How Have The Zealots Got Away With Second Hand Tobacco Smoke Danger For So Long?

I heard about the Grand Canyon helicopter crash today. I have not read the detail, but I understand that there was one British person on board.

It is all very sad, but I cannot help but be concerned about the emphasis, in the media, upon the ONE British person. It is almost as though he/she was more important than the others. The weird thing is that the concentration upon Brits involved in disasters seems to be overwhelmingly prevalent whenever a disaster occurs. “Thousands killed in Tsunami: ten Brits unaccounted for” is the sort of headline of which I speak.

But the sad thing is that it does get to you, if you are a Brit. I wonder why. I cannot help but feel that the reason is, “There but for the grace of God, …..” merely because I, being a Brit, could have been one of the missing, merely because I am a Brit.

It is all utter nonsense, of course, but that is what our emotions and imaginations do.

So we have a smoking ban in private property which is a ‘public’ place. How can you best avoid questions of whether or not the SHS is dangerous? Simples. Ensure that everyone talks about the iniquity of describing private property as ‘public’. No one notices the lack of any real danger in SHS, even for a full time employee in a pub. Further,  the FACTS can be deflected by the encouragement of discussions about ventilation and extraction. Those aspects too, distract attention from the harmlessness of SHS.

It is very hard to avoid being distracted. Perhaps the epitome of distraction is illustrated here:

Snowdon does not pick up the blatant error which manifests itself in the first few lines of his quote from the article. The error is this:

The specific harm cited has almost always been well-documented health hazards caused by secondhand smoke.”

Erm, where are the ‘well-documented health hazards caused by SHS’? There are none. There are none, and never have been any such ‘well-documented health hazards’. I think that some Zealot made a mistake a few years ago by estimating that the number of deaths from SHS among bar workers in the UK was 50 per an. Is that not similar to the missing Brits in the tsunami which killed thousands?

Not that long ago, TV programmes would have created comical effects of smoking deaths where Sid James et al, in the ‘Carry On…’ series,  would have depicted a pub, full of tobacco smoke, where sundry ‘clients’ gasped and fell down dead, but Sid et al carried on chatting about ‘the match’.

It is a pity that such satirical programmes died out precisely when TobCON reared its ugly head. I doubt that such satires would be permitted these days in the MSM. They are too much ‘under control’.

I watched a very interesting programme this evening about Julius Caesar. It upset some of my previous understandings, even though I studied Roman History as a student. It was a long time ago, but I have more than a suspicion that the the FACTS placed before me, as a student, were very disputable. Bias, you see.

One of the important FACTS about Caesar is that his original description of his campaigns in Gaul (France) have survived. Find the programme on BBC1 if you are interested.

Where are the studies which tracked SHS and morbidity and mortality? There are none. It is impossible for there to be any, because birds fly about in the air, and fish swim in the sea. Birds do not swim in the sea, and fish do not fly through the air. Their natures do not allow it.

In view of the fact that we smokers have no fighting organisation, other than the wimp which calls itself ‘Forest’ (not that it does not try its best), then we cannot expect other than persecution. That is how it has always been.

The answer is peace. It is not-negotiable limits on SHS harm. Those harms must be spelt out in great detail, just as Doll’s Doctors Study spelt out the harms of heavy smoking.

All the rest, as regards SHS, is lies.



6 Responses to “How Have The Zealots Got Away With Second Hand Tobacco Smoke Danger For So Long?”

  1. elenamitchell Says:

    They haven’t even proved that first hand smoke causes Cancer, let alone SHS.

  2. Timothy Goodacre Says:

    Yes Junicsn you csn learn a lot reading De Bello Gallico in the original Latin. In my opinion by far the best historian of Rome is Ronald Syme. Certainly not Mary Beard.

    • junican Says:

      I may have been able to read the original in Latin when I was around 16, but I doubt it now. The programme said that he wrote his ‘reports’ in the third person (“Caesar advanced,,,,,etc”) so that they could be read out loud in the Forum. He was a master of propaganda!

  3. garyk30 Says:

    It is all very sad, but I cannot help but be concerned about the emphasis, in the media, upon the ONE British person.

    In their eyes, one death can be a tragedy;but, a thousand deaths a mere statistic.

    Good news is seldom printed or on tv, that is why one never sees an honest reporting of smoking’s probability/possibility of harm.

    • junican Says:

      Very true, but you will often see the rescue of a child portrayed as an act of heroism. How often do we see children being carried out of buildings after an earthquake? Why not the parents first?
      I call it ’emotional blackmail’. What else is SHS danger but emotional blackmail?

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: