Shutting Down ‘Lifestyle Control’

More and more bloggers ‘of repute’ are pouring scorn on ‘Public Health England’ (and Scotland and Wales). At the heart of their scorn lies the simple premise that ‘whole population’ remedies do not work.

But, you might say, what about immunisation? Hasn’t immunisation prevented masses and masses of ill-health and deaths? Certainly it has, but the two situations are totally different. In the case of immunisation, the ‘jab’ or whatever has been proven to kill the pathogen, and, in many cases, to provide immunity for years and years, if not for life. A person travelling to a country where malaria is a problem, would be stupid not to have the anti-malaria jab. Of course, there are always exceptions – people made ill by the jab – but they are rare and do not detract from the value of the jab.

On the other hand, imagine that there was no anti-malaria jab. Imagine that the medics were claiming that there was a massive epidemic of malaria throughout the world caused by people going to ‘malaria infested’ countries. Also, imagine that the solution that they proposed was that an extra tax was placed upon all travellers to anywhere by air, land or sea, to pay for the costs of the malaria ‘epidemic’. Oh, and the extra tax would deter people from travelling to malaria infested countries.

That imagining is not dissimilar to ‘whole population’ remedies. An alcohol unit price will deter alcoholics from buying alcohol. Maybe, but the real intention, not frequently mentioned, is that, as the years go by, the increased price will deter just enough people from drinking alcohol to excess so that a few people who might have become alcoholics will not.

The result is that millions of people who enjoy alcohol and who control their drinking pay massively more for their pleasure, with no expected health result! 

That is THE most important thing. Those millions of people, who are paying more, ARE NOT EXPECTED TO BECOME HEALTHIER! The claim that ‘hospital admissions’ would be lower means only that there might be fewer fights and accidents. But what ‘fewer fights and accidents’ actually means is fewer people going out to have some fun. But wait! Pub and club prices are not supposed to be affected, so why should fights and accidents be reduced?

I think that such idiocies need to happen more and more before the ‘whole population’ rebels. It would be nice to find a way for the ‘whole population of smokers’ to rebel, but it is not easy. Perhaps the ‘whole population’ has to include everyone who is being persecuted by ‘Public Health’. For be in no doubt, ‘Public Health (England or elsewhere)’ is NOT a benign organisation. It is a ‘deep state’ creation, far above the minions parading as MPs and Ministers, such as Theresa May.

We need a Trump. A REAL Trump. But that does not mean the same thing as it does in the USA. In the UK, it means a very powerful Cabinet, and not a powerful PM. A powerful Cabinet instructs the PM, and not vice versa. The only power that the PM has is to sack the Cabinet, but what if no one would accept positions? She would have to stand down. In former times, she could have called a General Election, but she cannot do that now. There has to be a Parliamentary majority to do so. The powers of the PM are much reduced these days.

Even so, a PM with courage could make much political capital from making a public speech about the oppression of The People and how he/she is going to reverse that. Brexit, Trump, Poland, Romania, Greece, show that The People are YEARNING to be released from the oppression.

But there is a very, very important question: it is ‘What has been of great value to The People of Europe, and what has been to their detriment?’ I doubt that the value of smoking bans could compare with the disaster of mass immigration from ‘malaria infested’ countries.



%d bloggers like this: