How Tobacco Control has Contributed Substantially to the Obesity Epidemic and the Alcoholism Epidemic

A commenter to yesterday’s post made me realise just how true my heading is.

He said that most smokers now no longer go to the pub – they drink at home. I don’t know if national statistics have shown such a thing. They may have, but it all depends upon what questions are asked, and what people say in surveys. It is a well-known fact, I understand, that people under-report how much they eat, so it is not unlikely that they will under-report how much they drink. Before I started drinking substantially at home, it was comparatively easy to say how much I drank on average each week; all I had to do was multiply three by nine, which was my ‘normal’ intake each time I went to the pub – three pints. I suppose that I could add a couple more on Friday nights. But, now, I have no real idea. Perhaps more importantly, I have no wish to think about it. What does it matter?

But there is no doubt that very few smokers now go the pub. It is also true that many fewer non-smokers go to the pub. It is a matter of fact that some 17,000 pubs have closed since the smoking ban in England.

So the constant nagging by TC for the last several decades has frightened people sufficiently that they no longer avail themselves of the ‘appetite suppressing’ drug, nicotine. So they eat more – and more, and more. They cannot help themselves.

I can only quote my own experience. I enjoy my food very much, but I rarely feel hungry. That’s the whole point – I rarely feel hungry. Why do I rarely feel hungry, even though I enjoy my food and am physically quite active (you have to be when you are looking after a disabled person!)? It makes sense that my ‘nicotine habit’ suppresses my appetite, but does not stop me from enjoying my food.

So we see two effects of smoking propaganda and smoking bans. One, the incessant propaganda has caused obesity, and, two, smoking bans have caused people to drink at home more excessively than they would have otherwise.

If I stopped there, I would be behaving like TC in that I would advancing only ONE reason for this or that, and not including OTHER reasons. The reduction in the need for physical activity must ALSO contribute to obesity, but what about alcoholism?

The reality is that ‘youths’ (18 – 24) do not drink as much alcohol as they used to, but middle aged people drink more. That is what national statistics says. Is it not likely that the people most affected by smoking bans are middle-aged smokers who have become somewhat set in their ways? Those that have brought up their kids, are paying off their mortgages, are working in jobs with somewhat more responsibility, who would rather smoke and relax (and drink) at home than bother to go to boring pubs?

What is the answer?

I saw a piece tonight in the New York Times (I think) which complained that Trump, President Elect of the USA, was denigrating honest, investigative journalism. What a load of shit! We smokers all know that the New York Times has been promulgating anti-smoker propaganda for years! They headline the fear-mongering  blatherings of ‘Experts’ without any ‘investigation’ at all. The piece in question particularly talked about Trump’s disregard for ‘Climate Change’. How awful!

Trump seems to have embraced Social Media. He has bypassed the MSM, and the newspapers do not like it. They especially do not like being ignored by Trump. But they are blowing in the wind. Social media is here to stay, and there is nothing that politicians or newspapers can do about it. Scepticism is also here to stay.

Politicians, if they had any sense, would stop and reverse micro-management. Such management is very, very expensive. It is not a solution to move that micro-management to local authorities. There are simple answers – do not fix what is not broken. Fix those things which are broken. Fix especially the things which you yourself have broken.

One of the things that especially annoys me is the difficulty of reversing erroneous legislation. You would think that the Tories would reverse legislation which they opposed in Opposition, but they never do. Nor do Labour in the reverse situation. The inference is obvious – their opposition was manufactured. They really did not give a shit.

So we have a situation where the Press claims to be ‘courageous’, but is acquiescent; politicians claim to be ‘free-thinking’, but they are not. Social media is revealing those failings, faulty though Social Media might be.

It will take some time, but I am sure that,eventually, truth and facts will prevail.

 

Advertisements

6 Responses to “How Tobacco Control has Contributed Substantially to the Obesity Epidemic and the Alcoholism Epidemic”

  1. Vlad Says:

    Don’t know about alcoholism, but I think the rise in obesity and skyrocketing consumption of anti-depressives is in great part due to falling smoking rates. Instead of relaxing after a hard day’s work with a cigarette, cigar or pipe, in a pub or at home, people get prescriptions filled and pop pills. Very sad, the brainwashing that led to the current state of affairs.

  2. Some French bloke Says:

    Alongside obesity and alcoholism, neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer & Parkinson’s should also be thown into the equation. Tobacco smoking has popularly been known to halve the probability of such diseases happening, in addition to (maybe even as a result of) obviously being able to alleviate depression and stress.
    No doubt that sound prevention is better than cure, but just have a good look at the general picture sketched by Junican, Vlad, and myself, and you’ll see that politicised ‘prevention’ has been at least as bad as the disease itself that it was supposed, but dismally failed, to curb.
    We may learn whether those consequences were really ‘unintended’ if, and when, the zealots are prepared to at least ackowledge their existence, which is quite unlikely until they’re at last forcibly called to account.
    Health warning: don’t hold your breath!

    • junican Says:

      To Vlad and SFB. I have no doubt, in my mind, that that State demands have induced illnesses. I remember when the biggest butcher in our town hung rabbit carcasses on hooks on his veranda. Then, no one thought that the practice was odd. Now, there would be hysterics.

  3. artbylisabelle Says:

    Excellent article, as so many you have authored are. I can only think, that it’s the dark government forces we don’t see in any of the media that need to be lit up and exposed. To discover these covert evil-doers, we simply can follow the money. The many media mouth pieces indirectly or directly bribed (follow the money PHARMA), blast endless lies that negatively effect our health as you have pointed out, quite clearly, are who LOL W.H.O. and CDC, FDA, EPA all of them have constructed a narrative that is no better than the curtain, that the Wizard of Oz hid behind. They want us sick and taxed to death.

    • junican Says:

      I agree that there is a broader narrative out there of which tobacco control, global warming, obesity, etc are just instruments. What I find odd is how easily our elected representatives allow themselves to be drawn in. Or do they stand for election as a result of having been drawn in? It just seems very odd that, one minute they are decent enough people, and the next minute they are persecuting people.

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: