THE CLUB’S AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

06/09/2011

THE CLUB IS A GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO DETEST THE SMOKING BAN. WE DO NOT AGREE THAT SECOND HAND TOBACCO SMOKE IS DANGEROUS.

WE WANT THE LAW TO BE AMENDED SO THAT PUBLICANS AND OTHERS CAN PROVIDE FACILITIES FOR THEIR SMOKING CUSTOMERS. WE WANT AN END TO THE PERSECUTION OF PEOPLE WHO ENJOY TOBACCO.

WHY NOT GROW YOUR OWN CIGARETTE TOBACCO? IT IS PERFECTLY LEGAL. SEE SIDEBAR FOR EASY-TO-FOLLOW GUIDE! OR GO DIRECTLY TO THE SITE:

https://growingandcuringtobacco.wordpress.com/

TOBACCO GROWING DIARY 2012 (SEE SIDEBAR).

TOBACCO GROWING DIARY 2013 (SEE SIDEBAR).

THE McTEAR v IMPERIAL TOBACCO (2005) CASE – SEE SIDEBAR.

DOLL AND HILL ‘HOSPITAL STUDY’ (SMOKING AND LUNG CANCER) (1950) – SEE SIDEBAR.

DOLL AND HILL ‘DOCTORS STUDY’ (1951 – 2001) – SEE SIDEBAR.

Tobacco CONTROL tactics. (tctactics.org) HOW TOBACCO CONTROL DECEIVES. (See sidebar).

“SMOKERS BLACK LUNG” IS A FRAUD. See this post by Frank Davis:

http://cfrankdavis.wordpress.com/2012/08/06/the-black-lung-lie/

NB. BECAUSE OF SPAM, COMMENT ON POSTS WILL CLOSE AFTER SEVEN DAYS. PLEASE FEEL FREE TO COMMENT ON OLDER POSTS ON MY LATEST POST (simply reference to the title and date of the older post).

 

 

“Smoking a Few Cigarettes per Week is as Bad as Smoking 40 a Day”

16/08/2017

The study in question did not say that, but it was a close thing. The results have certainly been promoted as though that was what the study said. Here is the title of the study:

An Epidemiological Study of Population Health Reveals Social Smoking as a Major Cardiovascular Risk Factor

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0890117117706420?journalCode=ahpa

What is a bit weird is this paragraph in ‘The Conversation’:

Ours is the first population health study to compare the blood pressure and cholesterol levels of people who self-identify as current versus social smokers.” [My bold]

https://theconversation.com/why-social-smoking-can-be-just-as-bad-for-you-as-daily-smoking-79968

It is possible to easily understand how blood pressure could be affected, but cholesterol?

Juxtaposing is a favourite trick of all Healthist propaganda. The favourite is ‘overweight or obese’. The two are very different things. Being ‘overweight’ is trivial and depends upon some sort of ideal weight by height. My three daughters are all overweight, as compared with skinny models, but none of them are ‘obese’ – you could say that they are ‘pleasantly plump’, or ‘well fed’. They are certainly not starving skelibones. ‘Well fed’ people survive longer than ‘skelibones’, which is easy to understand.

So what proof at all is there, in the study, that cholesterol is affected by smoking? As far as I can see, there is no proof at all. What it seems to say is that cholesterol levels are the same for heavy smokers, more or less, as for light smokers, but the levels for non-smokers are a bit lower. There are all sorts of reasons that non-smokers might have lower cholesterol which have nothing to do with smoking. Absolutely nothing to do with smoking. Their habits might involve eating more fruit that steak. Who knows? But that is not to say that ALL non-smokers have lower cholesterol. ON AVERAGE, that might be true for one reason or another. And, you cannot CONTROL for ‘other reasons’. That is another epidemiological lie.

Consider this:

  1. Study A is about smoking and ‘controls’ for alcohol and obesity.
  2. Study B is about alcohol and ‘controls’ for smoking and obesity.
  3. Study C is about obesity and ‘controls’ for smoking and alcohol.

Can you see the circular argument? All the studies rely upon each other for ‘justification’.

But the effect of smoking upon blood pressure has more authority. It seems that inhaling cig smoke immediately increases blood pressure by a small amount. It is the ‘amount’ which is important and not just the increase.

Can you see the trick? Smoking one cig slightly increases blood pressure. Who know why? Perhaps the chemicals have that slight effect. But eating an ice cream might have the same effect, or seeing a pretty girl or a handsome man might have the same effect.

The whole argument depends upon the idea that some individual somewhere sometime, will keel over with a heart attack brought on by elevated blood pressure, no matter how small that increase might be. BE AFRAID!

I had a similar experience. I was asked by my new GP to attend the surgery to check my medication. I take a daily pill to counter prostatism (difficulty in weeing). So I attended. The nurse took my blood pressure. Why? Who asked her to do so? I did not. She said that it was elevated. Why should it not be elevated in the circumstances? Why should my blood pressure not respond to the circumstances?

A few weeks later, I received a letter from the surgery asking me to attend the surgery because of my elevated blood pressure.

I refused. And I told the doctor to remove references in my records to the recordings of the Nurse on that previous occasion since they were not typical. I don’t suppose that he did.

Horror stories abound about medical records being seen as some sort of gospel. They are not. They are a snapshot.

I think that I read somewhere that every time that you light a cig and inhale the smoke, your blood pressure increases a little. There might be all sorts of reasons for that. All sorts of reasons. But the most likely is that the chemicals in the smoke either tighten the arteries or push blood harder. It does not really matter because the differences are tiny. If you are sitting in a chair and you suddenly get up, your pulse increases just a little because of the effort involved. But pulse rate is not the same as blood pressure.

And yet I would argue that the way in which blood pressure is taken is archaic. How is it done? A balloon is wrapped around your upper arm and inflated. The doctor applies a stethoscope to a vein and counts pulses. Suppose that the balloon is not precisely pumped up? Suppose that the patient is worried and tense?

But, worst of all, the findings are totally contradictory to Doll’s Doctors Study – the bible of TobCon. It is not tiny risks from tiny variations in blood pressure which are important. It is continuous, year on year, heavy, moderate or light smoking which produce the effects of a greater likelihood of serious ailments and death.

I would accept Doll’s study if it were not for the massive confounders at the time. WW1 seriously affected everyone in England in terms of nourishment. Everything was directed at the war effort. WW2 did likewise. There was much deprivation of the basics of life.

The Hospital Study by Doll was conducted immediately after WW2. Is it any wonder that normality was disrupted? The Doctors Study commenced in 1951. It must have been planned well before it was implemented.

It is hard not to think that those studies, as timed, were not intended to take advantage of the circumstances.

But the critical thing is that Doll’s studies were in no doubt that the amount of smoking and the period of time of smoking were paramount in the development of heart problems. (It is hard to disregard LC) The idea that smoking a few cigs on a night out with mates as dangerous would have been laughed at by Doll.

What is important about that is time-scales. A few cigs per week would take hundreds of years to have an effect.

But the whole point of these studies is to pile up ‘a body of evidence’ which no one will ever query. I suppose that a mountain of hard shit would look much like a mountain of sandstone.

But we always come back to the effeteness of politicians. I think that ‘effeteness’ is a good word to describe Cameron when he agreed to PP, having poo-pooed the idea. That word precisely describes weakness and looking pretty.

The idea that a tiny amount of poison does just as much damage as a large amount of poison in the same time-scale is anathema to science.

I do not know why proper scientists do not rip such studies to pieces within days.

 

 

‘Cutting’ Tobacco

15/08/2017

A comment from X caused me to think. He said that smoking tea leaves was pleasant. I remember a couple of years ago intending to buy some tea leaves and seeing what smoking them tasted like. Sadly, I did not follow through with that idea. Maybe tomorrow….

But the idea of smoking tea leaves is not a strange idea. Prisoners, deprived of tobacco, habitually dry out tea leaves and the contents of tea bags, in order to create a form of ‘tobacco’ which they can smoke. But imagine the importing into prisons of strong tobacco, such as pipe tobacco or cigar tobacco. Imagine such strong tobacco being mixed with tea residue. I can imagine a very pleasant smoke from such a blend.

TC and Politicians have no idea whatsoever of what is going on. The reason is that TC has blocked out any discussions or negotiations. It is ‘in denial’. It has only one recipe, which is the destruction of tobacco companies. It has no other objective. It has never been about health per se.

The same applies to the WHO, and probably even more so. The higher you go up in an organisation, the more ‘profit’ becomes central to the business. In WHO and ASH terms, ‘profit’ is propaganda. It is not about smoking prevalence, it is about shouting, shouting, shouting, shouting. That is their job. But even more important is that Governments should hear what they are shouting about, and capitulate. Is that not precisely what happened about Cameron and PP? Why did the PM capitulate about such disgusting medical porn shouting? What was in his mind? And what was in the minds of his Cabinet Ministers, and what was in the mind of the Health Sec?

There is no doubt in my own mind that the problem is ‘objectivity’. A smoker is an object. A group smokers is an object. Tobacco is an object and tobacco companies are objects. ALL must be done away with. There is no humanity, fraternity or affinity involved. “My job is to prepare Jews for gassing. They need to be persuaded to remove their clothes, so we tell them that they are going to have a shower. We tell them to pile their clothes up carefully. Once they are in the chamber, my job is done and that is the end of my responsibilities. I sleep well”.

The ‘Nazification’ is world-wide. How else could the wave of smoking bans be explained? How is it that the most enlightened and liberal countries could enact vicious taxation penalties upon a small group of citizens just because they enjoy tobacco?

When I say ‘enjoy tobacco’. I really mean it. I have a blend of Virginia, Burley and Pueblo going at the moment. The taste is delicious.

The vicious taxation applies also to alcohol and petrol. The USA has no such vicious taxation upon petrol. Imagine the increase in costs of trade within the USA if petrol taxes were as vicious as ours!

Our Country has become a swamp of special interest groups. The success of ASH ET AL has shown the way.

If I was Theresa May and her Cabinet, I would clear out all the ‘special interest groups’ from Government in anticipation of Brexit. Negotiations with the EU apparatchiks are not nearly as important as getting rid of small groups of activists within Government.   Many of those groups originated from the EU.

Would it not be wonderful if it was not not necessary to go abroad to buy cheaper cigs, and that it would not be common for tobacco to be ‘cut’ with tea leaves?

Nicotine-less Tobacco

14/08/2017

I bought some stuff from a source in Israel a few years ago. It was promoted as a stuff which resembled tobacco without nicotine. I think that the base substance was lettuce, but it could have been something else. Anyway, it tasted quite nice – very similar to tobacco in the sense that one would be hard put to differentiate. Unfortunately, despite being in a sealed bag, it rotted. It became covered in the ‘spider’s web’ of bacterial activity.

I suppose that nicotine could be removed from real tobacco using some sort of chemicals.

But who know what the long-term effects of the chemicals used to remove the nicotine are?

Rose has directed out attention to the proliferation of LC amongst non-smokers in recent years. The ‘authorities’ are at pains to say that the location of the LC tumours are not similar to smoking caused LC. They are deep in the lung. These ‘new’ cancers are blamed upon atmospheric pollution.

I fail to see how inhalation of toxic substances can differentiate between ‘small’ cells and ‘large’ cells.

It does not surprise me that various types of LC are proliferating. A population which is living longer is bound to have have such age-related conditions. The medical profession seems to no conception of ‘age-related’. As far as it is concerned, a 70 year-old person has just the same ability to repair damage to the body as a 17 year-old. I can personally refute that idea. At the age of 78, I am fit, but wounds, no matter how slight, take ages to repair themselves. Thus, a scratch from a thorn scabs over but takes weeks to disappear altogether. Such a wound would have disappeared in days when I was 17.

The body slows down with age. Repairs take longer, and, eventually, stop happening at all. Wounds do not repair themselves. The longer people live, having avoided killer diseases, the more that they are likely to succumb to sheer agedness – repair failure. That is how the human body works. It can repair itself for years and years, but that ability eventually brakes down and fails to work.

The horror of Tobacco Control is that it has gained the levers of power. You would think that politicians would jealously guard the ‘levers of power’, but they have surrendered that power to TC. The surrender of power is so far gone, as regards smoking, that is hard to see any way that politicians can pull the power back.

What is happening with Brexit is a typical example. THE PEOPLE decided to withdraw from the EU. That withdrawal is simple. It involves simply abrogating Mastrick or Lisbon treaties, or whatever. It does not really affect the Common Market. What is affected is the specific treaties which established the EU and the involvement of the UK in it. We are already OUT OF those treaties. The People have decided.

Oh Dear. I have drifted.

The idea of nicotine-less tobacco, and nicotine-less ecig liquid, is so silly that ‘The Expert’ who proposed such a silly idea should be removed at once by President Trump. Why on earth did Trump appoint such a silly person? It seems to be true that even the cleverest of academics can be utterly stupid when it comes to real life.

The stupidity seems to revolve around the idea that nicotine ‘addiction’ can override all our other personal controls. How weird! I do not recall any reports of wild, nicotine-addicted persons breaking into tobacconist shops and looting the contents.

The fact is that nicotine is a pleasant substance to raise ‘the spirits’, just as is coffee or tea. Sure, it is hard to give up, but why should it not be? Why should it be easy to give up? Who said that it should be easy to give up?

They can stuff their nicotine-less tobacco. Dr Goebbels can fuck the fuck off. If that is the best that Trump can do, then he needs to kick himself up the backside.

Keeping Up Our Spirits

13/08/2017

Imagine what it would have been like forty years ago had the Tobacco Control Industry existed then. There was no internet and therefore no way for smokers to discuss what was happening. We would have had to talk about it in the pub, but we would have been ‘exiled to the outdoors’ which would have been useless since smokers would have abandoned pubs, as they have in huge numbers today.

I think that our discussion have only one realistic purpose, which is to ‘keep our spirits up’. Tobacco Control have no interest whatsoever in ‘spirits’. They are happy to drive down ‘spirits’ until suicide results. They are happy with smoker suicides and other causes of death, such as falling off balconies. For them, such events prove beyond doubt that smoking causes deaths. It never occurs to them that it is their demands which cause the deaths. I suppose that TC does not believe that the ban on smoking in prisons and mental hospitals causes riots and suicides. For them, it is addiction to nicotine which causes the riots and suicides.

The Zealots have tried to exchange the word ‘addiction’ to ‘dependence’. There is a reason for that. ‘Addiction’ implies real physical effects, such as sweating, bleeding, shivering, hallucinating. None of those things apply to stopping smoking. The only effect is a longing for a cig.

I used to long for a cig on an aircraft when going to Majorca. Now, it does not bother me at all. The idea of a cig rarely enters my mind, never mind a ‘longing’. When I arrived at Palma airport, I used to dash outside to the cafe and get a coffee and have a fag before returning to the baggage collection area to get my bag. Last Spring, I did that, and had a devil of a job to get back inside. There were security guards on every entrance. I had to get Jet 2 desk to get me back inside. When I did get back in, my suitcase was the only one left. I was lucky.

In July, I decided not to try to go out for a cig and a coffee. Was I shivering, hallucinating, bleeding at the eyes, sweating? Absolutely not! The mere fact that I decided not to bother quelled the desire for a smoke. I stood there and waited for my suitcase to appear. I was not in the least bothered. After I got my suitcase, THEN I went to the cafe for a coffee and a cig.

And was I bothered that the coach took around 45 mins to get to my hotel? Not at all!

It is all about habit and pleasure. Nicotine has little to do with it. Note that I say ‘little’ to do with it, and not ‘nothing’ to do with it. I feel the same about lung cancer and smoking. I do not say that smoking has ‘nothing’ to do with LC.

I am sometimes surprised by the attitude of TobComs. You would think that it would be in their interests to collate the studies of attempts to addict mice, rats and dogs, all of which failed, in order to project the truth. Zealots would scream ‘Nasty Tobacco Industry’, but the scream test applies just as much to them as to TC.

All the above applies to the latest wheeze of TC to force TobComs to reduce the nicotine in cigs to levels which are not addictive. But by the propaganda of TC, there is no such thing as a non-addictive level of nicotine, except zero.

But it gets worse. The implication of Dr Paul Joseph Goebbels M.D (sorry, Dr. Scott Gottlieb MB)’s demand that nicotine should be eliminated from tobacco products implies that nicotine must also be eliminated from ecigs. Sorry, but it is obvious. It is also obvious that nicotine, being terribly addictive, must be eliminated from patches and gum and inhalers. It is obvious. Why has Big Pharma been allowed to spread addiction to nicotine amongst kids by supplying patches and gums? A kid nearly died as a result of treating nicotine gum as spearmint.

It is because of the manifest hypocrisy throughout Government, both in the UK, the USA and most of the EU, that we smokers must be content to simply ‘keep our spirits up’. That is what the internet has done for us. It has enabled us to do so.

But what do we mean by ‘keep our spirits up’? Is it reasonable to talk about ‘the spirit’? It almost sounds as though we are talking about ghosts. Without getting into religion, we can say that human beings have something which transcends mere physical attributes. We may be hungry but we can sing; we may be in pain, but we can laugh.

So we collectively ‘keep our spirits up’. That is a worthy end in itself. We can see the vile persecution, no matter how it is dressed up as ‘for the children’ for what it is – vile persecution. We can laugh at the ostracisation and condemn the persecution, especially our ‘brothers and sisters’ in prison or mental hospitals.

If today was around 1920 or so, when Prohibition was at its height in the USA, I think that I would be on the side of the gangsters. I would see the world as pro-liberty rather than pro-prohibition.

Dr Paul Joseph Goebbels M.D (sorry, Dr. Scott Gottlieb MB), whether he realises it or not, has committed to a Nazi agenda. Snatch the nicotine out of people’s lungs – sod the tar. Only a dope who has accepted the ‘gospel’ of nicotine addiction could propose such silly ideas.

But that is exactly what happened over a hundred years ago when alcohol was banned in the USA. It is exactly the same thing – prohibit nicotine.  This time, the Zealots want to take decades to do it and spend billions and billions doing exactly the same studies, with minor variations, over and over again, just to provide ‘an accumulation of evidence’. The problem is that ‘the evidence’ is just the same as – “I too am one of the twenty people who saw the suspect walking along the street where the murder took place”. It does not matter how many people saw ‘the suspect’ walking along the street where the murder took place.

It seems to be a trait of Academia to pretend to be objective. The reality seems to be that research is anything but ‘objective’. The very sad thing is that ‘science’ has morphed into a sort of amalgam of ‘real’ science and ‘pseudo’ science where astrophysics, for example, has no more clout than vegan recipes.

So, as I see it, we smoking bloggers help and advise each other. Not everyone can zip over to Belgium for a weekend trip and buy £1000 packets of cigs, worth £2000 in the UK. But I have said, again and again, that there is no reason that one should not use a credit card to make the purchase. I have used my debit card in Majorca without difficulty. True, you incur a debt, but the cost of debt is far, far less than the difference in prices. Further, that debt is POSITIVE PROOF that you can afford to buy the cigs.

Until events work themselves out as regards Brexit, smokers would be well advised to take advantage of what is on offer. There are coach trips to Europe in plenty. Go for it! Use your credit card if you need to, but pay off the debt as fast as you can.

‘Keep your spirits up’. Do not give in. You are in the right. It is the Prohibitionists who are wrong.

 

The New York Anti-Smoker Initiative

11/08/2017

I think that the pretence of ‘health’ as a motive for anti-smoker laws is well and truly exposed by the latest New York, USA, legislation. “10,000 New Yorkers die every year from smoking, and 400,000 Americans die each year from smoking” is the excuse. It is the excuse for New York City legislators to wet themselves with the pleasure of exercising power over those who cannot fight back.

Not only do the ‘City Fathers’ hit smokers, they also hit ecig users. And they hit those people just as hard as they hit smokers.

You have to wonder what is going on in the minds of such dictators. I guess that meetings of the ‘City Fathers’ are like a party, where everyone gets all excited and a little drunk; but in this case, the inebriation comes from the exercise of power rather than alcohol or nicotine.  The similarities between what is happening and Prohibition are uncanny. The pattern is almost exactly the same.

In Prohibition, the manufacture and sale of alcoholic drinks was forbidden, but possession was not. I guess that the lawmakers thought that the supply of alcohol would dry up so that possession would become zero. How wrong they were! Manufacture and distribution became a very big ‘Wild West’ business with turf wars and all the rest of the consequences. Forget the word ‘criminal’. It was a simple case of supply and demand. The word ‘criminal’ is not a word that we ordinary people should bother about. It is a word used by those who make the laws, and not us. So, if I came across a person who would supply me with cheap tobacco, I would not think ‘criminal’ – I would think ‘supplier of what I want’.

My point is that an awful lot of Americans, in the Prohibition era, DID NOT regard suppliers of alcohol as ‘nasty criminals’. On the contrary, they regarded such people as heroes.

The difference today, as regards tobacco control, is that the black market has not really got going yet. The need for ‘bathtub gin’ has not yet reached that level. But these situations are almost always ‘non-linear’. On a graph, you would see a line which starts out as a straight line, but there comes a point where the line suddenly starts to curve upwards (or downwards) much more rapidly. That is what ‘non-linear’ means. ‘Non-linear’ means acceleration or deceleration. Customs would be powerless in the face of such an onslaught of ‘imports’. Needless to say, the corporate MSM would report only the Custom’s successes rather than the Custom’s failures, and that is reasonable because no one would know about the failures, by definition.

So the purchase of visible cigs would fall drastically, and ASH ET AL would declare a great success. The Treasury would sweat over how to replace the excise and Vat income. Non-smokers would have to pay their fair share.

I wonder if we smokers could use that idea to frighten non-smokers who complain about smells? “You do realise, do you not, that you are now paying more in tax because fewer people are smoking taxed tobacco products?” I like that idea very much. It is a practical response to ‘the stinkers’. “YOU ARE PAYING MORE TAX BECAUSE OF YOUR AVERSION TO SMELLS”

The last time that I paid UK excise and VAT on cigs was about two years ago when I had to cancel a holiday because of my wife’s MS. No need for details. I ran out of stuff. I had to pay full price for a couple of months. I have since been building up a stock to allow for such an eventuality in the future.

I think that we should abandon the USA as some sort of ‘ideal’ society. It clearly is not. It is a whirlpool swamp.

The ‘City Fathers/Mothers’ have decided to treat ecigs just the same as tobacco cigs. That cannot possibly be for health reasons. It can only be for ideological reasons. Puffing on an ecig looks like smoking, therefore it is the same thing.

Minorities are always easy to attack. But, in the meantime, whilst resources are being used to attack smokers, what is happening about REAL crime in the city of New York? The sort of crime which badly affects the citizens? The muggings and burglaries; the fraud and corruption inevitably present if the ‘City Fathers’ are concentrating on banning ecigs?

The mind really, really boggles at the misdirection of effort.

Voting for Persecution

10/08/2017

I am coming around to the idea that I should not vote in any elections. I do not like that thought, but I see no alternative. How can a differentiate between one candidate who is happy to persecute smokers and another?

As has been pointed out on many occasions, the vast majority of MPs voted in favour of the smoking ban. Most of those MPs were dismissed as a result of the expenses scandal and many just lost their seats. They voted to persecute smokers and then walked off with their pensions and CVs.

The persecution of smokers is not a light matter. It is indeed a very serious matter. And yet, in 2006, passing-through MPs, claiming false expenses, with little or no thought of the cost of Tobacco Control, voted to enable the vast costs of Tobacco Control.

The situation in the last few years is almost surreal. We have Cameron  pictured being hugged by a Corben lover with Cameron pictured with a cigarette in is hand. Cameron was the guy who forced Plain Packaging through Parliament.

There is only one sensible way to behave – do not vote. As a smoker, whoever you vote for wishes to persecute you even more. Do not vote. That is not the same as the Brexit vote. I mean do not vote in local or national elections. The point is that whoever gains the majority is said to represent all the People. They do not, if they promote persecution.

And is that not the crux? In 2006, the vast majority of MPs, of whatever Party, voted to persecute smokers. They ensured success by voting to make publicans responsible for forcing anyone who who lit a cig indoors to be forcibly ejected from the pub. There was no excuse for not doing so. It still amazes me that the Publican’s Assn did not object strenuously to being forced to be unpaid policemen.

I have a feeling that we must enter into ‘the dark ages’. We have to ‘go underground’.  I am not quite sure how it can be done. It involves minimising costs, absolutely especially taxation. I would rather pay the same cost, without taxation, than contribute to our persecutors.

How can you trust politicians who voted for smoking bans, sugar bans, salt bans, obesity bans, etc, to be stronger than the EU Elite?

“The Walk of Shame”

09/08/2017

I think that I have probably written a post with that title in the past. But it is important to understand the implications.

I go to the pub and buy a pint. I drink about half of it and then extract a cig from my cig box and stick it between my lips. I take out my lighter and head for the door.

It is that walk to the door which was designed by TC to shame smokers. They have to do it in front of their friends and acquaintances. It was never about second-hand smoke danger. It was always about shaming smokers. “You are a disgusting, filthy, stinking smoker and must go out of the company of decent people to indulge in your filthy habit”.

Part of the problem is that a lot of the shame is subconscious. Few ordinary people are able to analyse their feelings.

Ad there lies the difference between the situation as regards pubs and the situation as regards aircraft. On an aircraft, everyone is equal. No one can be shamed into stepping outside for a cig. But the shaming is still there but more subtle. Everyone knows that smoking is banned on aircraft. Everyone knows. And yet aircraft operators STILL blather on about smoking not being permitted and the presence of smoke alarms in the loos. The announcements are sickeningly repetitive.

But what they do not say is that it is not permitted for a fat bastard to plonk himself into the seat next to you and pour his flab all over you. That happened to me on my holiday trip. (OK, I exaggerate slightly). Thankfully, for some reason or other, the window seat next to me remained empty when the doors of the aircraft were shut, so I shot over into that seat before fatso could.

Why are disgusting, filthy, stinking fat bastards allowed to drape their flab over into OUR space on aircraft? And they do so shamelessly. They do not say, “Do you mind if I overflow into your space?” Perhaps one should beckon the stewardess and tell her to instruct the culprit to flow his flab under the seat in front of him.

The wonderful thing, however, is that people are endlessly able to adjust. I do not mean ‘give in’. I mean ‘take evasive action’. For example, on holiday in Magalluf, I used to go into Chaplin’s disco bar, buy a pint and stay inside watching the antics of the yoof. It was all terribly amusing. When smoking was banned inside, I adjusted and moved outside. It took me a year or so to further adjust and start taking my electronic chess set with me and playing chess sitting outside the disco bar at 2 am. It is the best thing that I have done for years. It is warm, I can drink my beer, smoke, observe the antics of the yoof, and enjoy my game of chess. Usually, someone will challenge me and we have a good game regardless of the result.

Do you see where I am going? My adjustment in Magalluf produced a better outcome than existed before the ban.

There have been many such adjustments. I have learnt more about tobacco blends since the ban than I ever had any reason to bother about before the ban. I recently received a gift of fire-cured stuff from Indonesia. It is probably about the worst stuff that you can smoke from a tar point of view, but it had a wonderful aroma and taste when blended with Virginia.

For me, the ‘walk of shame’ has been an incentive to explore. I have benefited from it. But for many people, the ‘walk of shame’ has been disastrous. Their social lives have been destroyed and they have no reason or ability to find social company. They die before their time due to loneliness.

Ash et al, and in particular, Arnott, have caused those premature deaths. In just the same way that Ash et al, and in particular, Arnott, have caused deaths from freezing outside and falls from balconies and windows, to say nothing of riots in prisons and misery in mental hospitals.

But I come back again and again to my major premise: Why on earth are politicians so blind? Why do they think that it is OK for them to sit on the benches of Parliament, enjoying the risk-free fun of debate, and passing laws which persecute citizens whilst, at the same time, funding those who propose the persecution?

Nothing in Tobacco Control makes sense. Perhaps the fundamental problem is in the word ‘Control’. ‘Prohibition’ would make much more sense.

I care nothing about the rest of the world. I care only about the UK and specifically England. But I do not know what to do. No political party represents my view on life. Perhaps the only answer is to become a sort of ‘outlaw’.

In fact, I think that I already am a sort of outlaw. I go through the motions of being ‘law abiding’ but I take advantage of every possible ‘benefit’ that I can possibly claim, even if it involves telling fibs.

I did not used to be like that. But ‘the shame’ of being a smoker has driven me in that direction.

The ‘walk of shame’ will undoubtedly drive me to find further ‘adjustments’.

This Year’s Growing

08/08/2017

One hesitates to mention ‘gardening’ since the Zealots managed to insert Australia’s 1911 ‘growing ban’ into 2016 England. The situation is typical TC – you can grow stuff but can do nothing with what you grow without permission. But you cannot get permission. Catch 22. The excuse in OZ was that you need ‘secure premises’. Like thousand acre plantations in Zimbabwe are secure?

This year’s efforts are not being rewarded. Something is wrong. A few plants are magnificent, but most are sad. I think that my ground preparation was lacking. I do not expect a good harvest this year. But there is still time for the plants to stage a resurgence. It has happened before. It all depends upon the roots. If they are strong enough, they will push out new and spectacular growth. But that is the problem. I suspect that the roots have not had the space to develop. They may be ‘pot-bound’ in the sense that they are restricted by compacted soil. This autumn will see a thorough ‘double digging’ and much application of manure and compost. I want to see magnificent growth in ALL my plants.

That is the purpose of a hobby. A hobby produces no income. If it does, then it is not a hobby. A hobby is for personal amusement and achievement. Playing golf for most people is a hobby. I used to practice and practice, and I became better and better, but I never achieved anything better than an occasional prize for winning a club tournament. That was nice, but not important. What was important was playing good golf. I played a lot of good golf during my career as a hobby golfer.

Now, my hobby is growing plants. There are challenges galore and failure abounds, but what would be the use of a hobby which which produced perfection every time? That would not be a hobby. It would be a chore.

We, The People, have a great problem. We have no one to elect who is not a Controller. All MPs are controllers. It seems to be true that only Controllers stand for Parliament. When will ‘the controlled’ be offered candidates who are AGAINST control?

Control does not have to be physical. It can be via taxation. It can be via shaming. It can be via ‘permits’. It can be via politically correct speech. What is important is that ‘Control’ spreads wider and wider until there is a WAR! Only a physical WAR will destroy the control. It has always been so. People with power grab more and more, and that applies to lawmaking. What was the sense of the PP legislation, enacted by Cameron? What was the sense? When I saw my first packet of the nasty coloured cig packets, I thought that the colour was quite attractive. It was different from the usual violent reds, blues, greens, etc, which manufacturers love to cloak their products in. I bought some L & M cigs on holiday, and I must admit that the colours of violent red and white are rather common. The packets would be much more alluring if the colours were much more subdued. A nice brownish green would be perfect.

And so we go on. The more that TC spreads its tentacles, the easier it is to chop them off. But it has to be done secretly a bit at a time, until Government wakes up and reverses its priorities. At that point, TC will wither away.

Going Back to Basics

07/08/2017

We must all have experienced situations where our plans have hit the buffers – our calculations have turned out to be faulty. It happens all the time. Be in no doubt that your decisions are based upon calculations, though hardly ever mathematical calculations.

I decided some years ago not to be bothered about smoking on aircraft. At first, the desire for a fag was hard to resist, but, as time passed, that desire went away. Being on an aircraft, for me, is like being asleep in bed. Being in an aircraft at 30,000 feet is like being in a dream. It is both common-place and surreal at the same time. When you take off from Manchester and climb into the air, you can see below you the layout of the land. Almost all of it is green fields. That impression becomes even greater as you pass over France. Only when you pass over the Pyrenees mountains do you see constriction of human habitations. But human habitations are still there.

Why would people want to live in such mountainous habitations, miles and miles away from conurbations where all the ‘best things in life’ can be experienced? One can only assume that people who live in such places are content.

It seems to me that contentment is a dirty word these days. Politicians like nothing better than discontentment to pursue their agendas. They rely upon discontent. Contented people do not riot and raid shops. They do not provide headlines for newspapers.

But do we not see a contradiction? The Party in power want contented citizens whereas the Opposition want discontented citizens. But neither Party ca actually DO anything to change the situation in the short term. In which case, only PROPAGANDA is likely to have any effect on the contentment of The People. That is, contented people can be persuaded to become discontented by propaganda.

If you go back to basics, you can see without doubt that The Tobacco Control Industry is a monopolistic leach on society as a whole, and not just on smokers. It leaches off non-smokers as much as smokers, but in different ways. The millions of pounds which the UK pays to the FCTC Organisation, which organises jollies in far away, luxurious holiday resorts, come from non-smokers as much as smokers. The fewer the number of smokers, the more that non-smokers have to pay to persecute the smokers.

‘Going back to basics’ also requires a reexamination of Doll’s Doctors Study. Ideally, someone with time would resurrect the original data, which I believe is stored at Manchester Uni. Needless to say, no Academic would want to undertake such as task. It would be poison for his career. But an Academic nearing retirement could.

The Hospital and Doctors Studies linked Lung Cancer with Smoking, but both ignored other factors. Remember that you take a puff on a cig from time to time, but you breath in atmospheric pollution with every breath that you take. Atmospheric pollution could quite easily tip innocuous smoking ‘over the top’.

The Attacks on Trump

06/08/2017

One of my favourite American persons detests Trump. That person is Carl Phillips. He speaks disparagingly of him – almost sneering. I don’t know why. Perhaps it is because Trump’s background is filthy rich business success rather than filthy rich academic success, or filthy rich film star success, or filthy rich bums and tits success. For me, Carl’s attitude is weird. Carl has fought innumerable battles in favour of Tobacco Harm Reduction and failed again and again to make an impact. Perhaps if Carl had been a billionaire, then his arguments would have been more acceptable.

I like Trump because he has chucked the cat amongst the pigeons. But who or what is ‘the cat’? Perhaps ‘the cat’ is a constantly changing series of faces and names. How can his opponents ‘dish the dirt’ on his appointees if he is constantly changing those appointees?

Does Trump tolerate the blather about ‘The Russian Connection’ because it is a wonderful distraction? Suppose that you were accused of killing someone but you could prove conclusively that you were elsewhere when the person was killed. Why reveal your perfect defence if it is advantageous to you to let people blather on about the killing whilst you get on with your programme? Why not let them blather on and waste their time, money and effort?

In politics, it seems that success can only be achieved in small steps. If you want to lift someone up, you have to be careful not to step on someone else’s toes in doing the lifting. Better not to lift the person up than step on someone else’s toes, regardless of how desirable the lifting up might be.

We have seen precisely this effect regarding the postponement of severe restrictions on ecigs in the USA. Anyone with any sense would see immediately that ecigs are NOT tobacco products since they do not use tobacco. Only the single molecule nicotine is common to ecig liquid and tobacco. But nicotine can be produced from green tobacco plant leaves quite easily. Why cure the leaves if all you want is the nicotine? Only cured leaves are tobacco. Clearly, Trump has disarmed the Zealots for the time being at least. Glantz et al can rant and rave, but they are powerless.

Rendering the Zealots powerless ought to be an objective of all Administrations. There is a simple reason for that, which is that Zealots can never be sated. They become fat and then obese on a menu of continuing scoffing of easy pickings via politicians’ servitude, and they always demand more.

I think that Trump will survive intact and gain a second term. Hilary Clinton is busted. Whom do the Democrats have to contest the next election?