A Lost Post – “Herself Visits the Dentist”:: The BMA Call for Prohibition of Tobacco for 18 Year-Olds from 2018.

I wrote a post last night intending it to be short. As usual, it grew like topsy. Unfortunately, for some reason or other, as I neared the end, the whole lot just disappeared. Disappeared completely. Not even a trace of a draft (WordPress normally creates drafts as it goes along so that you don’t lose the lot if you make a mistake) I can only conclude that WordPress was acting up. Not to bother – the post was probably far too long and boring anyway.

The gist was that, because herself has MS and cannot walk at all, we usually use the local authority dental service ‘for special situations’. Last time we went there, in October last year, the resident dentist was on indefinite leave for some reason. There was a stand-in. She decided that herself needed three appointments to fix the problems. Then we got a letter cancelling the appointments. Too near Xmas to be bothered, I phoned early late February to re-arrange the appointments. Nothing available until June. I had to go to my own dentist a couple of weeks ago and arranged with him to see her. Yesterday, we saw him. He fixed everything that needed to be done there and then.

That was the main point of the story, but there were other little things. Our taxi man got the wrong pick-up time and so we were on the last minute. Also consequent, was the fact that we had three quarters of an hour to kill after the dentist was done. So we finished up in a pub, and had a jolly laugh outside drinking stout and white wine. The moral is that even fraught situations can have their bright sides. All in all, in view of the fact that herself was very pleased with Mr Dentist’s work, it turned out to be an amusing afternoon.

But the critical point is the three appointments needed by the local authority dentist compared with the ‘done and dusted’ situation with my own dentist. First he examined and decided that one tooth was just too broken up to repair, and needed to come out; her teeth needed a clean, and another needed re-filling. Then he numbed the gum and while the stuff was taking effect, he cleaned the teeth. Then he did the extraction and followed with the filling. All over in half an hour.

I have mentioned before the idea of ‘commercial imperative’. This tale is a good example. My dentist saw a problem that needed to be solved. He saw the means to solve it and, having solved it, got paid. The local authority stand-in dentist saw no such imperative. There was nothing to be gained for her personally – and nothing to be lost. What’s the rush? Let’s dot all the ‘i’s and cross all the ‘t’s; belt, braces etc.


We can see the same processes at work in general local authority government and, indeed, national government, and in the EU. Motivations become complex and lacking in ‘imperative’. Thus, the EU does everything it can to make ecigs ineffective. National government contemplates plain packaging for no other reason that the Health Zealots say so. It commits money and resources to an enquiry into the health ‘effects/benefits’ of PP because the Zealots say so. Because of the lack of ‘imperative’, government gets itself into a real mess and subjects itself to all sorts of influences. And yet, as regards most anti-smoker and anti-vaper propaganda, there are only a few individuals who are calling the shots. For example, not all of the BMA is involved in tobacco control. Only its tobacco control unit is involved. Who is funding this ‘tobacco control unit’?

The reason that I mention the BMA in particular is because it has once again made a fool of itself. It has called for a prohibition of people born in the year 200o and thereafter to buy tobacco (products?).  Was it Arnott who said that prohibition was not the ultimate objective? And there we are, the BMA, that bastion of medical authority, calling effectively for just that. Any youth, attaining the age of eighteen in 2018 would be PROHIBITED. Here is a link:


There has been a big discussion going on over at Breitbart. One has also indulged oneself.

I have welcomed this proposition from the BMA. For me, it shows once and for all that the BMA has gone crazy. It wants Parliament to pass a law NOW so as to PROHIBIT anyone who becomes 18 in four years time from buying tobacco. This gang of charlatans is the boss of ASH ET AL, whose CEO Arnott said, “Oh no! We do not want to prohibit tobacco”.

I suspect that the BMA is trying the usual trick of ‘upping the anti’ in order to get lower stuff passed – that is, PP. It is an old trick. Ask for too much and settle for something less (which is what you wanted in the first place). This call for a prohibition is a red herring. It is intended to look silly so as to make PP look less silly.

It would be interesting to know whether or not ‘proper doctors’ (and not obese ex-nurses like Nathanson, head of medical ethics at the BMA (yes, her who claimed smoke in cars to be ’23 times smokier than a smoky bar’, which required a BMJ apology) would like to take steps to either ‘retake’ the BMA from the Zealots or start a new organisation to represent them. At the same time, they could disown the College of Physicians which has also lost its direction. Are ordinary doctors financing the RCP, and, if not, who is? Could it be medical students who are doing so? Are their fees subsidising tobacco control? Frankly, the stench is becoming intolerable. People make wills donating to ‘Cancer Research’. Are these funds being used to support the tobacco control dept of CRUK? Is that also true of the other big ‘charities’?

What these Zealots have lost sight of is ‘human nature’. No matter what their influence on Government, and their control of Government Departments, in the end, human nature will prevail. James the First tried to ban tobacco, in effect, 300 years ago by increasing the duty on tobacco imports enormously (while protecting ‘the better sort who used tobacco as medicine’). There seems to have been a ‘pause’ (just like the climate change ‘pause’) through to the mid 1800s, when puritan ideals again gained traction with the ‘temperance’ movement, which eventually produced prohibition of alcohol in the USA.

Prohibition of the manufacture, import and sale of alcoholic products was actually passed in an Act of the USA Government at the time. It actually happened! It actually happened! Thousands of years of brewing and fermenting and distilling cast away in an instant.

Despite the ‘slowly, slowly’ approach of Tobacco Prohibition’, the result is the same. But there is a huge difference. Despite appearances, the financing of ‘The Framework Convention on Tobacco Control’ is very fragile. It is a matter of ‘diminishing returns’. The idea of ‘diminishing returns’ applies also to efforts to counteract smuggling. If the authorities spend X to diminish smuggling, the smugglers will devise better methods. Thus, the authorities will have to spend more on improving anti-smuggling methods. In the end, as we have seen again and again, the only solution which makes sense is to stop fighting! Which means cut duties – or, better still, use your brains and rearrange the whole tax/duty system. For example, reducing fuel duty would give British manufacturing a big boost. But just ‘reducing’ is not enough. Abolition should be the objective. The same applies to all duties. Duties artificially deform trade. However, the income derived from duties needs to be replaced if duties are to be abolished. Oh dear! That means that non smokers and non drinkers would have to pay more!

There was a time, not an awful long time ago, when politicians were well-versed in history. Even though that did not stop them from making the same mistakes over and over, at least most of them were knowledgeable about our history. It seems that our politicians, including Cameron, Milliband and Clegg, are only versed and educated in ‘political science’ and stuff. It is similar to academics who are skilled in ‘media studies’ pronouncing on microbiology.


It is hard to see where any sort of leadership is to come from. In the forth-coming EU elections, I shall vote for UKIP, and I am sure that many Europeans will be voting for the equivalent of UKIP in their own countries. BUT, I am a Europhile! I like the free exchange of people, ideas, culture, knowledge, art, tobacco types, alcohol types, food types, tourism, and such. What the EU should be doing is making such exchanges easier and more fluid, just as is the case in the USA. But there are lessons to be learned from the USA. One lesson is that duties on booze and tobacco etc are counter-productive. They distort the common market. They should not exist. They are an anachronism. They belong in the 19th century.

In principle, there is no reason whatsoever that duties should not be abolished. However, such duties should not be abolished piece-meal. Either you abolish or not. Political considerations and taxation incomes should not be involved. That is cheating on a grand scale. No blather from politicians should deter us. WE demand that politicians do as we say.

I must admit that I make it seem simpler than it is. But we must also take into consideration that the Zealots who wish to create a European Super State are the ones who complicated things in the first place. If I was asked if I want a strong Europe, as a Federation, I would say that I probably would, but only if it was carefully crafted, in the same way that NATO was carefully crafted. What I would most certainly find horrific is the mess that currently obtains. The mess has been deliberately engineered.

What can be done?

The first thing is to take any form of authority out of the UN and its subsidiaries, such as the WHO and the IPCC and the Framework Convention. De-fund them and do not allow private wealth to influence them.

The second thing is to do the same to the EU. De-fund the Elite. Severely restrict the extent of the EU. If it grows as a an entity,  it must grow very, very slowly. The Euro is a case in point. I was brought in prematurely and has been a disaster created by an insolvent banking sector. I can see it, but I do not understand how it can have been brought about. The creation of the Euro seems to have been magical.

The crazy thing is that the Euro could have been a wonderful invention. It could have been a common European currency. States could have had their own local currency, and had a system of conversion so that travellers and traders could use either Euros or pesetas, or whatever. Such a common currency would be easy to administer. It would be lovely and we would all love to be able to take Euros on holiday anywhere. Also, we would love to be able to spend pounds or whatever at a given rate of exchange to Euros in our ordinary transactions. If it were not for those who wish to steal our money by complicating things unnecessarily,  we could all be happy.


Thus we see that there are people whose interest is to steal our money by complicating things. That is how advertising on TV works. It is crazy. On the one hand, the adverts are mostly only semi-factual, but, at the same time, they are 100% emotional. Why are our schools not teaching children to recognise cheap advertising tricks?


I have drifted somewhat from the BMA call for tobacco prohibition for youths of a certain age. That call has been clearly a trick to impress politicians. I don’t expect ‘made to measure’ politicians like Cameron et al to disappear over-night, but I do expect, in the medium term, that they will be chucked out. They have facile tongues, but know nothing.






9 Responses to “A Lost Post – “Herself Visits the Dentist”:: The BMA Call for Prohibition of Tobacco for 18 Year-Olds from 2018.”

  1. Rose Says:

    The BMA follows , it does not lead.


    Tasmania considers cigarette ban for anyone born after 2000

    There was a time, not an awful long time ago, when politicians were well-versed in history

    The really crackpot ideas all seem to originate in Australia, but in the scheme of things they are still a very young country so they don’t have much history to learn from, same as America.

    Britain may have mused philosophically about eugenics but America went ahead and carried it out.

    • Rose Says:

      Sorry, this one is from Australia via Singapore.

      2000 Smoke Free Generation initiative

      “The initiative, brought to Australia by a University of Singapore academic, means that, from the year 2018, young people who would have then come of legal age, no longer could smoke”

      “Singapore-based professor, Jon Berrick, devised the proposal which is attempting to create a smoke-free generation by enforcing a complete ban on tobacco cigarettes for anyone born after the year 2000, with age restrictions increasing year by year from this point onward.”

      “Professor Jon Berrick, a Mathematics Professor and Tobacco Control Advocate, to speak about the proposed Tobacco Free Generation.”
      http: //www.events.utas.edu.au/2013/october/breathe-well-public-lecture

      • Junican Says:

        I think that these people are working to a plan. Introduce the idea here and there and see what happens. See how populations react. It is no accident that the PP legislation was introduced in Australia first, and that it is now underway in Ireland. This new idea is ‘paving the way’. Surveys of public opinion are probably already planned, but no actual plans are finalised. In effect, they are floating the idea of prohibition by stealth. But also, at the same time, it is a distraction from PP. This BMA initiative is timed deliberately to do so.

  2. cherie79 Says:

    Agree about the dentists, I had an excellent NHS dentist who retired as soon as he could due to the ill thought out contract the last government brought in. I now have a very good private dentist, not cheap but worth it. If I remember correctly John Major proposed a common currency and was ridiculed. It could have worked and in time economies may have chosen to unite their currency gradually, none of this forcing widely divergent economies into an artificial union. As far as the anti smoking fanatics, I despair, they are all mad, just hope people wake up to was has happened to their freedoms.

    • Junican Says:

      Regarding the Euro, it is obvious that the mess has been caused by the monopoly situation which the EU has produced. It is dictatorial and monarchical. Having said that, states complied. But what do we mean when we say, “States complied?” What we mean is that ‘experts’ (possibly already compromised) complied.
      Dentists are not having an easy ride at the moment. I suspect that, in the ‘medical hierarchy’, they do not have much clout.

  3. garyk30 Says:

    “Prohibition of the manufacture, import and sale of alcoholic products was actually passed in an Act of the USA Government at the time.”

    The law was to be only for ‘hard’ booze-whiskey/gin/rum.

    Beer and wine were not included; but,at the last minute, the politicians decided to ban ALL alcohol products.

    I guess it was better all than none.

    My guess is that the ‘total ban politicians’ told the ‘partial ban’ politicians that they would go with the ‘no ban types’ unless the ‘partials’ went with the ‘totals’ and ‘all banned’ was better than none banned.

    • Junican Says:

      Which is reminiscent of the imposition of the smoking ban – non food pubs and private clubs were to be excepted until a last minute intervention (already planned, of course) put paid to any thought of exceptions.

  4. nisakiman Says:

    The bright idea about not allowing anyone born after 2000 to buy any tobacco products is a doozy! I wonder if they’ve thought beyond their ideological boundaries on this one? In a way, I’d almost like them to do it.

    Can you imagine, Junican, if you, as a teenager were told that you and your peers were to be the first to be forbidden to buy and use tobacco? What would your reaction be? I certainly know what mine would have been, and probably most of my peers!. Ha! Can you imagine the howls of righteous anguish from the zealots as teenage smoking rates shot up to 50%, 60%, 70% or more? It would be positively delightful to see!

    Of course, it would be nothing to do with their stupid laws, it would all be the fault of the tobacco companies, but they would squirm like worms on a hook, nonetheless!

    • Junican Says:

      You describe the consequences precisely, Nisak. But all the Zealots want is legal bans. Any legal ban will do, just as long as it is a law. The same applies to ecigs. Just get a law. Then they can move on to the next law. Whether the laws work or not is irrelevant.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: