual issue. The issue is being used to legitimize a whole slew of myths that had already developed: anti-modernization and anti-business.
The theory is so entrenched, the voices of opposition so effectively silenced, it seems invincible. Untroubled by all contrary evidence no matter how strong, the alarm is now beyond reason.
Source (Global Warming Swindle video) URL: http://tinyurl.com/296jq6
Please only watch if you want to blow your mind with scientific viewpoints you don’t hear in mainstream media. This is simply an illustration for those who might believe we hear critical examinations of all sides of the evidence in mainstream media and sources.
Cognitive Disconnect: Smoking in China is causing a huge increase in lung disease. The Chinese (true of most Asian countries) have been heavy smokers since forever. No note is made of the fact that China is a vast sea of polluted everything and is getting worse as it catches up with the more "developed" countries. But it's smoking that is the problem - and they are smoking more!
And some of the rest of this piece of unscientific junk?
Salt? Very high salt intake has been part of the Asian diet for thousands of years. It's not a new thing and it certainly isn't because of adopting Western diets.
Meat? What about meat?
Breast cancer? What about breast cancer?
Cancer Expected to Skyrocket in Asia
By MARGIE MASON
AP
SINGAPORE (May 31) - Asia is bracing for a dramatic surge in cancer rates over the next decade as people in the developing world live longer and adopt bad Western habits that greatly increase the risk of the disease.
Smoking, drinking and eating unhealthy foods - all linked to various cancers - will combine with larger populations and fewer deaths from infectious diseases, there will likely be no prevention or treatment for many living in poor countries.
"What happened in the Western world in the '60s or '70s will happen here in the next 10 to 20 years as life expectancy gets longer and we get better control on more common causes of deaths," said Dr. Jatin P. Shah, a professor of surgery at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York, who attended a cancer conference last month in Singapore.
"The habit of alcohol consumption, smoking and dietary changes will increase the risk of Western world cancers to the Eastern world," Shah said.
An estimated 40 percent of cancers worldwide can be prevented by exercise, eating healthy foods and not using tobacco, according to the World Health Organization.
But more people in Asia are moving into cities and becoming overweight and obese from inactivity. They are replacing fruits and vegetables with fatty meals full of meat and salt, which is leading to increases in stomach and colon cancers. Meanwhile, traditional diseases like malaria are killing fewer people - building an aging population that's a prime target for cancer.
The effect is already startling, with the Asia-Pacific making up about half of the world's cancer deaths and logging 4.9 million new cases, or 45 percent, of the global toll in 2002.
That number is projected to leap to 7.8 million by 2020 if nothing changes, according to Dr. Donald Max Parkin, a research fellow at the University of Oxford who is a leading authority on global cancer patterns and trends.
China alone, with its booming economy and 1.3 billion people, is home to about one-fifth of the world's new cases, compared to about 13 percent in the U.S. and 26 percent in Europe, Parkin said. Heart disease remains the top killer in China, but cancer is a close second.
Cancer deaths are slowly dropping in the United States, with slight declines recorded in 2003 and 2004. A decrease in smoking, coupled with early detection and better treatment of tumors is credited with the positive results - the first U.S. decline in cancer deaths since 1930.
Smoking is on the rise in Asia, where it's common to see people lighting up in airports, restaurants and even hospitals. Lung cancer makes up the bulk of all cases regionwide, followed by stomach and liver cancers. It also remains the biggest cancer killer worldwide.
"Lung cancer is the big one because of cigarette smoking. There are many tobacco advertisements - everywhere," said Dr. You-Lin Qiao from the Cancer Institute and Hospital in Beijing, who added that the odds are stacked against those diagnosed in China. "No matter if you're rich or poor, if you get lung cancer you die. There's no treatment at all."
While Americans and Europeans have been abandoning smoking, an estimated 300 million men are puffing away in China - equal to the entire U.S. population. If nothing changes, a third of Chinese men under age 30 are predicted to die from tobacco, with lung cancer already the biggest cancer killer there.
Smokeless tobacco is also a big problem in Asia's other giant, India, where many men and women chew some form of tobacco. Mouth cancer makes up half of all new cases in parts of the country.
A lack of vaccines that prevent cancer-causing viruses is another obstacle for Asia, which is home to about three-quarters of the world's liver cancers, caused largely by Hepatitis B infections.
A vaccine guarding against the virus has been available since the early 1980s and is routinely given to children in Western countries, but it is still not reaching large swaths of the Asia-Pacific.
Some experts worry it could take years before the new vaccine for the sexually transmitted human papillomavirus, or HPV, is available to women in developing countries. The three shots currently cost about $350 in the U.S. and are 70 percent effective against preventing HPV, the main cause of cervical cancer. It is already the No. 2 cause of cancer among women in Asia, after breast cancer.
"The problem is so huge that it's very difficult for us to know where to start," said Dr. Franco Cavalli, president of the nonprofit International Union Against Cancer. "All the new cancer treatments are so expensive, that already in the affluent countries we are not able to pay for them. ... So imagine what that means for low-income countries where you have $20 a year per person for health expenditures."
Regular screening, such as Pap smears and mammograms, is too costly for many poor countries. Treatment with radiation or chemotherapy is unfathomable for most. And in Asia, many patients seek help from hospitals in the late stages of disease after traditional medicine has failed to cure them.
Monika Bardhan of Malaysia's NCI Cancer Hospital has seen a dramatic increase in cancer patients over the past four years. "It's staggering. Every day I see a patient with breast cancer - I just hold my own and say a prayer."
On the Net:
International Union Against Cancer, http://www.uicc.org/
I'm still waiting for the answer for my ventilation question. I just can't get over what ventitlation can do for the ill, but can't do for the smokers.
Smokeless tobacco is also a big problem in Asia's other giant, India, where many men and women chew some form of tobacco. Mouth cancer makes up half of all new cases in parts of the country.
Oh gee, this is bound to upset Bill something fierce. How dare they lie! Right Bill? After all, ST is sooooooo much better than smoking.
Diane, don't hold your breath waiting for an answer. The answer is that as long as they can smell it, it isn't safe.
From Rod uicc link above:
http://www.uicc.org/index.php?id...235&
tt_news=563
UICC supports the campaign for a 100% smoke-free world
Tobacco kills more than 5 million people each year, of whom about 1.5 million die from cancer. Many people die, not because they themselves smoke, but because others do
Tobacco kills more than 5 million people each year, of whom about 1.5 million die from cancer. Many people die, not because they themselves smoke, but because others do.
The International Union Against Cancer (UICC) supports the global campaign for legislation to make indoor workplaces and public places 100% smoke-free.
The debate is over. The science is incontestable. Second-hand smoke can seriously damage your health.
.
For the children from Rods link:
http://web0.uicc.org/wcc/index.p...d=61&
Itemid=298
~snip~
The campaign message globally consists of four key precepts:
provide a smokefree environment for children ("no smoking in homes")
encourage an energy-balanced lifestyle (regular physical activity and low-fat diet, avoid obesity)
learn the facts about vaccinations (HBV & HPV)
teach your children to be sun-smart
.
Sunz you omitted "and die of boredom".
From Rod's link: ".... as people in the developing world live longer"
Isn't this then to be considered a cause or at least a confounder?
Diane wrote: "First of all, why is it said that there is no ventilation system made that can filter out smoke in a bar or restaurant"
Minimizing Exposure to Passive Smoke in the Enclosed Environment of U.S. Submarines
CONCLUSION: Using cotinine as a marker, passive smoke exposure appears to be minimum. The location of the designated smoking area aboard U. S. Navy submarines does not appear to have any effect on urinary cotinine levels.
During submerged operations [Note: 2 submarines, each 228 hours=10 days!], the submarine's ventilation system is primarily kept in the recirculation mode, completely isolated from the outside environment. Atmospheric particulates are removed by electro-static precipitators as well as mesh filters and activated charcoal filters ...
The findings of this study suggest that the U.S. Navy's submarine atmosphere-control system is performing its designated task adequately during the time frame of the study. Nonsmokers demonstrated urine cotinine levels well below the values indicative of significant passive smoke exposure. Neither the location of the smoking area nor the nonsmoker's work proximity to the smoking area affected passive smoke exposure.
Abstract and full text: http://www.ingentaconnect.com/co...000001/
art00009
Si you're right I missed that completely.
I think I was obsessing about when/how these idiots will be regulating our bathroom visits next. I bet they are discussing this pressing topic with Sheryl Crowe, bright buld that she is. Then of course they will consult with the Sun God Algore, and he will have his campaign complete on the regulation of the gas we pass and individuals.
This is how, Si, these dim bulbs spend their time as do-gooders. Me I'd rather be enjoying my small habits and let others mind their own damned business.
.
Rod--
I do find most of your links worthwhile but could you post only the link and a teaser plus maybe a short snip?
It's difficult reading a whole article on a blog, and tedious for those who don't want to read it. Also, speaking strictly, it violates copyright to quote more than 200 words w/o permission.
:
UK NHS Trust to deny smokers surgery.
Excerpt
SMOKERS are to be asked to give up their habit before they are put on the waiting list for routine operations such as hip replacements and heart surgery.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/
tol...icle1875561.ece
UK NHS Trust to deny smokers surgery.
You can continue any other bad habits you have, just don't smoke. I have to laugh at their reasoning here, for I've noticed that I always heal fast and have fewer problems after surgery than any non-smoker I've ever known. I even handle anesthesia better with no after effects.
Christ, what they won't do to try to force you to quit.
And they still try to tell us it's not about attacking smokers?
This is a bunch of lawsuits just waiting to happen.
If everyone stated that they didn't smoke before surgery,the Health Authorities would NOT be able to ascertain who did and did not smoke with any great certainty.Another myth built up by the rantis for no better purpose that to move the blame from mismanagement to a third party (any party-but smokers,well,everyone hates them anyway).However there is a positive here,AT LEAST WE MAY NOT DIE OF MRSA OR C-DIFF INFECTIONS.
Interesting figure (italics are mine). Wonder where they got it?
Gloucestershire Health Services (UK)
"Kicking the habit can be difficult but it is the single most important thing you can do for the good of your health. A total of 75 per cent of all deaths are caused by heart disease, strokes and cancers, and smoking contributes to all of these conditions. Forty per cent of smokers do not even collect their pension - they die before they retire. "
URL: http://tinyurl.com/2mquc6
So Rod ,by upping the retirement age,perhaps even more smokers will not collect their pension,but of course non smokers cost the earth in state pension since they never die do they .
"Smokeless tobacco is also a big problem in Asia's other giant, India, where many men and women chew some form of tobacco. Mouth cancer makes up half of all new cases in parts of the country."
Lotta things wrong with the above.
First, of course, I don't trust the reporting system or the numbers.
Second, betel nut chewing by women and men has been common in India and Southeast Asia for centuries.
I am not surprised this is totally ignored.
The IARC has classified the betel nut as a known carcinogen. Warning labels are now required in India and Pakistan. Pakistan is making it illegal for children under five to use betel nuts (choking) but of course TC and WHO blame mixing it with tobacco as likely reason for additional cancers. Only a matter of time before they start taxing the hell out of betel nuts. We all know WHO the real nuts are here.
Si--
I'd be pretty sure they'd do urine tests instead of just taking somebody's word.
What's interesting, however, is what they write on the death certificates of those they deny ops to. Is it nonetheless officially a "smoking-related" death? or a murder caused by the medical establishment? Well, no matter. Justifiable homicide. It was only a smoker and we're better off without em.
:
Big Pharma begins to reap the financial return on their investment.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/
528ee392...0b5df10621.html
Excerpts
The largest operators in the market are Pfizer, Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline and Johnson & Johnson. Last year the global market of smoking-cessation products was worth more than £1bn, according to GSK.
Lehman Brothers has estimated that the nicotine vaccine market could be worth $1.25bn (£630m) a year. Other companies operating in this area are Cytos, a Swiss biotechnology company, and Nabi Biopharmaceuticals of the US.
GreatScot
OHIO, self appointed smoke police.
http://www.smokechoke.com/
GreatScot
GreatScot
(Smokechoke)
Welcome to Nazi Germany.
Our local newpaper editor is now listing the license plate numbers of those he finds littering (as well as reporting them to the code enforcement officers. I'm sure he will do likewise when the smoking ban is effectic 6.15.07.
.
effectic=effective Sorry.
Walt ,the NHS is hard pushed to provide basic services, so to incorporate urine testing would push it past it's limit.Since a fair proportion of nurses smoke (even though they preach abstinence) i think the system would grind to a halt whilst all important urine tests were undertaken before a patient would be allowed a bed.Maybe the Management would seek such testing since they are not medically qualified but i would hope the medical practitioners would kick the idea into touch.
The new alchemy: Mixing doctors and journalists to spin gold
By: Jeanne Lenzer
Healthy Skepticism International News 2005 Apr; 23: 4
Abstract:
Prominent medical journalist, Jeanne Lenzer, has made available to Healthy Skepticism this important piece on the relationship between journalists and pharma.
Excerpt:
"The chasm between raw research data and published analyses singing its praises is sometimes a yawning one. A number of researchers and writers have sounded the warning bell about how and why such distortions occur in both the medical literature and lay media.[1-7]
Shuchman and Wilkes warned “medical scientists alone cannot correct the deficiencies of medical news coverage, but neither can journalists…the underlying problem is an interactive dynamic to which both parties contribute.”[4]
We also need to acknowledge the role in this drama of the invisible third party: industry.
A recent example of inflated claims the media made for one drug, based on a study reported in The Lancet, illustrates the problem. The glowing reports reflect not only media vulnerabilities, but also the way the hidden hand of industry exploits those vulnerabilities, through prepublication news releases that amplify optimistic claims made by researchers in scientific journals, while minimizing or ignoring risks and failing to report scientific dissent and financial conflicts of interest."
URL: http://tinyurl.com/38pcqo
Charlton Heston's 'Culture War' Speech at Harvard
URL: http://tinyurl.com/3xyevh
Note: In my opinion, you cannot pick and choose those parts of our Constitution and Bill of Rights that you will defend.
Example: I love my country and have voluntarily served her. I love our flag. But, I don't want any law passed that forbids the burning of our flag as a protest.
To pass such a law would besmirch the very freedoms/rights our flag represents.
Re: Charlton Heston's 'Culture War' Speech at Harvard
Thanks, Rod, for posting that. I've used an excerpt as a sig line. It's my favorite out of all the quotes I've gathered that have to do with liberty, freedom, etc.
Please, everyone, read the entire thing, but here's a snippet:
"But, what can you do? How can anyone prevail against such pervasive social subjugation? You simply...disobey. - Peaceably, yes. Respectfully, of course. Nonviolently, absolutely. But when told how to think or what to say or how to behave, we don't. We disobey social protocol that stifles and stigmatizes personal freedom." ~Charlton Heston, Winning the Culture War, 02/16/99
.
In the the Toronto Sun Letters to the editors today:
"What about smuggling?
"Smoke-free act 'disastrous'" (May 31) says "tobacco consumption in Ontario has dropped 18.7% since 2003." Well, if you increase the price of Blue, everyone will buy Buds. It doesn't mean people stop drinking beer, they just switch to alternatives. The same goes for smokers. They simply can't afford to pay those outrageous prices for their daily needs and use alternative options. Why isn't anything mentioned about the increase of cigarette smuggling in Ontario since the prices skyrocketed? Does the government forget when they were practically forced to lower cigarette prices to curb the smuggling? And these people run our country.
Chris Schneidergruber, Concord
Editor commentNumbers can be twisted any way you want, that's why everyone uses them) "
Here I always thought that the editors, and reporters were suppose to be the gatekeepers of truthful, and real information!
At the very least they can tell the people when the gov't spews the lies (through omission of information) the twist in the information that they are leaving out! Canadian consumption has decreased by 2% nationally according to national figures(using tax revenues only, and not including any smuggling estimates)since 2001 and smuggling has increased by 1700% since 2001(extremists in a press release said that 25% of cigarettes is now contraband in Canada).
Here we have the newspaper editor making no apologies for advancing misinfomrmation. They are letting the gov't publicize twisted dogma, and not showing there's omissions/ twists to the full facts (at one point in article mentioning contraband not included)! Then they wonder why the public no longer reads/trusts the papers information. They also wonder why (instead of using newspapers) the people use the internet to get information; (where people will more likely be able to see sources for info for verification). I won't even mention that theres a loss in gov't reliability/truthfulness in Canada.
I'm convinced that TFK either has not read the Supreme Court's opinion in Lorillard v. Reilly regarding protection of commercial speech, doesn't understand the supremacy of the 1st Amendment over bills passed by Congress, or is intentially engaged in a campaign to deceive America and her youth. Am I missing an option here? Here's a link to the Court's 2001 opinion. Judge for yourself:
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/.../
lorrilard.html
Great Scot: SMOKERS are to be asked to give up their habit before they are put on the waiting list for routine operations such as hip replacements and heart surgery.
That happened to my husband's aunt. The woman is in her eighties and her doctor is...what?...trying to tell her that her smoking habit is unhealthy?
Onn myth beginning to be busted???
Perhaps the SHS will come soon? (doubt it, but it would be nice.)
http://newsbusters.org/node/13196
Could not cut/paste and did not want to post all.
Fateful Voice of a Generation Still Drowns Out Real Science
By JOHN TIERNEY, New York Times, June 5, 2007
Excerpt of beginning of article:
"For Rachel Carson admirers, it has not been a silent spring. They’ve been celebrating the centennial of her birthday with paeans to her saintliness. A new generation is reading her book in school — and mostly learning the wrong lesson from it.
If students are going to read “Silent Spring” in science classes, I wish it were paired with another work from that same year, 1962, titled “Chemicals and Pests.” It was a review of “Silent Spring” in the journal Science written by I. L. Baldwin, a professor of agricultural bacteriology at the University of Wisconsin.
He didn’t have Ms. Carson’s literary flair, but his science has held up much better. He didn’t make Ms. Carson’s fundamental mistake, which is evident in the opening sentence of her book"
URL: http://tinyurl.com/yoaj5n
Forbes Magazine
June 18, 2007 issue
Trust Us
Mario Rizzo
Paternalism's newest advocates say they know what you want, really.
Excerpt:
"Old-fashioned paternalists impose restrictions on behavior, like mandating bicycle helmets or outlawing marijuana, because they believe they're good for you, period. By contrast, New Paternalists coerce or manipulate behavior because they believe it's what you would really want if you were thinking straight. They are not deciding for you, they say, but rather, simply making it easier for you to do what you want to do at some deep level, but cannot."
Bankrupt (Piece critical of World Bank)
George Will
Excerpt:
"The bank's real mission statement is the non sequitur that makes government undertakings immortal: We were created for a reason, therefore there must forever be a reason for us to exist."
Sorry, but I can't link to any of these articles. You have to be a subscriber.
Heaven does have a sense of humor:
Perhaps the THE TOP Anti's & our resident Vollyball Pro will have to settle for a tie in his own state!! 
He he he he he
http://www.eveningsun.com/localn...news/
ci_6065062
~snip~
"Rep. Ron Miller, R-Jacobus, sponsored the bill that would ban smoking in most public places unless signs are posted indicating that smoking is permitted. The signs would have to be posted at each entrance, and children under 18 would not be allowed inside unless accompanied by a parent or guardian."
'Bill Godshall, founder of SmokeFree PA, said Miller is proposing "a phony ban" because workers in smoking businesses would still be exposed to second-hand smoke."
.
Junk Food Science
June 01, 2007
Ignore the man behind the curtain
Excerpt:
"The idea that there is no safe exposure is sheer pseudoscience. Sadly, our Surgeon General doesn’t understand toxicology, any better than those trying to terrify us that a morsel of transfat is the equivalent to 9-11. But it has become popular to test normal, healthy people for chemicals and scare the willies out of them when traces are found. These worried people are told they have “high” levels in their bodies...that aren’t actually anywhere near levels where any harm has ever been shown, as a recent post reviewed. Today’s analytical capabilities allow us to detect ever-tinier traces of chemicals in parts per trillion! But just because we can detect the presence of a substance doesn’t mean it poses any health risk and “should not be misinterpreted to indicate a health risk or potential disease,” cautions the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The EPA’s safe levels, for instance, are arrived at by taking a level of exposure where there was no observed effect at all in the most sensitive of the population with a lifetime of exposure and adds another ten- to 100-fold safety cushion."
URL: http://tinyurl.com/2v5nba
Sunz- Heaven does have a sense of humor:
Perhaps the THE TOP Anti's & our resident Vollyball Pro will have to settle for a tie in his own state!!
...................
One of the comment letters:
"Miller's bill should also include language that says that employees who get sick from cigarette smoke can sue their employers for compensation and that the burdon of proof should be on the employer to prove that the sickness was NOT caused by cigarette smoke."
Perhaps the above poster should be forced to prove he/she is not an idiot!
I wonder what Robertas reaction will be when the Nazis shut up her voice. I don't think she will sit by and utter "time's up."
http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs...50393/-1/
NEWS06
Where did she get this stat?
"Meanwhile, in the 10-year period after California's smoking ban, state health statistics report the lung cancer rate fell six times faster than the national average."
Sorry you are so annoyed by all of this Roberta. But then you don't own a business, you have no idea what having your butt on the line really is.
Hey Bill, that sounds like a win win to me. I'd shut up and roll with it. Can you imagine a state where owners could decide their business, customers could decide where to go and employees can opt out of working there or stay if that is their choice? Wow! I don't understand what it is about the word choice that Bill and others don't understand. It is in the dictionary, look it up!
Diane,
They are afraid that even though 80% of the population are non-smokers, that they prefer the company of smokers actually smoking.
They like believing that restaurant and bar workers are actually forced to work in those places therefore they MUST be protected from this imaginary health hazard.
They don't like the word choice for that removes their control of others. They dislike having to make a decision about going to a smoking establishment or an non-smoking establishment. Therefore no one should be allowed to make a choice.
Even with the price of gasoline, I actually think I would be willing to leave my little corner of Virginia and drive to Pennsylvania to tell Bill Godshall to his face where he can stick his sanctimonious propaganda.
I'm still waiting for him or any of the other anti-smoker blow-hards around here to show up at my place and do some work in the field. I notice they have all been rather silent for a while. They are apparently having a difficult time dealing with the truth about their lies being lies
I won't be doing too much more work out in the field this afternoon, I have to be at my part-time job tending bar in a smoker-friendly place at 4:30........but I'll be more than happy to serve any of the anti-smokers a drink.
Has California's Anti-Smoking Campaign Reduced Lung Cancer Rates?
California authorities have recently claimed that, as a result of their anti-smoking campaigns, there has been a marked reduction in lung cancer death rates (LCDRs) in California. No doubt, there's been a reduction, but I suggest that it's entirely unrelated to smoking!
Rod note: I wish Big Tobacco Control would make up its mind. We are told over and over that it takes 30 to 40 years for cancer to appear in smokers. Now, it's being claimed that anti-smoking campaigns and smoking bans for indoor areas are producing lower lung cancer incidence almost right away, relatively speaking.
URL: http://www.lcolby.com/calif.htm
Sunz: I wonder what Robertas reaction will be when the Nazis shut up her voice. I don't think she will sit by and utter "time's up." http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs...bcs...50393/-1/
NEWS06
Where did she get this stat?
"Meanwhile, in the 10-year period after California's smoking ban, state health statistics report the lung cancer rate fell six times faster than the national average."
This is what antismokers sound like: Whining brats. What an obnoxious little editorial. She should be spanked and sent to bed without supper. Seriously.
As for that stat, Sunz, I came across something very interesting. I don't know whether or not i can find it again, but I'll try. It shows how the cancer rates dropped in certain areas (as per the CDC before juggling the figures). The areas were along the Mexican border, Chicago, New York City... In other words, it looked more like a map of hispanic immigration than anything else.
Found it. "Has California's Anti-Smoking Campaign Reduced Lung Cancer Rates?" at http://www.lcolby.com/calif.htm
Gabz:I won't be doing too much more work out in the field this afternoon, I have to be at my part-time job tending bar in a smoker-friendly place at 4:30........but I'll be more than happy to serve any of the anti-smokers a drink.
LOL, I'm not going to ask what kind of drink. *snort* Hemlock, perhaps?
INRE the NH ban, "Smoke-free: But not living free" at http://www.unionleader.com/artic...d6-
69dc1a2833a3
Does anyone know which legislators voted for this ban and which did not?
Lynda F:They are afraid that even though 80% of the population are non-smokers, that they prefer the company of smokers actually smoking.
Actually, Lynda, that is exactly what antis fear. After all of the propaganda trying to convince people that their very lives are in danger from SHS, an anti will still be rejected in favor of the perceived threat coming from someone who smokes. That is a very BIG rejection. Well, look at that editorial that Sunz put here; who, in their right mind, would want to be around someone with that personality? The Robertas of the world are being faced with the very real fact that people would prefer carcinogens to their compnay--and the more rejected they feel, the more they throw tantrums.
PS Nonsmokers don't quite constitute 80%. By polls it's more like 77% but that doesn't count closet, secret or occasional smokers. I have a hunch that it's more like 60%--and that doesn't include the ex-smokers who would really like to relax with a smoke. As an example of this polling bias, I'll give a recent experience from speaking with some colleagues at a conference. The four of us were chatting in a hallway between sessions, when any of us could've been outside for a smoke break but we preferred each other's company more...until... Someone said that she was going out for a smoke...and two of the other three wanted to do the same! The odd-man-out was a borderline anti and he eventually went back inside, much to our relief. Minority? Really? And the most interesting thing is that we really did enjoy each other's company more than that of nonsmokers--even though we didn't know that we were all smokers at first! As a partial disclaimer, the most interesting person at the conference was a nonsmoking...*sigh*...Californian! But he was cool.
DTB, I also think smokers are a larger percentage of the population than people think. For one thing, how do they get the statistics? From medical records? I personally know several people who hide their smoking status from their doctor...either because they are afraid of being nagged at, or are afraid their smoking will be blamed for every illness without investigating real causes.
Off topic, but I went to a new doctor yesterday and had to give my "smoker" status, my "alcohol consumption" status, and my "SEAT-BELT" wearing status! What in the world does regular use of a seat belt have to do with my medical history??? (I left all three questions blank)
Julie,
I leave all of those 'junk questions' blank on my medical forms. No one ever questions it.
.
DTB & Rod----Thanks for the map links.
Julie, I was also at the doctor yesterday. I had to update my paperwork. All the things you pointed out were asked. Add a few more. Do you have a gun in the house? What about coffee and tea? Then they went on to ask about 5 additional question about these. This reminded me that US News And World Reports article in its 4/23/07 addition about Americans being wired. They stated that caffeine is the most used habit forming substance. "Habit forming"! That sounds familiar like what tobacco used to be called. How long before caffeine will gain nicotine status as addictive?
As to the questionere. I left it blank and also let them know that no files of mine were to be released without my permission except on a case by case basis except for billing the proper parties.
I'm so tempted to find a new doctor now, JUST so I can have some fun.....hehehe
Bill's problem with what just happened in PA is not that it's a "phony ban" but that it is NOT a ban at all, simply a statement allowing FREE CHOICE. The fact that he can't control someone is freaking him out. So sad.
Anyway, is it just me, or has anyone else noticed that our gracious host seems to be MIA?
I figured he went fishin'
I figured he went fishin'
Can't say that I blame him, we have been and continue to be rough on him. I'm sure he needs a break.
On the other hand, doesn't he know that fishing might cause him harm or death? He could slip, and fall in, hit his head on a rock.
We need to ban fishing now, so as to make sure the good Doc doesn't get hurt...... 
Julie--
One of the colleagues (a fellow smoker) I mentioned earlier used to wrok as an RN in oncology. Mind you, she was health conscious and she did not have nice things to say about linking cancer (or anythiong else) to smoking. So...there. *wink*
One of the colleagues (a fellow smoker) I mentioned earlier used to wrok as an RN in oncology. Mind you, she was health conscious and she did not have nice things to say about linking cancer (or anythiong else) to smoking. So...there. *wink*
Now, now DTB..........Bill will just tell you that's because she is a "delusional, addicted smoker".....hehehehehe
What I don't get though, is all the medical people and scientists, NOT speaking out as soon as all this nonsense started.
In England they now want liquor in bars labeled.............you should see the outcry over that. I just knew they'd bitch when it was something THEY liked.
Did anyone see that new cartoon that was on last night. Forget which network, but it was in primetime. Anyway, they surveyed people and found the most common things that they were fed up with and the show revolves around that. The first 15 minutes was on the medical community. The humor is subtle, but there.
DTB, I need to sign off for now, but maybe tomorrow I can relate a story about a cancer research Doctor and smoking. Please remind me.
Rod;
"Miller's bill should also include language that says that employees who get sick from cigarette smoke can sue their employers for compensation and that the burden of proof should be on the employer to prove that the sickness was NOT caused by cigarette smoke."
“Perhaps the above poster should be forced to prove he/she is not an idiot!"
To end the current fear mongers feast this would actually be the best thing that could happen. If industries thought their past could come back to haunt them in a big financial way. How fast do you think they would be in getting their own lobbies in front of the cameras, making the current anti smoker drug dealer's lobbies look like the complete buffoons they are. A day latter the politicians who supported smoking bans would be prime time targets With truth, integrity in science and personal rights as goals a winning strategy would be easy to create in spin city.
The current league of fools are open to a lot of scrutiny this blog has mentioned a few of the realities which could find a light.
Can you count how many embarrassed politicians and so call specialists would be made into laughing stacks over night?
They won't be allowing the compensation of the so-called damages, when those damages are so obviously fictional. It would be a last laugh on them all, if they actually did.
Doppelgangers or clones are the next big things in online advertising. Following the medical doppelganger armies and the success of that campaign in promoting partnerships, which promote record setting financial benefits right under our noses by using existing bureaucracies to full advantage.
A recent survey discovered teens could rarely name the 4 largest American TV networks. The info at this link is background music for the TFK gang who proved the use of children is very profitable business.
Now that they have a beachhead established through such groups as TFK and other protection of children promotion policies, regulators don't have a prayer of putting the genie back in the bottle, as children’s issues will be promoted as a big stick tool in advertising for fun and profit.
http://gigaom.com/2006/05/15/dop...nline-ad-model/
Phrase of the day;
They don't call them Doctored reports for nothing...
Here's another Roberta stat to conjure with. Talking about the effects of smoking in Ohio, she "informs" us that over the past 7 years:
nearly 258,000 teens started smoking every day.
Let's see, that's 1.8 million teens a week, 7.2 million a month, 86.7 million a year. Over the course of 7 years that's.... 606 million Ohio teens!
And not only that, but the amount of plutonium that 606 million smoking Ohio teens have emitted into the air with their secondhand smoke made the planet radioactive and terminally poisoned all known forms of life.
In 20 minutes!
{
Nigeria takes Pfizer to court.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world...ica/
6719141.stm
Walt: Here's another Roberta stat to conjure with.
You know...*sigh* I'm becoming just as happy to be segregated away from people like that. I vote that we put them all in special little nonsmking rooms with re-circulated air completely devoid of cigarette smoke. Meanwhile, the rest of us can go about our business and they can complain amongst themselves.
DTB writes "I vote that we put them all in special little nonsmking rooms with re-circulated air completely devoid of cigarette smoke."
I would add ...re-circulated air completely devoid of cigarette smoke any opposing opinion, thought or concern (other than about themselves), common sense or sense of fun and REAL LIFE.
Sunz--
No worries about excess Common Sense. Alas, Common Sense died recently. Here's the obit:
Obituary
The Very Sad Passing of Common Sense
Today we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend, Common Sense, who has been with us for many years. No one knows for sure how old common sense was since the birth records were long ago lost in bureaucratic red tape.
Common sense will be remembered as having cultivated valuable lessons such as knowing when to come out of the rain, why the early bird catches the worm, that life isn't always fair and that just maybe it was my fault.
Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies (don't spend more than you earn) and reliable parenting strategies (adults not children are in charge).
Common Sense's health began to deteriorate rapidly when well intentioned but overbearing regulations were set in place....Reports of a six year old boy charged with sexual harassment for kissing his classmate, teens suspended from school for using mouthwash after lunch and a teacher fired for reprimanding an unruly student , only worsened his condition.
Common sense lost ground when parents attacked teachers for doing the job they themselves had failed to do in disciplining their unruly children. It declined even further when schools were required to get parental consent to administer panadol, sun lotion or sticky plasters to a student, but could not inform parents when a student became pregnant and wanted to have an abortion.
Common Sense lost the will to live as the Ten Commandments became contraband, churches became businesses, and criminals received better treatment than their victims. Common Sense took a beating when you couldn't defend yourself from an intruder in your own home and the burglar got the right to sue you for assault.
Common Sense finally gave up the will to live after a woman working in her office failed to realise that a steaming cup of coffee was hot. She spilled some in her lap and was promptly awarded a huge settlement.
Common Sense was preceded in death by his parents, Truth and Trust. His Wife; Discretion; His daughter; Responsibility; His Son Reason....
He is survived by three stepbrothers, I Know My Rights; Someone Else Is To Blame and I Am A Victim....
Not many attended his funeral because so few realised he was gone. If you still remember him, pass this on. If not, join the majority and do nothing!
Amen
DTB---I have seen that. It is more than true.
.
Walt And DTB---
Who was it dear Roberta said could not take NO for an anwser?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focu...s/1845243/
posts
(could not post article any other way)---Comments here are always interesting.
.
Sunz, from the article:
“Get on board,” said Frieda Glantz....
Any relation to stanton Glantz?
Sunz--
I can't find that link to the article about Wyoming turning down a ban. Could you re-post it or send it to me?
DBT--Check your email.
Sunz - Free Republic site excerpts:
"Group members admit they may not win the next time around either because of the state’s Libertarian streak, but, they say, it’s certain that smoking will one day be banned in Wyoming’s public places — including bars and restaurants — because science is on their side: namely that secondhand smoke kills about 50,000 nonsmokers yearly in the United States.
ROD NOTE: SCIENCE IS NOT ON THEIR SIDE. THE ALLEGED DANGERS OF SHS IS AN UNPROVEN HYPOTHESIS. THEY CANNOT PROVIDE EVEN ONE DOCUMENTED CASE OF A PERSON DYING OF SHS.
“They (tobacco proponents) know they’re not going to win eventually — so they delay, delay, delay,” said Dr. Robert Shepard, co-author of the Helena Heart Attack Study, which showed the incidence of heart attacks in Montana’s capital city was reduced by 40 percent following a smoking ban in all public places.
ROD NOTE: OUTSIDE OF BIG TOBACCO CONTROL, THERE ARE NO REPUTABLE SCIENTISTS THAT WOULD VALIDATE THIS FRAUD OF A STUDY.
The coalition came together to discuss strategies for reducing smoking, implementing a smoking ban and educating the public about the dangers of smoking and secondhand smoke. Shepard spared few words when referring to the coalition’s enemy — “Big Tobacco” — calling tobacco companies “truly evil.” He especially was critical of the industry’s attacks via “front groups” like beer and tavern associations on those pushing for smoking bans.
ROD NOTE: PATRIOTIC ORGANIZATIONS THAT BELIEVE IN CHOICE, IN PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE BEING LABELED "FRONT GROUPS" WHILE THE ANTINAZIS ARE RECEIVING HUGE FUNDING FROM THE LEGAL DRUG CARTELS VIA THE BACK DOOR IN ADDITION TO EXTORTED MONEY FROM SMOKERS.
Because of the industry’s deep pockets, Shepard told coalition members it is sometimes best to pursue smoking bans at the city level — where, unlike the federal and state levels, tobacco money has little hold.....
ROD NOTE: LET US NOT MENTION THE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS THE ANTINAZIS RECEIVE FROM THE LEGAL DRUG CARTEL AND BIG TOBACCO CONTROL'S FUNDING VIA THE "SLAVE" TAX.
ALSO, AT THE CITY LEVEL, THE COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE VERY FEW RESOURCES, EDUCATION OR TRAINING TO EVALUATE THE CLAIMS OF THE ANTINAZIS.
Rod,
I like this 50,000 figure: it's neat; it's tidy; it's easy to remember. Much neater than the Glantz figure of 53,000, a figure that Dr. Siegel repeated as fact in 2002.
Still am at a loss, though, as to how the figure was concocted. Must have used a large pot, natives with spears dancing around, and whoops to the heavens. Wish I'd been there.
Incidentally, that means that for every 100 smokers who die as the result of smoking, 12 die as the result of breathing in secondhand smoke (50/400). Toxic stuff. We should all be ashamed.
.
Harry--
Here's the source-- as ferreted out by the Congressional Research Service, and debunked:
http://www.nycclash.com/Cabinet/
...000_Deaths.html
And yet, all these years later, the vampire won't die.
Walt,
Thanks for the reference. Wasn’t it Glantz, either later or before, who came up with the same figure based on his own calculations?
This might be of slight, passing interest:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/
na...1089233409.html
I can’t recall ever hearing the one about “A cigarette is still the best laxative I know” (Germaine Greer). If true, surely a good ameliorative to the binding stuff coming out of the Anti’s camp.
.
Harry - Thanks for the reference. Wasn’t it Glantz, either later or before, who came up with the same figure based on his own calculations?
Walt - And yet, all these years later, the vampire won't die.
...................
Yes, each time you turn over a rock, Count Glantzula crawls out, followed by his fly-eating toadie and sycophant Renfrew (aka Repace).
Presently, the legions of darkness are ascendant. Only the cleansing light of day can destroy them.
Rod,
I'm sure all of our arms are quite weary from pounding wooden stakes into this particular Dracula's heart, and all to no avail. Must be the fable has it cock-eyed.
Pardon my pessimism, but I sense not even a faint glimmer of the light of day.
.
6 Visitors Online
Commenting by HaloScan
