Further Information

Effect of the Italian Smoking Ban on Population Rates | Giulia Cesaroni, Francesco Forastiere, Nera Agabiti, Pasquale Valente, Piergiorgio Zuccaro, Carlo A. Perucci
Article Published: 2005

Type: Population
Funding Source: Lazio Region Health Authority
Significance: Statistically Significant Negative

Published By: Circulation. 2008;117:1183-1188

Further Information

One of the most fundamental jobs of antismoking propaganda is to convince the population that passive smoking is a killer, and therefore that it is to be banned. As the documentation in this portal demonstrates, that is impossible: in fact passive smoking kills nobody and harms nobody. Scientific reality, however, has never intimidated antitobacco propaganda, coördinated at the vertex by the World Health Organization, official partner of the pharmaceutical multinationals, for the purpose of tobacco control (stored English link here, French here).

As the public needs persuasion eliminate by steps the civil liberty and free behaviour of citizens, immediate beneficial effects of smoking bans have to be concocted. To that end, questionnaire- based retrospective studies on vague memory recalls are no good. Something more immediate had to be found. Heart attacks lend themselves quite nicely because of their rapidity. A completely new vein of methodological junk science was started by the "Helena study" in the United States in 2002. Since then the “health” authorities of many nations have financed self-serving "studies" using this trash methodology, that has absolutely no connection with science and real public health, but serves the political purposes of smoking "de-normalization" and prohibition.

This “study” is an example. Is shows that just a few months after the Italian ban in 2005 the number of heart attacks in a sample region of Italy (Piedmont) substantially decreased -- thus “demonstrating” that passive smoking exposure is lethal in both the long and the short term, and casts even more the innocent smoker as a killer. The trash study concludes, of course, that "...public interventions that prohibit smoking can have enormous public health implications".

This outrageous public dishonesty is here debunked by Dr. Michael Siegel (stored copy here), himself a tobacco control advocate who was “cast out” from the Olympus of Tobacco Control because he opposed the use of trash science and false information in the war against smokers.

FORCES is supported solely by the efforts of the readers. Please become a member or donate what you can.

Contact Info
Forces Contacts
Media Contacts
Evidence Categories
Quick Look-Up
List of Methodological Errors in ETS Studies
Hill's Criteria and Authoritative Citations
What Must an Epidemiologic Study Warrant?
Table of All Studies on ETS and Lung Cancer up to 2006

Pie Charts of ETS/Lung Cancer Studies
How many cigarettes must be smoked to create an ETS danger?

Passive Smoking: an Institutional Problem
A 13-minute video to understand the fraud

If you like to read rather then listen, download
Now available for free