Further to Last Night’s Post: Common Sense

How many times have we heard the phrase ‘Common Sense’ used? It must be in the millions. But what does it mean? “Just use your common sense” is very common. Even Judges use the phrase from time to time.

‘Common Sense’ says that, if peeling an orange and eating it produces no population-wide problems, then peeling an orange and eating it is  a ‘safe’ thing to do. But what do we mean by ‘population-wide’ problems?

According to Public Health, even a single incident of ‘harm’ from peeling and eating an orange requires countless expensive studies to discover ‘the problem’ which, they say, is ‘population-wide’. But the problem is not ‘population-wide’ – it would apply to only a few individuals. It never seems to occur to the those who finance the ‘countless studies’ that COMMON SENSE suggests that there must be something wrong with the eater of the orange rather than the orange itself, because these incidents are so few. That is very important. Tiny numbers mean individual susceptibility.

PUBLIC HEALTH does not ‘do’ individual.

When ‘Public Health, England’ was established, I had high hopes that the CEO would be different: that he would be wringing the necks of Zealots. Sadly, it seems that he needs his neck wringing. The CEO has turned out to be a ‘junior clerk’, who does what he is told.

“Common Sense” would look at Doll’s ‘Doctors Study’ and ask why so many smokers DID NOT develop LC. “Common Sense ” would demand answers to that question. The question is extremely relevant – far more relevant than why some smokers developed LC. To be clear, only a small number of even the heaviest smokers developed LC.  The numbers were far greater than the incident in non-smokers, but were still small as the cause of death. Only some seven out of a hundred expired due to LC. Ninety three expired for other reasons. Does it matter that only one non-smoker expired from LC in comparison? I think not. Death from LC is no different from any other cause of death.

The Zealots have spread the idea that death from LC is, somehow, particularly drawn out and painful. What rot! LC acts rapidly and there ought not to be pain. My brother-in-law died from stomach cancer, as had his father. In the final stages, he had no pain. Maybe he would have had, had it not been for ‘medication’. Perhaps that was so.

But such ailments do not necessarily cause pain. I saw my dying mother. She was not in pain. She was old and weak. I saw my dying father. He had had a stroke. He was not in pain. He had another stroke and expired. My sister had breast cancer which spread. In her final hours, she was not in pain. She drifted away. Her husband, as I have mentioned, was the same.

Thus, “Common Sense” dictates that all the talk about “disgusting, filthy, stinking, painful deaths” is shit of the most shitty kind.


It is a matter of fact, for anyone who has visited a hospital ward where the patients are very old and on their ‘last legs’, that there is no ‘screaming from the pain’. It simply is not true that dying people, in the main, are in great pain, although some might be, in which case morphine is the answer.

But again “Common Sense” dictates. It is a matter of fact that, if one lies in bed, totally still, one never feels pain. That is how animals accept death. They lie down and stop moving. And that is how humans also deal with pain. Just stop moving.


We have not finished with this subject yet. Common Sense, Science and Justice go together. What is ALIEN is the distortion of the reality by the WHO and Public Health in general. Even worse is the ALIEN attitude of out MPs. We, THE PEOPLE, use Common Sense. Our MPs seem to be devoid of this attribute. In fact, they seem to be DEVOID, period.

Our political system stinks.


2 Responses to “Further to Last Night’s Post: Common Sense”

  1. nisakiman Says:

    Only some seven out of a hundred expired due to LC

    As a comparison, in the USA one in thirteen children under the age of 18 (about the same figure as for LC; seven in a hundred) suffer from food allergy.

    ‘The economic cost of children’s food allergies is nearly $25 billion per year.’

    ‘Every 3 minutes, a food allergy reaction sends someone to the emergency department – that is more than 200,000 emergency department visits per year. ‘

    ‘The U.S. Centers for Disease Control reported that food allergies result in more than 300,000 ambulatory-care visits a year among children under the age of 18. Food allergy is the leading cause of anaphylaxis outside the hospital setting.’

    Etc etc


    Food allergy must therefore be considered a serious problem on a par with, if not worse than smoking, and severe restrictions on the sale of food should be imposed. Maybe they should mandate warnings and medico-porn covering 85% of all packaged food, plus punitive taxes to deter people from buying it.

    • Junican Says:

      They’ll probably get round to it eventually. In fact, the sooner the better, just to show how shitty the ‘science’ is.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: