There has been something bouncing around in my mind for some time and I could not put my finger on it. I was vaguely ruminating, as one does, and something clicked. It is not a fully thought-through idea, but I’ll write this as I think.
I am sure that we are all aware that the WHO has recommended that ecigs should be banned in enclosed places (surprise, surprise). This propaganda suggestion is blatantly the work of the Big Pharma Companies which the WHO represents. And the reasoning is also blatant nonsense – literally. “We do not know what the long-term effects on ‘passive vapers’ will be, so make sure that there are no passive vapers so that no one will EVER know what the effects on passive vapers will be”. Re-work that sentence with a few clever words, and Bob’s yer uncle – vaping banned in pubs. But it was the evidence that the WHO produced which led me to think.
Here is a quote from the McTear Case (2005) [See Sidebar]. The Judge said:
(1.5) The pursuer can succeed in this case only if she proves all of the following:
(1) that cigarette smoking can cause lung cancer;
(2) that cigarette smoking caused Mr McTear’s lung cancer;
(3) that Mr McTear smoked cigarettes manufactured by ITL [Imperial Tobacco] for long enough and in sufficient quantity for his smoking of their products to have caused or materially contributed to the development of his lung cancer;
(4) that Mr McTear smoked cigarettes manufactured by ITL because ITL were in breach of a duty of care owed by them to him; and
(5) that such breach caused or materially contributed to Mr McTear’s lung cancer, either by making at least a material contribution to the exposure which caused his lung cancer or by materially increasing the risk of his contracting lung cancer.
Now then. Can you see the similarity between that and Science? The connections are the precision, the required ‘proofs’ and the ‘quantification’. There is nothing vague about it. [In the event, the Judge said that 'the pursuer' had failed on every point, and kicked the whole thing out. He complained strongly that 'the pursuer' (nominally, Mrs McTear, but actually ASH, acting for The Medical Profession', especially the Royal College of Physicians) had brought no evidence that smoking causes lung cancer]
Now, let us consider Tobacco Control. What are TC’s stated objectives? The overall objective is “to make the smoking of tobacco history” (paraphrased). Suppose that objective was placed before a Judge. Would not that Judge lay out the required actions with some precision, one by one, and require TC to lay out its programme before him to achieve that objective? Who is the Judge in ‘The Case of Tobacco Eradication’? In the UK, it is Parliament. It really is, because Parliament exists to stop injustices being perpetrated by the Executive.
But TC has never been required to lay out its FULL programme, and Parliament has never had the opportunity to examine that programme. Taking the smoking ban to start with, how did TC manage to wangle a ban for adults, especially in places which children rarely go, and almost never alone, and then, once that ban have been forced, move on the children? It seems to me to be similar to the idea of the Victorians ignoring vast numbers of infant mortalities and concentrating on deaths due to horse trampling. (In fact, they might have done just that, for all I know).
So let’s just consider the WHO recommendation about ecig use with the above in mind. We are thinking in terms of SCIENCE and JUSTICE. Let us imagine that the WHO has already laid its full programme for ‘the eradication of tobacco smoking ‘before The Court, and received approval. Now, it has approached The Court with an amendment to its programme to include ecigs. What will the WHO be require to show?
(1.5) The pursuer can succeed in this case only if she proves all of the following:
(1) that ecig smoking can cause lung cancer;
(2) that ecig smoking caused Mr McTear’s lung cancer;
(3) that Mr McTear smoked ecigs manufactured by XXX for long enough and in sufficient quantity for his smoking of their products to have caused or materially contributed to the development of his lung cancer;
(4) that Mr McTear smoked ecigs manufactured by XXX because XXX were in breach of a duty of care owed by them to him; and
(5) that such breach caused or materially contributed to Mr McTear’s lung cancer, either by making at least a material contribution to the exposure which caused his lung cancer or by materially increasing the risk of his contracting lung cancer.
When the WHO made its recommendation, did it produce any evidence of that nature? Absolutely not. Nothing at all remotely connected. Nothing. It said that ecigs produce SOME particulates from the gradual deterioration of the tiny heating element, and claimed, without specific evidence, that these particulates are as bad as tobacco smoke. The only other ‘evidence’ was, “We do not know [and do not want to know] what the long-term effects might be” (which I have already mentioned), which is not evidence of long-term harm.
Why have they not done lab experiments with hamsters? They did with tobacco (failed – perhaps that is why they have not). And it would be extremely simple, since hamsters have a short life-span. Just have 100 hamsters, genetically engineered to get lung cancer easily (how do they do that?) and let them run about in cages as they do, but ensure that they breath an atmosphere which is laced with ecig vapour. Also, have a similar control group which does not. Treat both groups equally in terms of warmth, food, water, etc. Wait for them to die. Do ‘post mortems’, looking for evidence of particulates of burnt tungsten, cyanide, etc, and record the events. The evidence would be:
1) More hamsters died in the affected group than in the control group,
2) Those that died in the affected group had more burnt tungsten, cyanide, etc, in their lungs than the control group,
3) It was the excess of burnt tungsten, cyanide, etc which caused their death.
Do you see how we are approaching something scientific and just? The just and scientific demands are:
1) That the exposed hamsters inhaled more ‘toxins’ than the control group.
2) That it was the toxins which caused the deaths of the hamsters in the exposed groups.
3) That more hamsters in the exposed group died than in the control group.
Even if all these requirements were present, there would still be uncertainties, but, at least, it would be reasonable evidence.
Clearly, the WHO Tobacco Control charlatans have over-reached themselves. They have resorted to easily debunked lies.
But will The Court, Parliament, fail in its duty to ensure that the SCIENCE and the JUSTICE are compatible with the WHO’s recommended ban? It completely failed with the smoking ban, and has completely failed with the proposed PP and smoking-in-cars ban, and we know why. It is because The Courts (being Parliamentary Committees), which examined these matters, were rigged.
If it is so bad in an ancient democracy (of sorts) like ours, think how bad it is in the EU and the UN. Bribery and Corruption cannot help but be rife. Let’s face it, if a person has the opportunity to raid the open treasure chest without the possibility of repercussions, who could resist the temptation?
I haven’t even mentioned ‘Common Sense’.
Damnation! I have been much distracted tonight by the ‘curing box’ and stuff. How time flies! Is it not weird how, with some tasks, time flies, but with other tasks, time stagnates. It seems to me that the more complex a task is, the more quickly time flies; the more simple and repetitive a task is, the more time drags.
Whatever… It is very late.
Just a couple of amusements.
The BBC ‘News’ has just run a little article on TV about e-cigs. It was only about 15 seconds. It was pointless, but propaganda. It showed a mother and baby, and the mother said (words to the effect), “It should all be banned”, as she stuck her finger into the babies mouth. Believe it or not, the BBC produced an ‘expert professor’, who claimed that EVERYTHING AT ALL must be banned until evidence produced by the banned use produces evidence of the safety of the banned use. Talk about mad professors.
And I really think that these ‘professors’ are mad. Not in the sense of being lunatics, precisely, but in the sense of being disconnected from the real world. They are like the Mad Hatter in Alice in Wonderland – perfectly logical, provided that their initial suppositions are correct.
The programme was, as usual, replete with propaganda mental slitherings. For example, showing a girl puffing, and MASSES of ‘smoke’ appearing from her mouth. Interestingly, the same ‘piece’ is even now appearing on BBC News. The Mad Professor has, once again, said that ecigs should be banned until using them produces a long-term effect, either good or bad. “This penicillin stuff seems to be great, but the evidence of its effectiveness is scarce. The use of this penicillin stuff must be banned until its non-use proves that it is effective”
The professor guy who appeared in the BBC news item is truly ‘mad’. Even if what he said was ‘propaganda’, he is truly mad. The reason is that no professor who is sane should be claiming that the ‘non-use’ of a substance or thing can prove its effectiveness.
I don’t know quite how to put this, but it seems to me that this ‘Mad Professor’ has an address. He has publicly stated nonsense, on the BBC. The Nonsense is that you you can prove the safety of an implement by not using it. Perhaps the Mad Professor should be made aware of his Madness. His madness could only be excuse if, in fact, he was not mad, but was being paid handsomely to pretend to be mad.
That article has coincided (!) with a YouGov survey tonight (is there a link between the BBC and YouGov?). The Survey asked the following questions (I actually had the presence of mind to ‘copy and paste’ the questions):
Recently a product has been marketed in the UK that looks like a cigarette and allows you to inhale nicotine vapour. Some produce a small amount of vapour from the tip but they do not burn tobacco or create smoke. They are sometimes called e-cigarettes.
Which of the following statements BEST applies to you?
|I currently smoke e-cigarettes|
|I have tried e-cigarettes in the past 12 months but do not currently smoke them|
|I have tried e-cigarettes longer than 12 months ago but do not currently smoke them|
|I have never tried e-cigarettes|
Note the intrusion of the word ‘smoke’ , rather than ‘vape’, or ‘inhale’, or ‘enjoy’, etc. If there is not ‘smoke’, then people who use them are not ‘smoking’.
But then we move on to the next question:
Thinking about TOBACCO CIGARETTE SMOKING…
Which of the following statements BEST applies to you?
|I am seriously considering quitting smoking in the next 3 months|
|I might consider quitting smoking in the next 3 months|
|I am not considering quitting smoking in the next 3 months|
I am seriously considering ‘quitting’. I’m not quite sure what I might ‘quit’. But there is something not quite right about the word ‘quit’. I suppose that it might just mean ,”Leave this place” – just for now. Every night I ‘quit’ the enjoyment of tobacco when I go to bed; I also ‘quit’ enjoying alcohol; I also ‘quit’ shagging Brigitte Bardot, or Her Majesty. Thankfully, I need not quit not eating, since not eating has kept me slim. There again, not eating and being slim might be a ‘life style’ problem which needs to be addressed – far too many people are too thin ‘for their own good’. After all, it was the ‘fatties’ who had the best chance of surviving Auschwitz.
Weird or What?
The even crazier Irish ‘Health Person’ has pronounced. She reckons that there is little smuggling of tobacco products into Ireland. Again, there appears the ‘dissonance’. Because the Customs has seized X amount of stuff, then people will not find ways to circumvent the Customs. Critically, however, is that she ‘lost the plot’. She claimed that there was little ‘smuggling’, and yet claimed that the Customs were confiscating ‘billions’.
It is very late, and so I can only give the bare bones of the idea – and I am tired.
Given a War, like WW2, Nations were faced with ‘reality’ – fight or be enslaved. Had the Nazis in WW2, who just happened to be German, defeated the armies of France, Britain, etc in Europe, the USA would never have become involved. The USA became involved for specific political reasons. Those reasons were very complex, and it is probable that no one now would understand. What I am saying does not judge the value of who won the war.
What I am saying is that, in wartime, ‘Reality’ (bombs and guns) is paramount. Little else matters. For some reason that I do not understand, in peacetime, a sort of ‘war’ is induced. This ‘war’ displays itself in REGULATIONS. It is a war between ‘Business’ and ‘Government’. But it is not a war between ‘Business’ and ‘The People’ – it is between Commerce and those who wish to control and benefit from commerce without contributing. AKA Leaches.
It seems to be a matter of fact that ‘Theory’ is in the ascendant. Thus, the tiny possibility of infection from some virus (like ebola) which might kill you, becomes paramount in your consciousness. Thus, ‘Reality’ becomes cloudy.
ASH ET AL have been substituting ‘theory’ for ‘reality’ for decades. I can understand why the MSM goes along with the ‘theoretical’ scares (good for sales of newspapers), but I cannot understand the failure of politicians to see the difference between real life and theory.
I am at a bit of a loss to think of anything to blather about tonight, so I’ll spend a little time on ‘associated topics’.
I mentioned the WordPress Problem a week or two ago. What was happening was that WordPress was slow loading and loading to the wrong ‘page’. It ought to load the log-in window first, and quickly, then it should load ‘Comments’ and quickly. What was happening was that everything was very slow and, after the log-in, it was going to a list of blog WordPress ‘functions’, such as ‘All Posts’, ‘Themes’, etc, not all of them specific to this site. The only way that I could get into the site was via ‘All Posts’. Even that did not always work.
I seem to have solved the problem. There was a recommendation, which was to ‘clear THE WHOLE browsing history’, although clearing THE WHOLE was only hinted at. I don’t really understand what I’m doing, but I did delete THE WHOLE, apart from passwords and autofill. Also, there were a couple of downloads which were ‘search engine related’. I got rid of them also.
Anyway, when I had done that, and clicked on the BSC link, everything was back to normal – straight to log-in, straight to comments, straight to ‘new post’ when I clicked it. (This one) Of course, next time I do it, it might be cocked up again. Oh… Forgot to say that I changed the password some days ago without effect.
Damn! I’ve just opened a new tab and clicked the BSC favourite and – shit – crap again.
Must try harder. I’ll have to pester the WordPress admin, and pester them I shall – greatly.
Re the ‘Curing Box’. Readers might remember that I was having problems when I simply hung leaves in the box in that the lowest parts of the leaves dried out far too quickly and dried out green. Because of that, those green parts had had no chance to ‘cure’. To correct the problem, I rolled up the leaves in towels. Here are a couple of pics as a reminder:
That is the box. I was going to put hinges on the flap (at the bottom front) and the lid (self-evident). I’ve decided not to – hinges would be more trouble than they are worth – it is simple enough just to move the flap and the lid out of the way.
There are the rolled up towels containing the leaves hanging inside the box.
The whole thing is powered by a crock pot (slow cooker) placed at the bottom of the box. The heat level is controlled by a thermostat. Further, since then, I have lined the interior with kitchen foil and partially insulated the outside with polystyrene sheets. It is all very ‘Heath Robinson’.
The ‘towelling method’, allied with the ability to maintain a constant 35ºC, has yellowed the leaves nicely (apart from a few stubborn bits) over the last two days.
JB from Ireland found a really good, short pdf article on curing tobacco. It is ‘authoritative, being a result of the investigations of an agronomist, but is simple and clear. Here it is:
What I particularly liked about it is this. It says:
The leaves need to be ‘alive’ for the starches to ferment into ‘reducing’ sugars. The fermentation must be done at a low but warm temperature (around 35C), otherwise, the sugars, being ‘reducing’ sugars, will decompose into carbon dioxide and water. The leaves will be ‘cured’ when they have become yellow. After that, the leaves need to be ‘killed’ by increasing the temperature to around 55C for as long as it takes, generally, a couple of days. Nice and simple, don’t you think?
I didn’t think that it would be possible to get a temp of 55C using the crock pot on a low setting, but it is possible.
All this experimentation is fascinating. Today, I have tried the kitchen oven, but it is very hard to control the temperature and avoid overheating. I have tried the propagator, but it is not hot enough. The curing box seems to be working well.
Growing the plants this year has been a bit weird. Some plants are gorgeous, but others are not very pretty. Here are a couple of pics:
That is Plot 1. The white thing is a 30 cm (1 foot) ruler. You can see that there are some jolly big leaves on those plants. But you can also see that there are small plants in the foreground and on the left. Those were plants which I put in later because of slug predation. There is still September and October for them to grow.
That is Plot 2. Not so good, but it is North facing. It does not get much sunshine since it is overshadowed by next door’s bushes and trees. Note how the development of the plants gets worse on the right. Those plants are nearest the fence and most overshadowed. But there is time yet, as I said. All I’m interested in is getting the best harvest that I can this year. I have plans to extend Plot 1 over the winter and, possibly, abandon Plot 2. What is the point of having a decent-sized garden and having most of it just grass?
I wish I had thought of growing tobacco plants twenty years ago.
I have been vaguely watching BBC News for a while as I deal with the baccy leaves (at around 3 am). There was a panel discussion about the Middle East.
I was watching only vaguely (not actually listening much – more interested in the leaves), but it struck me that the people talking and discussing what was happening were not the people who can make decisions.
I fail to see the significance of these ‘blatherers’. Why do these discussions not take place, on TV, among those who can actually make the decisions? I’m not talking about backbench MPs. I’m talking about Ministers and Government Departments, such as the Defence Dept (or rather, the Attack Dept). What is the point of journalists discussing what needs to be done about ‘Islamic State’? They might as well shut the f*ck up for all the difference that their discussions make.
It seems somehow as though the BBC goes out of its way to report ‘non-events’. These events might seem to be apposite, such as well-rehearsed videos of a guy rushing to an ambulance, weeping and shouting, carrying a comatose child, but they are not. The reason is that they are just pictures of ugly events, and not ‘decision making’ processes. I mean, even though these videos are set up, in a war of the nature of Hamas V Israel, such morbidity and mortality can be expected. Thus, they are not THE MAIN news. What is the MAIN news is that there seems to be no solution to the Middle East Conflagration. One might imagine a discussion on TV between Ministers and, say, the Defence Dept about what to do about the ‘Middle East Conflagration’.
What is the use of listening to journalists blathering about what may, might, possibly?
Is this not also true, more or less, about discussions on TV about The Enjoyment of Tobacco? When have Health Ministers ever appeared on TV discussions about it? I discount programmes such as ‘Question Time’ because they are not serious. They are emotional, propagandised and trivial.
Would it not be amusing and enlightening if the last three ‘Health Ministers’, Milton MP, Subry MP and the current one, Allison MP, were forced to appear on TV, in a discussion with ‘Free Trade’ experts about Plain Packaging? What is the international treaty which forbids the pirating of trade marks? It has been said that ‘HEALTH’ overrides trade marks, but there is a huge ‘non-sequitur’ in that statement, which is PP implies that writing and colours on cig packets, in themselves, make people ill.
There lies the rub. It may be that cigs make people ill, but the colours and writing on the packets cannot possibly be the cause.
So here is the weirdest thing. Something that cannot possibly be ‘the cause’ of ill-health is banned, while the actual cause (if it is true) is not banned. That is why I suggest that actual politicians and Minsters should be quizzed on TV. Decisions should not be made on the basis of YouGov quack surveys.
I have had several YouGov surveys over the last several days. Some of them seem to have become advertising rather than surveys. For example, Costa Coffee machines crop up again and again. Do you have one, do you like it, do you intend to get one? Again and again, I have seen such suggestive ‘surveys’.
They are not surveys; they are adverts, pretending to be surveys. ASH ET AL used to do it all the time, with their ‘surveys’. By asking the leading questions, they put ideas into the minds of people who do YouGov surveys. These people are different from the general population, and are ripe for advertising via survey. Costa Coffee machines appear again and again and again.
When a Government Minister stands up in the Commons and says that the Government is ‘minded to’, she must explain what ‘minded to’ means. To me, that phrase means ‘has decided NOT to’. If it were otherwise, she would have said, “Will do”.
“I am minded to redecorate the whole house, Darling”. “Jolly good. When will you start?” “Erm…. Erm….. GIVE ME A CHANCE, FOR HEAVEN’S SAKE!” I trust that readers will see the ‘cognitive dissonance’.
I think that THE PEOPLE are becoming sick to death of Government uselessness. They have ceased to believe a word that politicians say, if only because they see, intuitively, that politicians know bugger all about the matters upon which they decide. It is hard to think if a worse system of Government.
I’m just thinking aloud here, but I have noticed that quite a few of my ‘favourites’ have not posted anything for some time. I am wondering why. Have they been ground down, or is it because TC has ground to a halt? Certainly, TC is making a lot of noise about the plain packaging stuff, but if they succeed, PP will not directly hurt PETS (People who Enjoy Tobacco). Nor will it hurt tobacco companies since the existing brands will continue with their loyal following. Thus, companies like Philip Morris will, in effect, have a monopoly. People who might wish to change brands for whatever reason will have little option but to try lots of different brands in order to choose one.
I know that that has been true for a long time, ever since advertising was banned, and probably before that, in view of the individuality of taste, but there will be a huge difference with PP, which is that it will be awfully hard to know what brands exist since they will all look the same. Apart from choosing according to the nastiness of the gory picture on the packet, how might a person begin? The obvious way is to go by the price. “How much is THAT packet?” “£7.50″. “And how much is THAT one?” £7.30″ “OK, I’ll try that one” Thus, premium brands will lose sales.
Funnily enough, in the first instance, that might be good for new brands. “How much is that packet?” “£6.90, but it only has 19 cigs in it” Quick calculation: difference from £7.30 packet is 40p. Cost per cig of 20 pack = about 36p; cost per cig of 19 pack, about 36p. No difference. Hip-dip-Dash. So back to price. But Philip Morris will soon cotton on and reduce their prices to ‘the monopolistic norm’. Bang goes any thought of ‘quality’. While the Zealots are blathering about nicotine content, carbon monoxide, menthol and e-cigs, PM will be using expanded tobacco, which weighs less and burns down more quickly. Easy-peasy profits. NO ONE WILL KNOW WHAT IS IN THE CIGARETTES. We will see a monopoly of cheap and nasty cigarettes. (When I say ‘cheap’, I mean pre-tax: when I say ‘nasty’, I mean variable quality tobacco, but not poisonous)
But, essentially, PP will not reduce smoking prevalence, either among adults or ‘children’. For consumers, including ‘children’, nothing will change.
So, at the moment, for us PETS, there is nothing much happening. There are far away countries, that we know little about, like Australia and the USA, who are banning smoking in the open air in parks, on beaches and in ‘al fresco’ areas of pubs. So what? The sillier their bans become, the sillier the Zealots will be seen to be, and the sooner they will start to be ridiculed. There is not much happening, or, such that is happening, is on no importance to PETS.
It is easy to see why it is that some blogs have ‘rested’.
But that attitude is wrong.
It is important to keep on questioning the assumptions. For example, the fact that there is a thirty year delay between a person starting to enjoy tobacco and that person getting lung cancer, does NOT mean that smoking causes LC after 30 years of smoking as a result of smoking. Is there any ‘disease’ in the world which takes 30 years to accumulate? No! The 30 years stuff is just another assumption, based upon the statistics of the Doctors Study. There is no verification. It is a rationalisation. “Malaria is very prevalent in people who live near swamps, therefore swamps cause malaria, but these people do not get malaria straight away. They get this disease after 30 year have elapsed. We know this because we have counted the years between a person living near a swamp and getting malaria. Most still live near swamps, and they are the ones who most commonly get malaria, but some have moved away, and they get less malaria. The longer that you live away from swamps, the more likely it is that you will not get malaria”
But what really causes malaria? It is a parasite which mosquitoes carry. What causes lung cancer ……?
Do not accept the preconceptions as true. They may or may not be. Remember always that the Zealots in the Medical Profession control what studies should be undertaken. For example, what studies were undertaken in the past concerning LC in Veterans of WW1 and WW2 as compared with non-combatants?
Some interesting studies have been conducted. For example, a person named Kitty Little conducted a study in South Africa. It found that smokers in cities which were windy, even though they had lots of industry and motor traffic, had a lot less LC than smokers in cities which tended to have frequent still air conditions (aka, smogs). She also showed that people who lived in the ‘interior’ (far away from smoky, smoggy cities), rarely suffered LC, even though they smoked a lot. Another study showed clearly that people who live at the top of high-rise buildings have less heart problems than those who live on the lowest floors. Another study in the USA showed that people who are over 90 years of age did not have a particularly healthy lifestyle – some smoked, some didn’t; some drank, some didn’t. And all the variations that one might imagine. And there has been the Bofetta Study, on behalf of the WHO – a huge study which could not find any link between heart problems (I think) and SHS. And there was the Enstrom and Kabat study about the incidence of LC in spouses of smokers, which showed no effect, even after 30 0r 40 years of spousal smoking. The WHO did its best to hide the Bofetta Study, but was found out by a newspaper.
And then we have the McTear Case (see sidebar). New readers should read my Summary of the Case. It ought to have been simple for The Medical Profession to ‘prove’, for the purpose of a civil case (meaning ‘on the balance of probabilities’ rather than the criminal case of ‘beyond reasonable doubt’), but they failed even to produce their evidence that smoking causes LC. Note that – they failed even to produce their evidence. The Judge complained about the lack of evidence, and kicked the idea into touch. The Medical Profession failed abysmally. The judge found against the Medical Profession on every count.
It is important to note that the McTear Case was not simply an action by a person named McTear against Imperial Tobacco. It was a ‘test case’. Originally, ASH asked for volunteers, and it chose Mr McTear as its best option. But ASH is just the propaganda arm of the Royal College of Physicians, aka, the Medical Profession (along with the BMA). McTear was the useful tool, ASH was the vehicle used to select the participants, lawyers and such, but, behind it all was the RCP and the Medical Profession in general. Except that ‘The Medical Profession’ is represented by Zealots like non-medical people such as Glantz, Chapman and others. Further, even further back, were the Zealots who have gained control of the NHS.
We must never give in. There has never been any positive proof whatsoever that smoking causes LC or any other disease. Even more, the idea that SHS causes any problems at all is a mirage, apart from people who should never venture outside without wearing a mask. There may well be such people, and they may subject to asthma attacks as a result of seeing some activity of which they are afraid.
Contest everything. The Doctors Study is not some sort of gospel. We do not know that it was not ‘fixed’, even in minor ways. Little attempt was made to account for war-time experiences, and little attempt was made to note geographical differences. Thus, despite the fact that 34,000 male doctors took part in the study, it suffers from the usual uncertainties – bias, false reporting, lack of consideration of other factors, failure to account for the delayed effect, lack of clarity that it was only very old doctors who died in the main, and uncertainty about the real ’cause of death’.
Because of the uncertainties, we must question everything, over and over again. There are so many charlatans who have latched on to anti-smoking to make a lot of bucks that the whole ‘profession’ has become hopelessly corrupt. Hopelessly corrupt.
It needs only one Nation to stand up and shout for the whole edifice to collapse. But that Nation must SHOUT, otherwise it will be ignored. Not only ignored, but undermined and its economy damaged (World Bank influence). SHOUTING is important. But one cannot shout if no one can hear because the MSM is also corrupt. For example, the MSM, especially the BBC, keep publishing obviously staged ‘propaganda’ for ‘the rebels’.
When in doubt, and when the News has nothing to say, ask who “owns” ASH, and who pays for ASH. Ask why the Lotto gave £500,000 to ASH.
There are things that I am not sure about, and which need to be explored. For example, can I instruct my MP to ask a question, addressed to a Minister, in Parliament? The question need not be actually voiced in the chamber. It might be a written question. For example (and this is silly, I suppose), one might ask how much skinny people cost the NHS! How many plump people become skinny when they become old. How many skinny people die ‘prematurely’.
It is obvious that the Health Dept will attract charlatans since it is a massive monopoly, as is the WHO etc. We need a Churchill-type person to sort everything out. Thus, the many sites which have become silent might revive themselves because they have something to cheer about.
Readers will recall that the Curing Box has not worked correctly in that the tips of the hanging leaves had dried out completely, some of them still green. I had a good think, and have come up with this solution:
The leaves are rolled up inside the towels which are suspended from the rail using two elastic bands around the towels, a piece of string and paper clip hooks. I think that the solution has these advantages:
Perhaps the word ‘disaster’ is an exaggeration, but it has not been going well today. When I removed the lid of the box and checked the leaves for dryness, I touched/felt the leaves near the top. Little did I know that, near the tip, closest to the crock pot, they had dried out a lot, and dried out green in many cases. Here is a pic:
[Damnation! WordPress is getting worse and worse - Click 'Add Media' and nothing happens]
Ah well…. Perhaps my blog has been sabotaged…… Wow! After publishing, I was permitted to ‘edit’ and add the pic.
What the pic showed was some leaves which had become yellower but had still green parts. That is ok normally, since some parts go yellow before others. But there were also brown parts, and the brown parts were just as brown as my ‘towelled and wadded’ leaves.
The above was my comment before the pic was available. The pic indicates the problems. The leaf on the right has resulted from towelling and wadding. The very brown part of the leaf from the box is almost exactly the same colour – dark brown. Is that a result of our ‘carboniferous’ soil? It might well be. The variety of tobacco plant known as ‘Virginia’ produces the best results when it is grown in ‘poor’ soil. It is known as ‘bright leaf’ because it goes yellow in curing rather than brown or near black, and it is weak in nicotine.
Without the pics, it is too difficult to illustrate. What I have done is cut off the brown bits and put them on trays to dry out. Those bits that were yellow, I have wadded. Those bits that had most green parts I have towelled.
I have not given up on the box – too much investment is involved: not the cost but the time. Various solutions come to mind. In fact, I tried one solution. I had a couple of sheets of glass in the garage measuring about 15″ x 8″. I put them in the box at the bottom of the box, at an angle, so that they partially covered the top of the crock pot. The idea was to deflect the warm air flow to flow up the side of the box and thus create a circulation of warm air.
It did not work. I had moistened the leaves and put them back in the box. The tips still dried out too quickly.
But all is not lost. A tiny electric fan (if such is available) and a cup of water might make all the difference, as well as cutting the big leaves in half.
Before I leave it for tonight, one encouraging thing was that the smell coming from the curing leaves in the box was just the same as that coming from the towelled leaves.
What is the worst that can happen? It is that I have a slow cooker, a thermostat, a thermometer and several pieces of chipboard that I shall leave to ASH when I peg out.
The leaves have wilted nicely and are beginning to yellow. They feel soft and cool to the touch. So far, so good.
In theory, the yellowing stage should be complete after two days. During that stage, enzymes in the leaves turn starches into reducing sugars. Once the leaves have all yellowed, the next stage requires an increased temperature (about 55ºC) to dry the leaves out further and stop the enzyme activity, but I’ll increase the temperature in steps of 5º during the course of the first day of stage 2 and at the beginning of the final day.
The leaves are different sizes and different thicknesses, so it may well be that they will yellow at different rates, but I understand that it is OK to wait until all the leaves have yellowed before moving to stage 2.
I’m playing it a bit by ear at the moment. Looking good so far.
A few days ago, I started an new project – to build a curing box for my baccy leaves. Pictures of the construction appear in the post of a couple of days ago. Here is a pic of the completed job:
I had to disassemble it to take it upstairs into the spare room. It is 40″ tall, 20″ long and 17″ wide.
I have started to use it. Here are some pics:
The leaves are supported by a piece of cane. I have used paper clips, bent into shape and pushed through the main rib, to hold the leaves. You can also see the thermostat sensor probe wire.
Is a view of the leaves through the window with the lid off. With the lid on, I use a torch to see inside.
Pics 3 and 4.
Show the thermostat set up. It is supported by a small dictionary so that I can easily see the display (the dictionary just happened to be in easy reach). In pic 3, you can see that the electric lead passes through the V shaped cut-out in the flap. It powers a crock pot (slow cooker). There is nothing in the crock pot apart from a glass bowl, and the lid is not used. There is no specific reason for the glass bowl – it is there because the guy whose ideas I have pinched said he put some crockery in the pot. I suppose that the bowl is an additional heat store as well as the crock pot bowl.
On the thermostat display, when the crock pot is switched on, in the bottom left corner of the display, a red ‘dot’ lights up. As you can see, the ‘dot’ is not lit up. I set the thermostat to ‘switch off’ at 35.2C (The .2 is irrelevant – it happened because the setting change very rapidly). As you can see, the display reads 35.3C, and the pot is switched off. I waited to see what would happen. After 10 minutes, the temperature fell back to 34.7, and the pot switched on again. (That is because I set a ‘difference’ of 0.5 before the thermostat operates again to switch the pot on again)
These Chinese are bloody clever, but I wish that they would get someone who can speak English to translate their instructions!
When I ordered the thermostat, I didn’t realise that it showed the current temperature in the box. I have a thermometer on order, which has not yet arrived, which seems to be superfluous. But perhaps not for two reasons. One, because it seem that thermostat temperatures are a bit iffy, and, two, because, as I understand it, the thermometer that I have ordered can indicate ‘wet’ temperatures. Let’s not get too technical. What the ‘wet’ temperature means is that the thermometer has the ‘gummages’ required to measure the temperature of the WATER VAPOUR in the air specifically. That temperature, when compared with the ‘dry’ temperature, can indicate the humidity of the air. If the humidity is too high, then you need to vent the chamber; if it is too low, you need to close the vents. I doubt that it will matter, if only because of inaccuracies in the machines, but it is fun.
I built the box out of the remnants of an old wardrobe which I had in the garage. The various gummages (crock pot, thermostat and thermometer) cost me just about £40 – about 7 packets of fags.
But nothing is certain at the moment. A worry that I have is that there is a possibility of mould attacking the leaves, but I doubt that there will be time for such activity since the whole process, as I envisage it, should be completed over four days or so.
One last thing. As you can see from pic 1, I am only using about 50% or less of the capacity of the box (the leaves are generously spaced). Even so, it is possible that the capacity might be too small towards the end of the growing season. That is a bridge yet to be crossed. I can always revert to towelling and wadding the excess leaves.
Our skills grow in direct proportions the growth of the sadistic persecution.