Well, I survived. I did have a good laugh though. I really did LOL. I mean, I really did laugh out loud. Along with the usual ‘do you smoke? How many per day?’ there was a question, “Do you drink more that 14 units of alcohol per week?” 14 units is the 7 pints. There were a few people in, so I read it out loud and laughed my head off. One of the receptionists said, “Did that amuse you?” I replied, “It certainly did. About 7 litres of red wine per week, never mind 7 pints of beer”. I think that I exaggerated a bit – I’m not sure since I don’t count.
I think that the Fanatics have upped their demands on dentists (and, I suppose, on doctors). I used to have a laugh with my dentist about these questions (he used to smoke himself), but he seems to be more serious about it now. I wonder if ASH ET AL have started to exert real pressure on dentists and doctors? I mean, legal tricks, such as: “If you do not give smokers the works, then you could be held legally responsible if one of them turns out to have oral cancer (or whatever) and you miss it”. He certainly seemed to be more thorough this time, even though I consulted him around 12 months ago. He prodded and poked and felt my jaw and mumbled ‘oral cancer’ and stuff.
I’ve just looked up the mortality statistics for 2013 looking for deaths from mouth and associated cancers. There are a lot of sites within the mouth where cancers appear. They are summarised as
|Malignant neoplasms of lip,|
|oral cavity and pharynx.|
Out of some 450,000 deaths in total in 2013, deaths from those sources totalled 2232. Almost none appear before death at the age 45 -49 (93), and the highest age group is 65 – 69 (335). Deaths from cancer of the gums, upper and lower, are negligible (low single figures in each age category).
According to the General Dental Council, there are some 105,000 dental practitioners in the UK, of which 39,300 are described as dentists. So, very roughly, how many of those deaths might have been averted had a dentist/dental practitioner spotted the condition, per dental practitioner per annum? We divided 2000 by 100, 000 and get 1 per 50 years. Taking dentists alone, the figure would be 1 per dentist every 20 years. (By the way, I read somewhere that doctors, on average, would see only 1 lung cancer case per annum)
Another thought occurred to me. Since mouth cancers claim their victims predominantly in old age, I wonder how many people of that age will have whole or partial dentures, or have caps? How many of those people would have cause to visit a dentist and how often?
I have a feeling that dentists are not very happy about being put upon in this way. It is only a feeling. It is because, after the treatment, he thrust a leaflet into my hands as I was leaving. It is called ‘Smoking and Dental Health’. I shall quote one passage [my bold]:
How will smoking affect my gums and teeth?
People who smoke are more likely to have gum disease. Smoking may change the type of bacteria in dental plaque, increasing the number of bacteria that are more harmful. It also reduces the blood flow in the gums and supporting tissues of the tooth and makes them more likely to become inflamed. Smokers’ gum disease will get worse more quickly than in people who do not smoke. Because of the reduced blood flow, smokers may not get the warning symptoms of bleeding gums as much as non-smokers. Gum disease is still the most common cause of tooth loss in adults.
It is hard to read that bunch of ifs, buts, maybes, and generalisations and equate it with the maliciously intended gross pictures of rotting mouths on cig packets. Sometimes, I wonder if tobacco companies are waiting until tobacco control goes really, really over the top before they go to court over the genuineness of the warnings and pictures. If so, then the above para must be getting close to the tipping point.
Actually, I had already ripped up the leaflet and thrown it in the bin. I extracted the pieces from the bin and put it back together to read for this post. In general, why should I read the brainwashing material? It is like TV advertising. It is intended to get into your brain and your mind and influence you whether you know what is going on or not.
Also, if a patient visits the dentist and says that he does not smoke, would the dentist note the stains of his teeth and say to himself that this person is telling lies? Would he then call that person out and tell him that he is a liar? Would he throw that person out of the surgery, after giving him a leaflet? How many patients chuck that leaflet straight in the bin without reading it? My thinking is that going to the dentist is traumatic enough without reading bumph.
But it goes further, does it not? I wonder if tobacco control realises that it is making a fool of itself? Every step it has taken in the recent past has been silly, and everyone know that it is silly. PP? Silly. Hospital grounds bans? Silly. Is it any wonder that head of the WHO has once again resurrected the taxation trick:
WHO: Stepped up government tax action needed to curb tobacco epidemic
7 July 2015
“Raising taxes on tobacco products is one of the most effective – and cost-effective – ways to reduce consumption of products that kill, while also generating substantial revenue,” says Dr Margaret Chan, WHO Director-General.”
[H/T Rose and Frank Davis]
Simply translated: “Smack the poorest people hardest”.
Oh, and this is the woman who is the subject of this:
Which, Rose, leads inexorably to:
WHO ‘unfit for health emergencies’
The Ebola crisis proves the World Health Organization (WHO) lacks the “capacity and culture” to deal with global health emergencies, says a damning independent report, commissioned by the WHO itself.
[H/T nisakiman on Frank Davis’s blog]
Chan, the woman in question, thought it more important to attend the tobacco control meeting in Moscow than to attend to her duties regarding ebola. The toll of deaths from ebola has now reached 11,000. I suppose that those deaths, here and now, count as nothing compared with the theoretical billion, billion, billion lives which will not be infinite as a result of the pleasure of smoking.
A 90 year-old non-smoking teetotaller, who has watched his weight and exercised every day, lies in a nursing home cot. Next to him is an 80 year-old who smoked, drank, wenched, gambled, ate and was merry. The 80 year-old turns to the 90 year old and asks, “What does it feel like to be dying from nothing?” What would a non-smoking, teetotal ebola victim say to Ms Chan.
But nothing will change because these people have, somehow, raised themselves up to be Gods. Even if he wanted to, or dared to try, would Cameron be able to do anything at all about the UN and the WHO? Would he? Funnily enough, if he had the courage, he could ‘do a Greece’. He could say, “We will not pay a penny until a ‘full public enquiry’ has been conducted into every aspect of the WHO”. He could, but he will not. I don’t know why he will not since it would save around a billion pounds per an. Chuck in de-funding the tobacco control FCTC gravy train, and that becomes 2 billion. How about the IPCC (Climate Control)? Another billion.
Am I exaggerating when a say a billion each? Well, yes, directly, but not if you consider the ‘knock on effects’. Throw a million pounds into the streets and people will pick that money up. Assuming that they will spend it, say on cups of coffee and fags, those people who provide the coffee and fags will also spend the windfall, perhaps on holidays. The providers of holidays will themselves spend that money on, perhaps, new cars. And so on and so on.
The effect of the windfall repeats and repeats, but it is like the spread of a wave when a stone is thrown into a pond – as the wave spreads, it becomes weaker and weaker, but it can also be reflected backwards! The word for that effect is ‘circulation’ – circulation of money.
But what if the reverse occurs? Suppose that a ‘standing wave’ of money circulation is suddenly stopped? The reverberations will be the opposite of ‘the windfall affect’.
I am convinced that the fortunes of the Island of Mallorca suffered just such an affect. A few years ago, most hotels in Mallorca operated all year round. Apartments were more subtly affected. There came a point where Thomson holidays took out the Balearics from their ‘winter sun’ brochure. According to a friend who owned a bar in Magalluf, that was devastating. Clearly, he had a much better understanding of the economics of that situation than I had. Thomson holidays was big in Mallorca. When it withdrew its aircraft and booking system, the affect of the loss of business rippled throughout Mallorca.
That affect was bad enough, but then came the smoking ban – more ripples.
Now, almost all the hotels in Mallorca are closed from November to May. And yet, the island is just as pleasant a place it be in December/January as it has always been, and was for many older people who could afford winter prices but not summer prices. Even then, the town was still good fun. The smoking ban came at the worst possible moment in the island’s fortunes, driving down the ripple even more.
So what of Greece’s predicament?
In the first place, we must not expect mass starvation and a spread of ebola-type viruses, although that might occur. Clearly, even if such events occurred, it would be because, a) the Greeks have disobeyed the New Aristocracy, and, b) there are still a lot of smokers in Greece. Clearly, as portrayed in the NHS leaflet, smoking can affect blood-flow to the gums. Clearly, it must also affect blood-flow to the brain, and thus render Einstein and all the other great thinkers stupid.
I wonder if it is possible to find a drug which stops ageing after, say, the age of 45, give or take a bit? Would that not be wonderful? Smoking and drinking might effect one’s longevity, but only after 1000 years or so. Someone wrote a story based upon just that idea. A ‘Professor’ discovered just such a drug via experiments upon his own body. The affect was that he did not age at all. Unfortunately, he had trouble reproducing the drug. The Elite paid billions for laboratories. He was trying his best, but he was in no hurry because he was, himself, immortal. He was in no hurry.
We might contrast that story with the haste of TC to get laws passed before the shit hits the fan. For example, it would behove Greece to kick every impediment to their tourist trade into touch. “Are you a smoker? COME TO GREECE! ENJOY!” Sooner or later, the shit will hit the fan, and, as happened with Prohibition in the USA, the edifice will collapse.
In the meantime, we must continue to harry and ridicule the Fanatics wherever they rear up. “Like licking an ashtray” Who licks ashtrays? “Smells like an ashtray”. Tobacco ash has no smell.
There is a ‘consultation’ about implementing the Tobacco Control Directive. I shall not respond, nor should anyone else. We have gone beyond authority. We are ‘leading beyond authority’. We have become the ‘New Common Purpose’. Each and every one of us will defy, defy and defy, in our own ways, and we shall continue to do so. We shall not allow ourselves to be made miserable, but we shall still defy. If you can venture to a foreign place and buy ‘tobacco products’ cheap, do so. At the same time, take advantage of offers of leaf on the internet, and, at the same time, grow your own stuff. Above all, do not be afraid. That is what the propagandists rely upon. It is not easy to not be afraid. It helps to imagine the worst case scenario – what would TC gain by raiding my house and ripping up my plants? The answer is nothing. In fact, the answer is in the negative – it would cost more to mount such a raid than the value of my plants. Further, there is no certainty that I would then buy taxed tobacco. NO WAY!
Is that why the Fanatics want to ban ecigs? It is a simple idea but an attractive one. It has nothing to do with health, but entirely to do with POWER.