‘Calling out’ the Zealots in Tobacco Control

I mentioned in last night’s post how a Zealot became hysterical when she was asked ‘whose children’ she was referring to when she demanded that ‘our’ children should be protected from SHS. The likes of ASH ET AL, and Arnott are very fond of manipulating words and phrases. For example, they might say, “We are worried that…” Who are the “WE”? It is likely that the “We” does not refer to the population at large, but to those people who rely upon people continuing to smoke to provide them with a continuing gravy train.

But there is an even more logically destructive phrase, which is, “There is a worry that…” I have seen that phrase used again and again. “There is a worry that ecigs might tempt youths to progress to smoking”. What we should be aware of is that the phrase “There is a worry that…” encourages the ‘Prevention Principle’.Damn it! the correct words will not come into my mind. It is the ‘just in case’ principle. What is the word?

The fact is that, generally speaking, there is no ‘worry’ at all. Worry is an emotion. No non-smoker actually worries about the fate of smokers.

That reminds me of the hysteria about the prevalence of homosexuality some decades ago. I remember thinking, “The more homos there are, the more girls there are available for me”. My thought was ‘disgusting, filthy, stinking’ – but it was true, sort of. The fact was that there were not many homos around, and, if there were, then they existed outside our normal heterosexual activities such as groping on the dance floor.

“There is a worry that….” is the idea that costs us all a fortune in taxes and preventative measures. Imagine the RAF in WW2 being denied the Spitfire because there was a ‘worry that…’!

All the blatantly  anti-science blather about ecig danger falls into the category of ‘worry that’ – emotion. But the emotion is fake. There are no realistic ‘worries’ in a scientific sense. There are no significant toxins or carcinogens in ecig liquids or their heated vapours.

I am a smoker, and I enjoy tobacco. I like to buy different tobaccos and experiment with blends. If ‘duty’ was demanded, I might well pay it – within reason.

I understand why the Zealots like Glantz and co hate the idea of ecigs. It is because ecigs have disrupted the UN, EU, FCTC, IPCC, One World Control.

Trump understands this. The simple ecig has thrown a spanner into the machine. Trump will build upon that to reconfigure the machine.

For be in no doubt that the UN in particular is a MACHINE.

Advertisements

5 Responses to “‘Calling out’ the Zealots in Tobacco Control”

  1. Lollylulubes Says:

    “No non-smoker actually worries about the fate of smokers.”
    Nail – head. So they have to pretend it’s about the cheeeldren, but it’s about money ($billions), budget deficits, protecting pharma’s profits, outdated and unworkable ideology and sheer ignorance in the case of the useful idiots.

    FYI: Precautionary principle

    • nisakiman Says:

      But more than that, it’s about the delicious sensation of imposing your own perspective on others by force. The self-righteous satisfaction that you are saving others from their misguided desires by making those desires painful, if not impossible to achieve. And failing that, removing any joy from the situation. Arnott & Co probably get positively orgasmic when they manage to impose another burden on the objects of their loathing.

      But for their own good; of course. And the cheeldren.

    • junican Says:

      The damned word would not pop into my head! ‘Precautionary’.

      The removal of pleasure is pillar of alcohol control, as well as tobacco. The ‘playbook’ is exactly the same – remove pleasure as a factor. But there is a big problem for the anti-alcohol zealots, which is that booze is far more clearly pleasurable in itself than is tobacco. Also, ‘addiction’ in the form of ‘alcoholism’ is far clearer as regards alcohol than tobacco. Addiction to tobacco is far from clear since there are no physical symptoms in the form of ‘the shakes’. That is why the zealots can claim that even one cig will hook a youth for ever.

  2. Radical Rodent Says:

    “precautionary principle”

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: