When Theory and Reality Diverge

Once upon a time in America, there were great evils in the land. There were devils incarnate. And they were ‘incarnate’, meaning devils ‘made flesh’. There were wizards and witches – mostly witches. There was a public outcry – a sort of ‘Public Moral Health Survey’, and many a witch was revealed. The witches were hunted down by ‘public moral health ‘experts’ and destroyed. The same had happened in England previously, and the methods employed to seek out the witches were much the same. You could, it you wished to, describe in modern language, the methods as ‘a template’.  A great success was declared, and America was saved.

In the early 1900s, the ‘devils incarnate’ reappeared in the form of tobacco and alcohol manufacturers and purveyors. They were sapping the moral health of the nation and had to be exorcised. Further, many folk had been invaded by the devils and had been rendered into sub-humans. Such sub-humans had to be stopped from breeding, and so they were identified and castrated. Later, in Germany, the logical progression was pursued, and the sub-humans were not only castrated but eliminated. All of these ideas and actions were  well received by the rulers (politicians) of the day, even though, due having been taken over themselves by the devils, they themselves enjoyed the morally corrupting substances of alcohol and tobacco. They banned the substances for others whilst enjoying them themselves.

===

When prohibition ended, it was because the devils had been seen to be non-existent. There were no devils. Or rather, it was much more profitable money-wise to pretend that there were no such devils. Various Foundations, like Rockefeller, did not lose the faith. They bided their time. Sure enough, the opportunity arose. WW2 provided the opportunity. Rich and powerful nations were exhausted. A little manipulation here and there enabled STUDIES around 1950, initially using foundation funds to get them started, but grasping the teat of tax monies by hook or by crook. Thus, the Institute of Tropical Hygiene became the perfect misnomer to instigate Hill and Doll’s Doctors Study. But before the Doctors Study, they had performed the Hospital Study as a ‘proof of concept’ preparation. Despite the fact that the vast majority of people smoked tobacco, the Hospital Study, conducted over a year or so, showed that more lung cancer victims were smokers than non-smokers. That study result provided the initial evidence necessary to justify the great cost of the Doctors Study. It was initially intended to last for twenty years but was extended at a later date. What we can take from all this is that ‘the devils’ changed from being supernatural to being profit-orientated tobacco companies. Profit became the new devil. Devilish tobacco companies used spells, in the form of adverts, to ensnare babies into their hell of tobacco addiction.

===

And so it came to pass that a new form of Prohibition replaced the failed previous form. But the new form still had the expectations of the old form. Only the presentation changed. Instead of ‘morality health’, it became ‘health morality’. That is, instead of the ‘Sin’ being indulging in immoral acts, the sin became indulging in unhealthy acts.

===

That is all very lovely, but the shit hits the fan when ‘the devils’ have to give way to reality. For example, despite the reduction of smoking prevalence, the incidence of lung cancer deaths is still not a lot less than it was 20, 30 years ago. I am just talking here, but I have the figures on my computer.

Anomalies keep appearing, and the Tobacco Control Industry is in a panic. Ecigs have changed the scenario and the Profiteers in TC are worried.

===

We are all becoming aware of the ‘cognitive dissonance’ which surrounds us. For example, some paid people at Sheffield Uni have some sort of theory that minimum unit pricing of alcohol will actually stop ‘poor, heavy, problem drinkers’ from suffering from ‘health inequalities’. There is the devil, appearing once again. The devil is ‘health inequalities’.

====

The Theory is that everyone is a standard human being who will live forever if everyone obeys. The reality is that the studies are false and that everyone will die in due course.

It is a matter of fact that the Doctors Study was continued for some 50 years, and then it was terminated. But what was happening is that all the doctors were dying. It was not in the interests of Doll, Peto etc for it to be revealed that everyone dies for one reason or another, and that almost all deaths are ‘tobacco related’ whether the deceased smoked or not.

===

But even modern day politicians fall for the confidence trick. Is it not hard to believe that our elected representatives will not baulk at the idea of destroying the ecig industry? Will the majority of them not say, “Nonsense! The TPD Article 20 is nonsense”. No, they will not. They will enact the TPD directive. They will accept the theory and ignore reality.

===

Is that also not true of the Cameron support of the EU? I’m not going to go there tonight. Suffice to say that Treaties which advantage the people who engage in the treaties are fine, but, once the treaties ceases to be advantageous, to either party, then they must be and are abandoned. They no longer exist IN REALITY.

===

The ‘Reality’ is that the EU is a ‘Mental Construct’. It does not really exist. What exists is a monstrous bacterium which preys on its host. The host is the people of Europe. That is the ‘Reality’. The ‘Theory’ is still philosophically tenable, but collapses when reality bites.

===

We must exit. But it is important to understand what we are exiting from. We are exiting from a group-think that ‘one size fits all’, ‘level playing field’, ‘standardisation’, ‘Big Industry Lobby Groups’, The WHO and the IPCC and the UN Unknowns. Those groups are BIG, and unaccounted for in the EU.

It is horrific that the UN has itself become nothing more than a puritanical lobby group.  But what of the World Bank? What is it, and who created it and why? Who controls it? What does Cameron know about it?

===

Reality and Theory diverge when theoretical plans fail. I see a future where politicians, especially MPs, are very seriously subjected to investigation.

====

Whatever. It is unlikely that the Camerons of this world will be held to account. They never are.

 

Advertisements

6 Responses to “When Theory and Reality Diverge”

  1. Smoking Lamp Says:

    I agree “tobacco control” is based on a confidence trick. They even admit as much themselves. The problem is the public is unaware that they have been suckered and the politicians can’t admit as much let they look like fools.

    • junican Says:

      True, but an awful lot of the MPs who passed the smoking bans are no longer MPs. That is part of the step by step approach. Every few years, a new set of MPs is there, ready to be exploited. Why do they fall for it? I suspect that it is ‘the feel-good good factor’. It is indeed a moral issue and not a health issue.

  2. elenamitchell Says:

    I don’t care. I live in Europe, although it wasn’t my first choice. I ran out of money on my way to New Zealand.
    But France is okay. It’s bloody light years better than Britain. They are at least still polite here.
    Okay, you can’t smoke just any old where, but they do try to make outdoors smoking vaguely pleasant with awnings and such. They know that they are all going down the pan if they don’t.

    • junican Says:

      Very true. Most of our pubs were way, way too slow to accommodate their smoking patrons. They must have believed ASH’s propaganda that there were millions waiting for pubs to be filled with pure air. They are, and that is all they are filled with.

  3. Roberto Says:

    Yes, it may take some time but sooner or later reality overcomes myths, even if the latter are peddled by powerful bureaucracies. Think of mccarthyism in the 50’s in the USA: it was overwhelming and super-powerful but ran out of steam and fell by its own hubris and excesses. It is a good analogy because tobacco smoking has been subjected by TC (a powerful bureaucracy) to a similar fear mongering as communism was by mccarthyists (another powerful bureaucracy). The end of mccarthyism did not make communism more appealing to the the public in the USA (which remained anti-communist), but the public realized that mccarthyism was a worse option than tolerating a communist minority. I venture saying that something like this may happen with smoking in the future: the ideologues of TC will loose the war against the pragmatists. Tobacco smoking indoors will remain very restricted, but outdoor smoking tolerated, the “quit or die” approach and the “de-normalization” will be slowly phased out and replaced by a “harm reduction” strategy (it is starting to happen with e-cigs). In the end, I (and millions like me) will continue smoking regardless of these bureaucracies. Maybe in 30 years there will be a renaissance of tobacco smoking.

    • junican Says:

      I agree with most of what you say except the 30 years. I don’t want to seem to be thinking wishfully, but I think that the indoor smoking bans are much more fragile than you think. In the same way that alcohol prohibition in the USA collapsed quite suddenly, so could smoking bans. They are fragile because, when they were introduced, they depended upon junk science, parliamentary trickery, propaganda, the ‘moral feel-good factor’ as mentioned above, and an anti-big business attitude among Labour MPs.

      All of those factors are at risk for TobCon. They could all tumble at once. Who knows how it will happen?

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: