Unless I am mistaken, I am seeing more and more criticism of ‘unaccountable authority’. Readers will know what I mean by ‘unaccountable authority’. That phrase most particularly applies to the decision of the WHO, at their convention in Moscow, to exclude media reporters and such. An amusing point has been raised about the next convention in India, which suggests that agencies of the Indian Government will be excluded because they have not gone far enough in ceasing to confer with tobacco companies. Or something like that.
Actually, I am a bit confused. Is the next COP (Conference of the FCTC parties) in India or in Khasikstan, or somewhere else? I get lost. There seem to be so many of these jollies, all over the world, subsidised by Governments and Big Pharma, that I lose track. Further, I lose track of who these ‘parties’ are. They are supposed to be Governments, but they seem to have become Representatives of The Tobacco Control Industry. Actual Governments do not seem to be at all interested.
Does anyone know what is going on? Who goes to these conventions and who pays? No doubt the honourable and most high CEO of ASH, Deb Arnott (I forgot her name and had to search the ASH site for ages before I found it) will be in attendance. Who will pay? Will the PM, Theresa May, permit the expenditure of paying for Arnott to attend, and will she permit the Health Minister to attend? If not, why not? After all, it is not that long ago that a previous Health Minister stated that the UK was LEGALLY BOUND to enact FCTC demands, and EU anti-smoker demands.
It is not difficult, although you have to think, to see that ALL the hatred of ‘smoking’, eminating from ASH ET AL, is actually hatred of ‘smokers’. It is odd that it has taken such a long time for that realisation to appear. It has always been obvious from the beginning.
There would be no ‘smoking’ without ‘smokers’. If ‘smoking’ is disgusting, then it absolutely must follow that ‘smokers’ are disgusting.
When you think about it, it is very odd that the act of inhaling tobacco smoke was called ‘smoking’. If I set fire to a piece of paper, then smoke will inevitably ensue. I would reasonably say that the lit paper was ‘smoking’ – producing smoke. Somehow, over the last several decades, things that use to ‘smoke’ no longer do so. The only things that ‘smoke’ are human beings who inhale tobacco smoke. EH UP! Do you see that!!! It is the lit tobacco which smokes, and we inhale that smoke!
So, ‘smokers’ are bonfires, ovens, saucepans, burn toast, lit cigarettes. People who inhale that smoke are not the actual ‘smokers’. It is the fires which are the ‘smokers’. Even chimneys are not ‘smokers’ – it is the fires which produce the smoke which comes out of the chimneys which are the ‘smokers’. Do I recall the words ‘smoke stacks’?
Am I just engaging in semantics? I think not, and this is revealed by the disputes about ecigs. Not one person with any intelligence at all would call ‘vaping’ ‘smoking’. Why? Because there is no smoke at all. None at all. Nothing is burning. And yet it is common to see the phrase ‘smoking an ecig’.
We have reached a point of ‘Alice in Wonderland’ nonsense and contradictions, and much of it is because of the conflation of ‘smoking’ and ‘smoker’.
But I must regress a little. It is not unnatural for our language to be somewhat inaccurate. After all, the Romans, in their language, had only three degrees of separation – long, longer, and longest. The reverse was short, shorter and shortest. Of course, they moderated what was ‘longer’ etc by other phrases.
But propaganda holds sway in the TC world. When the Zealots say that the word ‘smoking’ means only ‘the enjoyment of tobacco’, then all other meanings of the word ‘smoking’ go out of sight. Burning wood produces smoke, but it does not ‘smoke’.
We have seen the deforming of our language in many ways. For example, the constant repetition of ‘overweight or obese’ comes to mean that anyone who either, a) exceeds the mean weight of the general population by even a gram, or b) is ‘overweight- and may be ‘obese’, or not obese. But the phrasing suggests that anyone who is above the mean weight is likely to be obese. That is an abuse of science as well as our language. ‘Overweight’ is one thing; ‘Obese’ is a different thing.
I have noticed that, since the Brexit vote, the ‘comfort zone’ of many organisations which rely upon ‘Big Government’ is beginning to disolve. Only a short time has elapsed since ‘Brexit’, and yet the effect on those organisations can already be perceived. Their ‘power-base’ is fading away. Also, oddly, the ‘power-base’ of the UN and WHO, etc, is also beginning to fade away, due to Brexit.
Brexit has been the catalyst which will bugger up all the top-down plans of the Elite. Form the moment that the result of the Brexit vote was known, the UK was not obliged to enact ANY previous EU directives. Thus, the anti-ecig regs in the TPD are rendered null and void. Only if the Health Dept of the UK Gov decides that ecigs must be standardised so that only Big Pharma (or Big Tobacco) benefits, financially, can any ‘regulations’ make sense. The sensible option is ‘let it develop’.
There is no need, as regards ecigs, for massive regulation. People inhale ‘flavours’ all the time. Such inhilations are perfectly normal and natural. When you smell a nice smell, you inhale the air which contains the smell. Thus, ecig fluids need only to be sensible. It is hardly likely that ecig fluid manufacturers would add arsenic to their fluids.
Progress demands honest. Without honest their is only more of the same.