The Nicotine Connundrum

Big Pharma sells nicotine patches, gums and inhalers. According the the MHRA in the UK, and the FDA in the USA, those things are harmless. Why so? Surely, since they contain nicotine, they are likely to be a gateway to smoking? But we go further. You can buy the patches and gums without a prescription, which means that you can buy as much as you like. They also claim that it does not matter if you use patches and smoke at the same time. As I understand it, kids (aka ‘young adults’) are not bared from buying patches, etc. There may well be rules, but can anyone see a chemist refusing to sell patches to a young man/woman who looks old enough? Will the chemist demand to see proof of age?

I have just been to Ebay and pretended to want to buy Niquitin. No problem whatsoever. No questions at all. Nothing about age, blood pressure, etc. Anyone can buy that dangerous substance, nicotine. Which just goes to show how much of the waffling about ‘nicotine addiction’ is hypocrisy. I could buy dozens of packets and stick all the patches all over my body all at once. Nobody would give a damn.

What is it with politicians?

Recent under-secretaries of State for Health have all been young women. They have cocked-up again and again. Milton MP was the first that I know of. She cocked-up big time when she declared that the UK Gov was under a legal obligation to do what the FCTC said. What Bullshit! Nothing in the FCTC Treaty is a demand. One of the oft repeated phrases in the FCTC is ‘according to national law’ (words to that effect). In other words, it is up to Governments to decide what laws to create. The FCTC did not impose anything. She was photographed again and again with ASH ET AL. She was unceremoniously sacked and wept. The next one was Soubry MP. She did not know what was in the TPD but committed the UK to it. She too was ‘moved on’ and has since been sacked by PM May.

Why are they always young women? It is not just about smoking. Why are they always young women? Could there be some sort of genetic thing involved? The emphasis seems to be on children’s health, and who are the people who are most likely to be easily swayed when it comes to children’s health than young women?

And yet it is people like Cameron, Brown, May, who appointing young women to be under-secretary of State for Health. Why have we not recently had an old man in that position? The (fake) message ‘for the children’ MUST be accepted by these appointees because they are women. They can be soaked with ‘for the children’ propaganda and have no alternative but to go along with it. They really do have NO alternative. Otherwise, they would be castigated as being un-woman.

I believe that, when the PM appoints people to positions, her first concern is with the high offices of State – Health Sec, Foreign Sec, etc. Lower positions are not important to her. So anyone will do. Who then decides? The probability is that a person will be recommended. Who recommends? It is not unlikely that the ‘advisers’ from the Civil Service will ‘recommend’. “So-and-so is pretty solid. She is voluble and has a good memory. And, she has no qualifications whatsoever other than being female” What can go wrong?

Thus, policy decided by a process of ‘acceptability to the population in general’, backed up by junk science, gets articulated by those women in Parliament, and gets passed.

There is no other explanation for the disaster of ‘plain packaging’.

I must explain why it is a disaster.

It has nothing to do with whether it worked or not. That is a distraction. The critical thing is that it destroyed the ability of consumers to choose as they wish. I am an old adult. If I wish to choose a particular brand of cigs because of the nice colours of the packets, I should be free to do so. Was it Milton MP or Soubry MP who said that she chose to smoke Du Maurier cigs because she liked the green packs?

The disaster lies in the uniformity: the ‘level playing field’; the greyness; the bossiness; the medical porn which has replaced art; etc; but, most of all, the failure of Democracy. Modern Government is not intended to CONTROL citizens. It is intended to free them from oppression. No Government can pass a law which forbids publicans to provide facilities for smokers and call itself ‘democratic’. You see, the idea of a ‘democracy’ DOES NOT mean the tyranny of the majority. It means that people can do what they wish to do, provided that what they do does not greatly damage the ‘demos’ (the people as a whole). Thus, democracy ALLOWS variations. It is not a tyranny.

So when Parliament permitted the Zealots to dictate that pubs could not have smoking rooms, it FAILED to do what it was created for. It permitted tyranny rather than opposing it.

That disaster, in terms of democratic reasoning, has spawned all sorts of similar tyrannies. It is very odd that Politicians fall for the hype again and again and again. What are they afraid of? When the Gov decided that everyone who tells a Supermarket delivery system to use plastic bags is destroying the planet, why did it not outlaw telling supermarkets to deliver in plastic bags?

===

Over the last few decades, Government has got itself into a glutinous mess. According to a recent survey, people see it as reasonable for smokers to acquire their supplies from ‘sources’ which are not taxed, because cigs are taxed so highly. What can Gov do about the ‘tax avoidance’? The only thing that it can do is spend money on interrupting supplies. That expenditure, by virtue of the enormous problem which it itself has created, is ENORMOUS. Thousands of Customs Officers need to be paid just to check that a person does not have 5 x 200 cigs in his baggage.

That is what Tobacco Control want.

But it will not work and never has done. The blatherings in the MSM about seizures is almost certain to be exaggerated. Does the reporter actually check the supposed seizure? Of course not! He/she accepts what he/she is told.

All the above is about ‘public perception’, which is easily manipulated. How sad is that? How can ‘public perception’ be so easily manipulated?

The truth is that ‘public perception’, for the most part, does not exist. The General Public does not give a damn whether or not there are smoking rooms. The General Public does not give a damn.

===

Thus, the General Public is not the slightest bit interested nicotine. Nicotine problems will not play a part in the USA Presidential Election. Why not, since smoking bans have played havoc throughout the land?

And yet the Academics say that it is all about the vile effects of nicotine.

I detest them.

 

9 Responses to “The Nicotine Connundrum”

  1. castello2 Says:

    They are disgusting! At least some of the fools are getting exposed in the UK? I hope. We have a long way to go here in the states. Pharma does have magic nicotine I’ve heard.😉

    • Rose Says:

      More magic nicotine in vegetables.

      The Nicotine Content of Common Vegetables
      1993

      To the Editor: The presence of nicotine and its metabolite cotinine in the body fluids of nonsmokers is usually taken as evidence of exposure to environmental tobacco smoke. Recently, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention studied 800 people, both smokers and nonsmokers, all of whom tested positive for urinary continine.

      There is considerable evidence that nicotine is present in certain human foods, especially plants from the family Solanaceae (such as potatoes, tomatoes, and eggplant). Castro and Monji;` Sheen,-‘ ” and Davis et al. have reported on the nicotine content of foods and drinks’: We have been able to confirm some of their findings in our laboratory. Gas chromatography and mass spectroscopy-5 were used to determine the nicotine and cotinine content of common vegetables and black tea available from a local supermarket. The vegetables analyzed were tomatoes, potatoes, cauliflower, and green peppers. They were thoroughly washed with tap water, as is done for human consumption. All the vegetables were treated in a similar manner so that any contamination from the tap water would be equally applicable. The vegetables (including their skins) were diced, pureed in a blender, prepared,” and assayed-. Cotinine could not be detected in any of the samples. Measurable amounts of nicotine were found in some of the vegetables.

      In indoor air, a low concentration of nicotine from tobacco smoke is about 1 gg per cubic meter. A person weighing 70 kg with a tidal volume of 4 ml per kilogram of body weight breathing 20 times per minute would exchange 5.6 liters of air per minute. If we assume that nicotine is completely absorbed from the lungs, it would take 179 minutes, or about 3 hours, of breathing in an environment with minimal smoke to absorb 1 ug of nicotine. Table 1 shows the amount of each vegetable by wet weight one would have to eat to obtain an amount of nicotine comparable to that of a passive smoker. Of course, the route of absorption is quite different in eating as compared with inhaling. Furthermore, if the vegetables are thoroughly cooked, the nicotine will diffuse into the cooking water and less will be ingested. It appears that the dietary intake of nicotine in nonsmokers may be of practical importance in the interpretation of the role of passive smoke inhalation when one is determining nicotine and cotinine levels in body fluids.”

      Vegetable Nicotine in ng/g g per 1µg nicotine
      Cauliflower 16.8 59.5
      Eggplant (Aubergine) 100.0 10
      Potatoes 7.1 140
      Green tomatoes 42.8 23.4
      Ripe tomatoes 4.3 233.0
      Pureed tomatoes 52.0 19.2
      http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/extract/329/6/437

      Didn’t half make them jump.

      More on the Nicotine Content of Vegetables
      http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199311183292118

      Dietary nicotine: Won’t mislead on passive smoking. . .: New insight into myocardial protection
      http:// http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/308/6920/61/c

  2. Nicotine Addiction. Smoking, E-Cigarettes & You. | Vaping Links And More Says:

    […] “It has the potential to lead to one of the greatest public health breakthroughs in human history by fundamentally changing the forecast of a billion cigarette-caused deaths this century.” Rethinking Nicotine: The Role of Public Health Law in Ending an Epidemic Added 10/20/16 from Bolton Smokers Club: The Nicotine Connundrum […]

  3. Rose Says:

    At least now we know officially that secondhand smoke doesn’t cause heart attacks.

    2016
    “Smoking bans were not associated with acute myocardial infarction or heart failure hospitalizations”
    http://mcr.sagepub.com/content/early/2016/09/12/1077558716668646.abstract

    And even the most devious and persistent tobacco controllers admit that nicotine is not unique to tobacco.

    Simon Chapman

    “Unless in the extremely unlikely event that residents burn copious quantities of solanaceous vegetables (aubergine, tomato) which contain small amounts of nicotine, tobacco is going to be the only source of nicotine in homes.

    “The omission of this information in such reports risks harming the credibility of tobacco control.”
    http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/20/1/e1/reply

    ———-

    Dietary nicotine: Won’t mislead on passive smoking…: New insight into myocardial protection
    J L Repace 1994

    If you don’t know “Tornado Repace” here he is on the BBC news pages in 2003 touting for a ban.

    Passive smoking ‘killing workers’

    “The study found that around 900 office workers, 165 bar workers and 145 manufacturing workers die each year as a direct result of breathing in other people’s tobacco smoke at work.
    It also found that there are three times as many deaths a year from passive smoking at work as there are from workplace injuries.

    It is estimated that three million people in the UK are exposed to second-hand smoke while at work.
    Study was carried out by James Repace, who has previously conducted research into passive smoking for the California Department of Health.

    He said: “More people died in 2002 from passive smoking at work in the UK than were killed by the Great London smog of 1952.”
    http: //news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2925633.stm

    “The claim that a building which allows smoking requires “tornado-level ventilation” in order for it to be made “safe” for nonsmokers was first made by James Repace, a prominent and fanatical anti-smoking activist since the 1970s.”
    http: //www.velvetgloveironfist.com/index.php?page_id=38

    • junican Says:

      Repace is old hat. He fulfilled his purpose. He was a minion, just as Chapman and Glantz are minions. The phrase ‘tornado-level ventilation’ shows just how detached from reality people like him were.

  4. prog Says:

    Not sure one could describe Anna Soubry as young. Thick would be more apt.

  5. smokingscot Says:

    O/T

    In case you missed it, seems BAT has come to the rescue of Deutsche Bank, who are the lead adviser in their offer to take over the remaining shares Reynolds (they produce Camel as well as Pall Mall).

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-21/deutsche-bank-gets-a-much-needed-boost-working-for-big-tobacco

    Astonishingly the market didn’t like this one bit with the share price down by almost 3%

    http://www.lse.co.uk/SharePrice.asp?shareprice=BATS&share=BR.AMER.TOB.

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: