Dr. Siegel: "Boston University broadcast journalism student Mary Stackhouse has done an excellent investigative report into the Massachusetts smoking ban/heart attack study."
You’re right Doc. Ms. Stackhouse presented a considered, even-handed treatment of the topic. She should be congratulated. Here’s hoping she can retain her objectivity when she steps out into the real world.
Maybe you could convince her to do a piece on why so many of her future colleagues are satisfied to present only one point of view and simply regurgitate the information (otherwise known as bullshit and bafflegab) provided by anti-smoker crusaders.
Nice job Mike.
The data doesn't support the claim that the MA smokefree law reduced heart attack deaths, but rather that the decline was due a combination and culmination of the enactment of 100+ local smokefree ordinances throughout the state, and the enactment of the statewide smokefree law and cigarette tax hikes.
Interesting. Is this a major source of news in the area? Either way it is significant that the heart attack miracles are being challenged by the mainstream media in any form. It is also significant that this comes on the same day that The Daily Mail changed an article online to remove a reference to the Scottish miracle - something that newspapers are very loathe to do after the fact.
Could it be that the anti-smoking groups have stretched public credulity too far with these heart attack studies?
The funny thing is, it was all so unnecessary. These groups were doing fine with the claims they made to justify these smoking bans in the first place. They could have sat back and said "you'll see the benefits in 40 years when lung cancer rates comes down". Instead, they got greedy and insisted on seeing instant results. There are signs that their hubris will come back and bite them now.
Dr. Siegel wrote, "We saw the problem of science by press release first-hand with the Scottish smoking ban/heart attack study."
Dr. Siegel, we've seen the results first-hand in virtually EVERY case of these "Instant Heart Attack Miracle" studies by press release. Think back on it: every single one of them, upon calmer/later/more-stringent analysis has boiled down to being, in effect, little more than a fraud as far as its press released claims go.
EVERY one of them, I believe, though I may be wrong, without a single exception.
This is not error. This is fraud. Deliberate, designed, perpetrated, and I believe actually criminal fraud in terms of the injurious effects upon so many lives.
Yes, I know you and I disagree on health benefits of "protecting workers" from the low levels of secondary smoke that could be reasonably mandated without bans, but I think even you, in your honesty, must admit that it's an open question whether those supposed benefits truly outweigh all the harms, both social and economic, that you have become aware of. And in the face of such an open question the Occam's Razor lands on the side of freedom.
Michael J. McFadden
Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"
“The Daily Mail changed an article online to remove a reference to the Scottish miracle - something that newspapers are very loathe to do after the fact.” – chris.
The reference is still there (in a graphic). When I posted a comment (an hour after it was published) I didn’t spot the graphic that refers to the “Scottish miracle” but I can’t be sure that it was not there when I posted but I know that the text went missing because I copied it into my comment. So there is no doubt that the text was changed after Colin fired off a missive but the reference is still there. The Daily Mail is still trying to send the “miracle” message. Although I take the point that the removal of the text is important.
Was this aired on Channel 5 or just buried within their video selection on the website?
Too bad the gentleman with the pictures of cereal in the background got the last word in the piece. The gentleman with framed diplomas in the background had the better approach 
What a revealing photograph!
North Essex: Health workers insist smoking ban has helped people quit
http://www.gazette-news.co.uk/ne...ed_people_quit/
Nicotine increases GABA in schizophrenia, relieves symptoms
"MedWire News: Scientists have uncovered the mechanism by which nicotine appears to alleviate some of the symptoms of schizophrenia and hope to develop more selective treatments based on this knowledge.
Many previous reports have found heavy smoking to be prevalent in the schizophrenia population, with patients often claiming the habit helps relieve symptoms such as hallucinations, A Guidotti (University of Illinois at Chicago, USA) and colleagues observe"
http://www.medwire-news.md/61/
78...s_symptoms.html
It is a good start, but more needs to be done to correct these unproven press releases.
Love how Bill jumped right in to take the real credit too.
diane wrote:
"Love how Bill jumped right in to take the real credit too."
I took no credit, but rather attributed credit where credit is due (to Mike for the TV interview, and to many different smokefree policies and laws enacted throughout MA, and to MA's cigarette tax increase).
I did the same thing in response to tobacco settlement funded groups taking credit for NC's decline in youth smoking.
Study: Anti-tobacco campaign is working
Activists say taxes prevent teenage smoking
http://www2.journalnow.com/conte...gn-is-working1/
Somebody has to tell the truth.
Dr.Siegel:
I have worked hard at debunking this study and communicated with lead author Thomas Land. Have you had access to the data he uses?
Incidentally, in The Harvard Crimson, coauthor Joel Schwartz says there was a marked decline in AMI deaths in 2004 whereas in the press release MDPH director John Auerbach says the decrese started one year later. Did you notice this contradiction?
A smile for you, one small step in the right direction.
I would like to see someone admit that the death rate did not decline. What went up?
Considering that you lobby and push statewide smoking bans and higher taxes, then yes Bill, you were taking credit.
Read or copy any study that interests you. Write one yourself. Fact is, the ones that are true are the actual living breathing teens who are smoking and walking the streets today! You can believe what you want, but I pay more attention to it when out in public just to see if you are telling the truth or if this is more junk. My observations are much different than what you want people to believe. Tell a lie often enough, huh? It still is not the truth!
diane
It appears that you are right.
"The number of young people smoking in Scotland has risen sharply, despite the ban in pubs."
"The findings will disappoint anti-smoking campaigners. Even though some of the demographic are too young to go to pubs, several experts predicted the ban would have a freezing effect on society, where smoking lost some of its charm to the young." http://www.politics.co.uk/news//...an-
$1255914.htm
The data doesn't support the claim that the MA smokefree law reduced heart attack deaths, but rather that the...
No mention of rapidly improving facilities and technology that allow faster and better reaction to heart attacks? I think we've had some of that in the past 15 years. I think Dave K made the initial point. But it is worth making again.
Bill may not be taking credit for the specific lobbying that is going on, but he is saying that there are no other causes than anti-smoking initiatives. So in essence he is allowing his movement to take credit for, potentially, the good done by technological advances.
Leaving aside, of course, that we have no idea what proportion of the "credit" would go to smoking bans and cigarette taxes and, of course, educating people about smoking. If it's 0%-0%-100%, his statement is true, but it misleads people as to what is effective policy.
Wait a minute! Maybe the Antismokers are partly RIGHT! Maybe the bans HAVE reduced heart attacks! But at the same time they've increased smoking rates!
The Antismokers have discovered that SMOKING REDUCES HEART ATTACKS!
Wow! Truly amazing what these folks come up with, eh?
Michael J. McFadden
Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"
Michael wrote: "we've seen the results first-hand in virtually EVERY case of these "Instant Heart Attack Miracle" studies by press release. Think back on it: every single one of them, upon calmer/later/more-stringent analysis has boiled down to being, in effect, little more than a fraud as far as its press released claims go. EVERY one of them, I believe, though I may be wrong, without a single exception."
Let me say that I think Michael is correct in pointing out that there is not a single one of these studies yet which has stood up to scientific scrutiny. I don't think a single one of these studies supports the conclusion that smoking bans cause a dramatic, immediate drop in heart attacks -- especially by decreasing secondhand smoke-induced instant heart attacks.
The question of whether this is fraud really depends on whether this deception is intentional or not. I'm still willing to allow that this is just really bad (and really biased) science.
Stephen,
Unfortunately, I haven't seen nor do I have access to the raw heart disease mortality data. This is precisely the problem of this science by press release approach, because only the investigators have the data, so there really can be no scrutiny of the conclusions. When the study is finally published, the data may then be available, but unfortunately it will be too late, because the conclusions have already been widely disseminated. This is why I would go so far as to say that science by press release is unethical public health practice. I think there needs to be some accountability to the public and to scientific review.
My understanding is that the more rapid decline in heart disease mortality was in 2004, not 2005.
Somebody has to tell the truth.
Bill Godshall | 12.19.08 - 2:14 pm | #
You're right on that, Mr. Godshall. It is just a shame that the majority of the anti-smoker cartel wouldn't know the truth if it slapped them upside the head.
Hey Doc--
If Stephen can write to the author, seems you could too and perhaps with your credentials he'd allow you to see the data. Then you could examine it BEFORE it's "too late."
Mr Bill take note.
From Rose's North Essex link, here's the observation of a anti-smoking activist working the front lines:
“The cost of smoking doesn’t seem to be stopping people smoking, even in these tough times.
“But then a lot of people smoke more due to stress and if they are worrying about work or money then they are likely to smoke more.
And then, of course, there;s the stress from being ostracized and demonized and denied employment even when it's there.
::
Commenting by HaloScan
