Do the Mail Contradictions Mean that Chaos is Infiltrating Tobacco Control?

I’m rather tired tonight, even though it is only 1.30 am. But I cannot resist.

The Mail on line published an article yesterday regurgitating the propaganda about the nasty ‘ingredients’ in cigs. Today, it published and article complaining about the “Labour Nanny State  Plans” to regulate every possible ‘lifestyle’ choice that the people can make.

The Mail ought to make its mind up – is it violently (and I mean ‘violently’) anti-smoker or is it opportunistically pro-smoker in order to bash Labour? I suppose that I ought to give the links which illustrate the above:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2617833/Fancy-cigarette-From-rat-poison-nail-polish-remover-list-ingredients-make-think-twice-lighting-up.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2619655/Labours-nanny-state-plan-drinkers-smokers-unhealthy-eaters-sparks-revolt-party-Red-Ed-says-FORCE-fit.html

The first link says how nasty tobacco is, with all the ‘ingredients’. The second says how nasty the leader of the Labour party, Milliband, is for agreeing to enforce life-style dictats.

As we all know, none of the political blather is based upon reality. How many times have I pointed out that even the Holy Bible of Tobacco Control, Doll and Hill’s ‘Doctors Study’, does not account for the fact that only a few smokers succumb to deadly diseases in their fifties? Most go on to live long lives. They may not live as long as non-smokers, but they do not die ‘to order’, as they should do according to the totalitarian ‘one size fits all’ view of the effect of ‘tobacco related diseases’. If a few smokers, who started smoking at age 18 died at the age of 50, then, all smokers who started smoking at the age 18 should die at the age of 50. Quack professor and quack doctors need to explain why that is not so, if it is to be believed that the smoking caused the deaths of those doctors who died at age 50 and were smokers. What was different about those smokers who died at age 50, as compared with those who died at age 80? Or, you could ask why it was that many non-smokers died at age 50, even though they could not possibly have died from ‘smoking related diseases’? There again, the propagandist zealots would probably claim that the non-smokers died from SHS.

———

I vaguely see a trend. It is slow but real. It is that, gradually, thinking people are beginning to realise that the studies that are supposed to reveal the danger of smoking are based upon  ‘one size fits all’ averages. It is upon this sort of unscientific conjecture that the statement that ‘50% of smokers are killed by their habit’ is based. THE CONJECTURE IS ONLY THAT! It is a conjecture and not a fact.

======

But it is good to see the rabid anti-smoker Mail getting its knickers in a twist. If the Mail is pulling itself this way and that, think how much the Tobacco Control Industry is messed up. Sure, the politicians will blow hot an cold. It is bound to be so since our political system is shot to pieces.

 

Advertisements

12 Responses to “Do the Mail Contradictions Mean that Chaos is Infiltrating Tobacco Control?”

  1. woodsy42 Says:

    “It is a conjecture and not a fact.”
    I think it’s a realisation across the board that we are continually lied to which is setting in. It’s not just smoking, although that’s the ongoing example for our older generation. I would suggest that it’s the global warming scaremongering which has woken many people up to the nonsense we are fed by bansturbators misusing science.

    • Junican Says:

      I’m sure that you’re right. In fact, it is likely that other bogus claims will awake the people to the fact that SHS claims are most certainly bogus. But there are decades of brainwashing to be reversed, so it will take some time. On the other hand, it may be that it will be like a dam bursting when the day comes.

  2. Harleyrider1978 Says:

    It appears to me we are watching a worldwide collapse of tobacco control and its healthist maniacs…………

    I could be wrong and I could be right. But with campaigns like this they eventually become a political liability to everyone and want nothing to do with it but get rid of the hot potato in the long run or in this case perhaps the short run!

    The next 6 months should unfold the answer as its pretty well dead in Kentucky and I expect to see some local repeals before long in the next 12 months in this state unless some miracle happens to breathe new life into it here. But even Ellen Hahn admits Kentucky as a whole has become hardened against anti-tobacco efforts across the state.

    No shortage of help from yours truly I might add!

    • Junican Says:

      More places like Kentucky need to break ranks, Cousin. When places like San Francisco and New York start to lose a lot of business to other nearby areas because of their nannying, they will soon change their minds.

  3. Harleyrider1978 Says:

    UKIP Election Gives Britons a Taste of Freedom… Will They Want More?

    The first thing you need to know about the European Parliament is that almost everything its 766 MEPs (Members of the European Parliament) do is a waste of time. This is not satire. It’s a basic, objective fact.

    Apart from rubberstamping the EU’s budget, MEPs have to do remarkably little to justify their $200,000+ salary and expenses package. That’s because the EU parliament has virtually no legislative power. All the decisions that matter are made by the European Commission – a body of 27 unelected technocrats (EU Commissioners) who propose and execute almost all EU legislation.

    If this sounds undemocratic that’s because it was deliberately designed to be. The founding fathers of the European Union – among them French cognac salesman Jean Monnet – recognized from the start that no sovereign nation would ever voluntarily submit to having its powers stripped away by some supranational body over whose decisions it had no control. So the European Union’s MO has always been to enlarge itself by stealth – first luring in members by posing as a beneficial free trade zone; then gradually ensnaring them with a succession of regulations from which there can never be any escape (a process known as the acquis communautaire).

    That’s why insiders are only half joking when they say that if the EU were a country applying to join itself it would be rejected on the grounds of being too undemocratic. And it’s why so relatively few people turn out to vote in European elections. From Ireland to the Czech Republic they abstain in record numbers, knowing that it is literally going to make no difference which way they vote, because their elected EU representatives have no power.

    Yet the corollary of the EU’s infamous “democratic deficit” is that while it may engender apathy it also creates the perfect seeding ground for a major rebellion. Unlike in national or local elections, people no longer feel compelled to vote tactically. That is, they don’t vote for someone they don’t like in order to keep the party they hate even more out of power – in US terms, say, voting for a RINO squish rather than the Tea Partier you might prefer but who doesn’t stand a chance of unseating the Dem. They vote for the party which most closely represents the things they believe in.

    And in the case of Britain at least, that party right now is none of the three mainstream ones – Conservatives, Labour, and Liberal Democrats – but the maverick outsiders of UKIP (the UK Independence Party, led by shameless Thatcherite Nigel Farage).

    In the British parliament, UKIP does not have a single seat, nor is it very likely to any time soon. But in the European elections at the end of May, it is now widely expected to win more seats than any of its British rivals. And this is where the European elections – hitherto of no consequence to anyone for reasons delineated above – suddenly start to get interesting and highly significant.

    Why? On the face of it, it should make no difference whatsoever. UKIP’s winning candidates will end up in Brussels (or Strasbourg – depending on where the moveable EU parliament is sitting at any given time) twiddling their thumbs, snoozing gently as the latest measures over which they have no control are translated for them through headphones by the EU’s vast array of lavishly remunerated in-house linguists.

    What will matter far more is the symbolism. The people of Britain will have voted, for once, with their hearts and not their heads – and finally got the kind of elected representatives who actually share the values they believe in, rather than just another bunch of remote, frankly interchangeable “LibLabCon” political time-servers, cynics, and Machiavels.

    What’s really scaring that LibLabCon political class right now is that once the voting public has tasted red meat, it might want more of it. In Game of Thrones terms, this is the moment when Daenerys Stormborn shows the slaves in the city the broken shackles of those she has already freed – and the possibility begins to dawn that maybe, just maybe, there’s an alternative to the life of serfdom they had hitherto thought would be theirs till death.

    The repercussions of this are going to extend far beyond Europe, for the issues are not local but global. Put simply it’s about a basic question of at least as much concern to Americans as it is to Europeans: is government your servant or is it your master?

    In the European Union the answer for the last few decades has been pretty obvious. Up to 80 per cent of all new regulations in Europe’s individual members states, according to some estimates, now emanate from the democratically unaccountable technocrats of Brussels rather than from sovereign parliaments. The calculation of the Eurocrats is that the system is so entrenched, monetarily (through the Euro), economically, and politically, that there can be no turning back.

    But the people – not just in Britain, but also in countries from France to Denmark to Italy where anti-EU parties are making a strong showing – appear to have other plans.

    For all of us these are interesting times. Viva la revolucion!

    http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/05/04/UKIP-Election-May-Trump-the-European-Parliament-s-Uselessness

    • Junican Says:

      It seems awfully difficult to get people to understand that the whole EU thing is based upon A TREATY!! Treaties are only as good as the continuing agreement of the parties to abide by the treaty. Any party can withdraw at any time. Some would say that a party cannot pick and choose – it would have to withdraw from the whole treaty on not withdraw at all. But that isn’t true. If the UK decided not to implement the new tobacco directive, but to shelve it, there would be nothing that the EU could do to force the UK to comply. All it could do would be to threaten to throw the UK out of the EU. But that would mean that Germany, France, Italy, etc would have to think very carefully about their relationship with the UK.
      Don’t forget that the fact that the EU parliament is powerless works both ways. The fact that it voted for an EU compromise does not mean that the UK gov is committed to that compromise.
      It seems that few UK politicians know anything about the nature of treaties.

  4. legiron Says:

    The cracks have been showing for some time, but I suspect Electrofag was the crowbar that really ripped them open.

    The antismokers want Electrofag because it actually does take people away from smoking, but they don’t want it because it still looks like smoking. They both want it and don’t want it with absolute passion, and both simultaneously.

    There are still some who believe they are campaigning for health, so support Electrofag. The Inner Circle know it is not about health and never has been, it’s all about increasing profits for the Pharmers and thereby lining their own pockets. They have to destroy Electrofag or their gravy train stops. Once the Pharmers are no longer making a huge profit from their useless patches and gum, they will drop the products and stop funding their terrorists.

    The quandary is that if the antis destroy Electrofag, they prove, once and for all, that they are interested in Pharmer profits and not in health at all. But if they don’t destroy it, the money will soon stop flowing.

    The antis are getting very close to the point where they will tear themselves apart. Which was inevitable, but I didn’t expect to live to see it.

    Every smoker should buy an Electrofag now, even if they never take it out of the box. All of us at once. Sympathetic nonsmokers could do it too – just buy a cheap one and put it in a drawer, you can sell it to a vaper later.

    A huge surge in Electrofag sales will result in some blocked sewers under ASH HQ 😉

    • beobrigitte Says:

      The antismokers want Electrofag because it actually does take people away from smoking, but they don’t want it because it still looks like smoking.

      Correction: the anti-smokers HATE vapers as much as they hate smokers. It’s something that would allow smokers their life back; ‘put up as many smoking bans as you want – I vape there then’ just does not invite people to go to smoking cessation clinic (thus questioning the “need” for such) to be put on medication that has been hastily trialled (no long term effects known!) in order to cash in on the anti-smoking drive .

      Questions have to be asked. LOUDLY.

      • legiron Says:

        Ah, but the drones of the movement still think it is all about health (costs to the NHS etc). Only the High Priests of Hate know it is really all about money and control.

        That contradiction cannot be sustained for very long.

    • Junican Says:

      LI.
      You have convinced me. After I have been on my hols, I shall buy the best e-cig available.
      But I must emphasise.
      I have one now called ‘Screwdriver’. It is old hat. It does not even work properly any more, even though it SEEMS to be working.

      OK. Lots of ex-smokers have entertained us with their plaudits of e-cigs. Let us see whether their claims are justified. I shall try to maintain a ‘scientific’, objective attitude. The best way for me to do so is to use the e-cig when I am blogging, because, what I do, is type a sentence or two and then reach for my fag while I think a bit. The idea would be that I reach for the e-cig instead. Would I notice that I was inhaling e-vapour rather than tobacco smoke?
      That is the key test.

      • The Man With Many Chins Says:

        I have been vaping for 5 weeks now Junican, and for me, the test has been when I am gaming on the PC. After a game of World of Tanks, its time for a smoke, instead I reach for the e-cig. I am currently using an Ego style one, but I want to get a mod (Advanced Personal Vapouriser).

        The problems with your “Screwdriver” could be as simple as the atomiser, or the battery has suffered.

      • beobrigitte Says:

        Would I notice that I was inhaling e-vapour rather than tobacco smoke?

        I would say, YES. At the end of the day this is what we should expect.
        When I started stretching my tobacco by using an e-cig, all I was after was ‘loads of smoke’. I was adviced to buy e-liquid that contains more vg than pg. My e-cig produces more vapour than my cigarette does smoke!

        For me, my withholding tobacco tax for this government still works. I think that vaping is nothing like smoking, yet it provides a viable alternative to it.

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: