E-Cig Enmity, ETC.

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

Don’t know

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

Don’t know

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’.

Enough….