Is Tobacco Control Beginning to Fall Apart?

Well, no. Like any juggernaut, it will plough on regardless by virtue of its own weight and inertia, even if bits are starting to fall off. The weight and inertia are the established, taxpayer funded employees of Health Services and Public Health more than anything. Those people are not on the ‘register’ of Tobacco Control. Their salaries are paid as employees of health services and councils. They are not directly connected with the Tobacco Control Industry.

An event occurred in a small town called Westminster in the USA (population, about 7,000). The local Board of Health (consisting of three people) proposed a ban on the sale of tobacco products, including ecigs, in the town. All hell broke loose when 500 people turned up at a public meeting and objected. The people were not mostly smokers. They were shopkeepers and their customers. What they objected to more than anything was that ‘it was not the American Way’; it smacked of dictatorship. Some of the protesters said ‘that smoking was a filthy habit’, but they still objected to dictatorial regulations. But what is central to my argument is that this small town had a ‘tobacco control officer’. It seems that such officers were paid for by federal grants, and very possibly illegally so since federal grants are not permitted to used for lobbying politicians.

It is reasonable to ask how many people influencing Local Authorities are being paid by the taxpayer as employees of the NHS. In my home town of Bolton, Lancs, UK, there was a document produced about “Wellbeing” in the town by employees of the NHS which was clearly intended to lobby the Local Authority to smack smokers as hard as possible. I have a link to that document here, but don’t bother clicking on it because the content has disappeared:

http://www.bolton.nhs.uk/Library/your_health/FULL%20DPH%20ANNUAL%20REPORT%20BOLTON%20WELLBEING.pdf

If you do click on it, you will see “This Webpage Is Not Available”.

The document was quite long with lots of charts, documenting the the enjoyment of tobacco among poor people and demanding that it should be stopped.If there was such an officer, paid for by the NHS, in Bolton, there would also be similar officers in most other towns with big hospitals. All paid for by the NHS.

HOW MANY OTHER PEOPLE WHO ARE LOBBYING LOCAL POLITICIANS ARE PAID FOR BY THE NHS?

Thus, the costs of the Tobacco Control Industry are diffused. No one knows what these costs are, but it clear that these hidden costs are costs to the taxpayer directly or indirectly.

====

But there is more. Are children in schools being brainwashed at taxpayers expense? Who is doing the brainwashing and who is paying for it? Is brainwashing the correct purpose of taxpayer subsidised education? We have seen in the recent past that Muslim schools around Birmingham have been castigated for receiving taxpayer funds for schooling, but which have been breeding jihadists. I doubt that the Education Dept is happy about that, but it happily concurs with other ‘lifestyle’ brainwashing. What is just as bad is Head Teachers being forced to examine the contents of their pupils’ lunch boxes.

Note the words ‘forced to’ in the last sentence. I very much doubt that Head Teachers do that for fun.

—-

There are weird things about. In general terms, everyone must look out for his own ‘Health and Safety’, although it is obvious that an employer must provide safeguards. But are thousand page regulations necessary or desirable?

—-

It seems to me that this is the major problem with Parliament at the moment, and what caused the Smoking Ban. It was the inability of MPs to see that ‘everyone must look after his own ‘Health and Safety’. And that people can risk their Health and Safety if they wish to do so. The argument that their decisions affect NHS cost does not hold water because such an argument would demand that no one anywhere or at any time would take any risk at all, including stepping outside their homes.

The Smoking Ban was predicated upon SHS danger. No study to date has supported that assumption. It has always been a lie and will continue to be so. In fact, SHS exposure would almost certainly take hundreds of year to have any effect – apart from those people who are particularly susceptible; in which case, those people should wear masks. The idea of ‘wearing a mask’ is difficult for us to accept, and yet it seems that there is a minority of people who are in great danger from SHS and other atmospheric pollutants such as diesel fumes and air fresheners. Such people should wear masks.

—–

The obvious consequence of the above is that there will always be someone somewhere who is uncomfortable. It is not possible to provide for the comfort of everyone all the time.

The 60,000,000 population of the UK have a problem. That problem is the calibre our politicians. Only they can THINK, but they do not do so. They are cyborgs who do as they are told. The PM is no better.

Hoe did it come to this?

 

 

Advertisements

3 Responses to “Is Tobacco Control Beginning to Fall Apart?”

  1. smokingscot Says:

    Brainwashing Children…. in action.

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/ashuk/with/13893348167

    • junican Says:

      The picture that particularly bothered me was the one of a group of a children holding up placards demanding plain packaging. They were indeed ‘children’ and not the newly defined type of child who might be 24 years old. What would they know about PP? Who was the rotter who put them up to it?
      The good thing is that those ‘kids’ will grow up and remember how these old farts tried the gull them when they were at school.

  2. smokingscot Says:

    Redhead gave us her thoughts on their BAT rot of 2013.

    http://www.redheadfullofsteam.com/ash-thinking-of-the-children-and-then-co-opting-them/

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: