Straightening Up Eaters

Health Before Liberty

Click here to return to main page Powered by reason, driven by passion

Click on the banner to donate now
Click on the banner to donate now

The Evidence

The scientific Archive that debunks 50 years of superstitions onsmoking

Health beforeliberty - Theescalation of food demonization Your body belongs tothe nation! Your body belongs to the Führer!  You have the duty to be healthy! Food is not a privatematter!  (German National Socialist slogans, 1937 - 1944)

Information andContacts
About us


Straightening up Eaters
Straightening up Drinkers
Outcasting Smellers
The Theatre of the Absurd
The Disgusting
The WHO gang section
Let's kill them-for their own good
At the service of the pharmaceutical industry


Norman Kjono
James Leavey
Judith Hatton
Andy Ludlow
Gian Turci


John Luik
Pierre Lemieux
Martha Perske
Wanda Hamilton

Archives andResearch Materials

News and Articles Archive
Past Front Pages of FORCES International
(startingJuly 3, 2000)
Historical Files- The milestones in the tobacco wars
Prohibition, then and now
Constitutional and Antitrust Violations of theMultistate Tobacco Settlement
WHO SCANDAL The CD thatsays it all on political corruption and frauds on smoking

Special Reports

Pharmaceuticalmultinationals: buying governments, selling antismoking
Big Drug's Nicotine War


Rush Limbaugh featured site

Tobacco Award 2002

 Lycos top 5% in 1998 Award for Outstanding Political Web Site

Enjoy good food, andtell the health cartel where to go! Visit EAT DANGEROUSLY

Alink to a great site:
Against the industry of fear!

Eaters archive 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003(Jan-June) 2003(July-Dec) 2004 2005 2006

May14 [02:30 GMT] – Do these pants make my pancreas look big" –   Never let it besaid that those cashing in on the "obesity epidemic" lack creativity in coveringall angles in their quest to shakedown a panic-stricken public.  So you thinkyou are safe from premature heart attack and diabetes, all you slim and trimpeople"  Hah!  Think again.  According to some doctors you could be just asprone to the pathologies that strike down your fat brethren.  Your fat, however,is inside your svelte frame, busily smothering the vital organs.

"Beingthin doesn't automatically mean you're not fat" and "just because someone islean doesn't make them immune to diabetes or other risk factors for heartdisease," is the message from these grifters who admit that they don'tactually know whether interior fat poses health problems.  They "suspect" itdoes and "theorize" that fat enveloping interior organs "might" be sendingthe body mistaken chemical signals to store fat inside organs like the liveror pancreas.  Very much like the concept that “smoking kills no matter what"forerunner of all frauds, here is the “you are fat even even if you arethin” concept.  What to do"  Turn it all over to the experts.  Stopsmoking.  You quit.  Stop eating.  You become a vegetarian.  Exercise.  Youjog till you drop.

Thebottom line to these hypotheses without evidence is that "bad" eatinghabits, the bête noire of the anti-fat crusaders, must be eradicated evenfor those who are not overweight.  Junk the sugar, discard the fat and aboveall exercise, exercise.  We all know, and perhaps unconsciously hate, thosefew, lucky people who can eat what they want and all that they want withoutgaining an ounce.  There is no need to envy them anymore since they, justlike the obviously overweight, are in need of the firm guidance that poursforth from the caring people who will make us fit no matter what it takes.

May 10 [02:00 GMT]–  From Germany but about England: cheese ads to children forbidden in England, andmore coming for your own good! – No morecheese advertisement in children-oriented shows in England.  Cheese is bad,destroys the body, makes you fat and lazy and "causes" disease. And there is fartoo much salt for children, anyway: take the word of the “experts”, they knowwhat they are saying.  After years of relentless “studies”, our “expert” heroeshave finally labelled cheese as junk food.  At the same time Homer Simpson willhave to be shown far less, because he gives “incorrect” dietary advice to hiskids.

On their side,the cheese manufacturers are showing the expected butt-kissing attitude alreadyadopted by the tobacco industry, but with an even more 21st century twist.  They make, in fact, the ultimate loser demand: equality underoppression.  If cheese is bad for health, they argue, what to say aboutcheeseburgers and Coca-Cola, that are “really baaad” for you"  Forbid that advertisement too!  In the meantime, instead of suing thehell out of the "public health" crooks, shut down their industries in protestand create a political problem (before it's too late), the cheese manufacturerlobbies are writing a petition -- as the supply of toilet paper in the“public health” offices is worrisomely low for the protection of theenvironment.

In themeantime, God forbid that every idiot is not given exactly what he deserves, andthat the holy hand of “public health” does not bestow its wrath on Coke andhamburgers to maintain absolute justice.  Finally, the British “experts”“recommend” the prohibition of adult-oriented cheese advertisement to makeanti-cheese campaigns more effective

May 3 [02:15 GMT]–  Haven’t we seen this before" - Overweightworkers cost their bosses more in injury claims than their lean colleagues,suggests a study that found the heaviest employees had twice the rate ofworkers' compensation claims as their fit co-workers. 

Just as anti-tobacco “suggested” that smokers cost their employers more thannormal so the overweight are now being tarred as economic negatives.  In bothcases proof is not required to demonize wholeclasses of people whose only sin is not to worship at the altars of health.  Inreality smokers and the overweight don’t cost society any more dollars than dothose who don’t smoke or fall into the proper weight limit as determined bybehavior control activists.

As they did with smoking civil libertarians are weakly advising employers not to“overreact” with discriminatory policies rather than honing in on the junkscience that reduces people to a grid of numbers.  The scandal is not fat orsmoking workers but the “science” that labels them so based on statisticalmanipulation that never proves but only suggests.

May1 [03:00 GMT]– 'If you're fat you most probably won't get that job' - Many if not most readers of this site will recall the days when smokers wereregarded as people, not pathetic, skanky addicts whose very presence poisonedentire communities at a single puff.  The people who brought us hatred ofsmokers continue to work their foul spell on the overweight.

First,“studies” spring up in the media like mushrooms after a rain telling everyonehow obesity is linked with various diseases and how employers should suspectlower productivity and fear future healthcare costs (a particularly compellingworry in the US where there is no national health system).

Now – bingo!Surveys show that employers are less inclined to hire the overweight. There’sprobably nothing new about that – attractive, fit-looking people have always hadan advantage in our culture. But in the current climate, it wouldn’t be asurprise to find that employers are inclined to be more discriminatory than everbefore.

The new twistnow is to look on being overweight as a “disability” in order to protect themfrom discrimination.  Pretty diabolical—we’redeeply stigmatizing people while simultaneously encouraging them to think ofthemselves as victims needing “help” from external programs.

So does thismean that EVERYTHING which “could lead” to a chronic disease should finally beregarded as a disability"  With fat, we’re making a “disability” out ofsomething which is, at least to a large extend, simply an instance of normalhuman variation.  We’re pathologizing another aspect of life for purposesthat could include both exploitation of the system by the “disabled” person, andexclusion or “special” treatment by government and institutions.

April 24 [02:45 GMT] -Perverting the language - Thehealth establishment purposefully corrupts the language as a tactic to furtherits control over the population.  Epidemic no longer refers to a terribleoutbreak of infectious disease but is unethically used to describe voluntary behaviors such as smoking and eating.  Addiction has been watered downto include smoking, shopping, gambling as well as other behaviors that used tobe described as habits.  "Proof" quite some time ago joined the words thatBig Health perverted for its own ends.

"Scientists prove that salty diet costs lives" screams the headline in theTimes Online introducing a story about salt consumption.  Within not only isthere no "proof" but a close reading provides evidence that the researchers,along with the media, have completely abandoned the epidemiologicalstandards that should govern research such as this.

People who ate less salty food were found to have a 25 per cent lower riskof cardiac arrest or stroke, and a 20 per cent lower risk of prematuredeath.

Add a zero to these percentages and this study would have warranted a newsstory.  Ethical epidemiologists are looking for at least 200% (relative risk3) as the base to justify concern or intervention.  These puny percentageswarrant nothing (especially when the data is gathered with questionnaires!),as the researchers well know and reporters covering these issues shouldknow.  The reporter, a Health Editor, no less, should have informed hisreaders that 20 and 25 per cent indicate... nothing.  He does, however,midway down remark that the number of heart attacks and deaths supposedlycaused by a salty diet are so small that they could have occurred by"chance."

Considering that the researchers are rehashing previous studies conductedone and two decades ago a more pertinent analysis should focus on why oldresearch is dubbed "proof" of anything.  Obviously the researchers arecashing in on the obesity "epidemic", a fertile ground for profitablegrants.  The United Kingdom, like other countries, is badgering its citizensto shape up and behave themselves.  Anti-salt messages there are becomingincreasingly strident and this study will bolster the campaigns to alterconsumption.  Like studies regarding the supposed bad effects from smokingtobacco, the salt and diet studies have proven only that Big Health long agoforgot why it is supported by a highly taxed population.

April20 [03:00 GMT] - Calling time out on the media’s weight obsessions: you tell ‘em, Tyra- Former supermodel Tyra Banks has come out as an unlikely (or is it logical")spokesperson for the idea that our obsession with people’s weight is … nuts.  Asvarious countries “crack down” on excessiveness skinniness in runway models(there have indeed been several anorexic deaths), Tyra Banks got called “fat” bythe media for flashing a bit more flesh than usual in a bikini.  Now she’scalling BS on the whole schizophrenic body image obsession.  Take that, healthNazis.

“… there aremodels right now dying on the runway and people are saying that people are tooskinny; then suddenly there are these pictures of me and they're saying I'm toobig. And never mind me, I didn't really want to focus on that, but look, even ifI had been 200 pounds, would that make me ugly and disgusting"  Because that'swhat they were saying I was.  And, if they're saying that, they're saying that toevery woman: and so many women are 200 pounds, so many do have that shape, sothat means that you're telling those women they're ugly and disgusting.' “

April20 [03:00 GMT] - Bacon causes lung disease- Busyjunk "scientists" in the United States have found that eating bacon, as wellas other cured meats, increases the risk of lung disease.  Thisreport from the British Broadcasting Corporation wisely omits anypercentages attached to the alleged increased risk so we can rest assuredthat the relative risk falls well below the threshold of concern.  If the"scientists" had found a 200% increased risk of lung disease from consumingcured meats we might concur with their call for "more studies."

The "scientists" attempt to cover their bases by invoking the incantationthat "smoking remains the single most significant cause of [lung disease]"but will undoubtedly ignite the ire of the anti-tobacco pressure groups byconcluding that smoking, as well as lower class status, insufficient vitaminC intake and bad diet, could not account for the increased risk of lungdisease for the cured meat consumption.  Of course these days specialinterest benefactors, such as the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, haveexpanded their anti-tobacco ideology to include a bevy of "anti" stances,especially where food is concerned.  Having discovered the joys of behaviormodification through anti-smoking propaganda the "anti" advocates are eagerto increase control wherever hysteria roams.

April20 [03:00 GMT] - Peril in the post trans fat world- Provingyet again that they are never satisfied, the behavior engineers, despitetheir successful campaign to demonize trans fat, are now singing the bluesthat the proletariat faces new, perhaps insurmountable, challenges in atrans-fat-free environment. The elimination of trans fat, dubbed"heart-damaging" and "artery clogger", although no actual evidence existsthat this cooking material warrants such terms of opprobrium, leaves a voidthat is being filled by animal fats, such as butter or lard, or tropicaloils such as palm or coconut oil.  Oh, the horror!  Coconut oil, for thosewho remember the genesis of the modern food policing effort, should ring abell since it was the evil substance that food ideologues successfullyremoved from movie house popcorn.  As for butter, could there be anythingmore insidious to good health"  The "good" substitutes for trans fat, suchas olive, canola or soy bean oil, are useless for cookies, pastries andpizza crusts.  It's no coincidence that these foods top the list of"unhealthy food" deplored by the food police.

"You needto find a replacement for a solid fat that doesn't have the healthimplications, and that's the tougher battle," says Susan Borra of theInternational Food Information Council.  "We are changing the entirefatty acid profile of the food supply, and we're not sure we know what it'sgoing to look like at the other end."

We arechanging the food supply and we're not sure what will be the result.  Couldany statement be more arrogant and more reflective of the mantle ofsuperiority with which the behavior engineers enwrap themselves" Historically any entity that proclaimed it was altering the food supply forentire populations with no concern as to the results wrought by itsalteration would have been considered an enemy of the people and harshlycurbed, if not eradicated.

In ouremasculated era, unfortunately, food supply manipulators are treated asindispensable, integral components of the community rather than noxiousmeddlers.  This article provides propaganda space for the American HeartAssociation, an organization that lies deliberately and continuously aboutthe effects of smoking, to dispense its nonsensical diet recommendations toa public that has fewer choices now than it had before the social engineersbecame a blight upon the nation.

April 19 [04:00 GMT] - Racial component of fat -Researchers investigating why Europeans are so fat have unearthed a racialcomponent that undoubtedly will lead to many, fatter grants for furtherresearch.  The numbers are quite precise:  half of white Europeanscarry a defective gene that causes a 30% increased risk of obesity while 16%percent carry two defective copies of the same gene, which carries a 70% risk ofobesity.  We'll accept the researchers word on the percentage of whiteEuropeans saddled with the defective genes and concentrate solely on the risksthey assign to carrying that disease.

Evenwithout looking at the data of the study one can easily figure that we aretalking about inferred causality and not about a scientificallyestablished one. “McCarthy notes that the function of FTO remains amystery. It is unclear if people with the gene simply burn calories lessefficiently or if they consume more food.”These researchers know this, of course, but they also know how incompetentis the reportage of the media, even in something called Junk scientists also know how to follow the hype and capitalize on thepolitical class's need to "do something."  Obesity is the hottest “healththreat” going, although tobacco research still rakes in the dough. Combining fat with racial differences is a two-fer in our obsessive culturewhere social engineers constantly seek to boil down human behavior intopredictable equations that can be dealt with by an overbearing therapeutichealth.  As to the majority of Europeans who have these "defective" genes,no need to worry.  The numbers cranked out mean nothing. But what issinisterly meaningful is the approach – once again identical toanti-tobacco: people who are fat (like people who smoke) are defective.Next to what" Next to a defective ideology concerning itself with the“perfect, healthy man” who is compared with assorted computer models.

We have been down that defective path before, haven’t we"... And walkingdown that path with or without computers makes no difference. We discoveredthen that this is not the logical way to go and -- even less -- the humanway to go. We have to discover it again -- because to err is human, but topersevere is diabolical.

April 12 [03:00 GMT]- Soft drink tax - Norwayis poised to raise taxes on soft drinks and sweets.  The country has ahistory of taxing "luxury" products such as alcohol and cigarettes and nowis going after products that are considered "unhealthy."  Whilerefreshing to read a news story that veers off script by mentioningcigarettes and soft drinks in the same paragraph but labelling just the softdrinks as unhealthy, it is disturbing that governments throughout the worldare basing policy decisions on pseudo "scientists" who crank out junkstudies that are more hype than research.  The government is keepingits cards close to its vest on how high the taxes will go and on what theywill be imposed but the ubiquitous "activists" hope for at least a doublingof the tax rate.  The activists also are clear on why taxes must beraised:

"The problem is that we eat much too much sugar... too little fruit andvegetables, and too many processed foods like potato chips."

As usual the operative speaks for the population at large, deciding with hisuse of the royal "we" what will be done with the taxpayers who pay hissalary.  The newspaper moves back on script as it reports thatNorwegians are firmly behind the government's plan to raise taxes. Never before have there been so many people who want their taxes raised, atleast according to those who live to bilk the public.

April 12 [03:00 GMT]- Salt, the new Plutonium - Whowould have thought it"  Apparently in Canada there are 15,000 deadbodies found each year, every last one of them done in by salt.  Thenumbers come from the Center for Science in the Public Interest, theAmerican shakedown organization that wants everyone everywhere to adopt itsaustere diet of self-denial.  CSPI is not above lying to stir uphysteria while pressuring governments to crack down on the consumer. For some reason salt consumption is an inordinate concern of this group eventhough at the moment "research" has been exonerating salt after years ofdemonization.  America may not produce any goods that people would liketo buy these days but it sure is successful in peddling junk sciencethroughout the world, no matter how fraudulent the claims.

April 12 [03:00 GMT]- Eat drink and be merry for dieting is no use - Theexperts for years have been hectoring us to loose weight since we are toodamned fat.  The message is relentless and accompanies the drumbeat ofcountless "studies" proclaiming that the industrialized nations areundergoing an epidemic of obesity.  Governments have of course gottenin the act by re-defining obesity and heaviness so that more people fallinto that category without having to gain a pound.  Dieting has becomea chronic condition for a huge swath of people.

So what are to make of the latest research that seems to say "give up andpork up""  At least that is one message coming from junk sciencecentral, the University of California where "scientists" analyzed dozens ofstudies involving thousands of dieters.  The university's conclusion" Dieting doesn't work.  This is an odd message to proclaim during anepidemic of obesity and speculations on the university's motives are justthat.  One explanation is that the university is preparing to pave thepath for the pharmaceutical industry to enter more aggressively the weightloss game.  Just as those who successfully quit smoking are those whodo so without using smoking cessation products those who lose weight andkeep it off do so on their own using will power.  Will power cannot bepatented but weight loss aids can be.  Pharmaceutical money is behindthe studies that discovered an obesity epidemic just as pharmaceutical moneyfinanced "research" that discovered that smoking leads to all manner ofillness and an early, inevitable death.  Based on its behaviorregarding tobacco, expect a flurry of studies recommending professional help and pharmaceutical aids to lose weight successfully.  It workedwith tobacco so why change a con job that brings lots of money to Big Drugs.

April 5 [03:00 GMT]- A breath of fresh air - Everyday scads of health-related stories hit the newsprint and airwaves bringing thelatest study to the public.  These studies warn against newly-discovered risksor tout the benefits of a particular diet or a special regimen designed topromote longevity.  Attentive readers and viewers over time often experiencedejà vue.  Haven't I heard this before, they ask themselves.  Well, yes you have heard it before and sometimes you've heard some food or activity toutedto the sky only to be damned later as suicidal.  Wine bad, red wine good, carbsout, carbs in.  What's a consumer to do"

Listen to anactual expert whose job depends on results, not deceptive hypotheses.  Speakingat an American College of Sports Medicine-sponsored health and fitness summitWendy Repovich, an exercise physiologist, spoke of the health myths that mystifythe public.  Eggs, for instance, got a bad reputation because researchers, awarethat the yolk contains the highest amount of cholesterol of any food,transformed that fact into a panic attack that frightened people away from afood that mankind had enjoyed for thousands of years.

"Most peopleavoid eggs and probably if they have any kind of cardiovascular risk theirphysicians tell them to avoid eggs," Repovich said. "But really, there aren't awhole lot of studies that show that one or two eggs a day really make adifference to cholesterol levels."

There are,however, a passel of studies, rendered into overwrought prose by our lazy press,that imply (but never prove) that eating eggs is asking for a heart attack.  Thesheer number gives the accounts a patina of authority that then becomes theTruth.  Years later the same grant junkies crank out "studies" that exoneratethe egg and the cycle is complete and ready to begin anew at an opportune time. Critics of this process, like Repovich, have far more credibility than thestudy-for-hire gang that produces results that please those who fund theresearch.  Repovich, after all, makes her living advising sports franchises onhow to keep the players healthy.  Better still, just follow the wisdom of"moderation in all things" and ignore the hysterics of the media.

April 2 [03:00 GMT] - Trans fat in restaurants: “at least as serious as the menace of smoking”- The rhetoric of  Public Healthcontinues to exhibit the same cookie-cutter tediousness day after day, weekafter week, year after year.   Another day, another crisis as bad or worsethan smoking!

This time it’strans-fats used in restaurants in Calgary, Canada, where the intrepid Dr. BrentFriesen, the Calgary Health Region's medical officer of health is gunning forpromotion by playing the menace-of-the-moment game in the typically cynicalfashion of his kind.

But with Albertansstarting to wonder about virus and bacteria-laden bone chips in the instrumentsused for internal medical exams (see story above) his talk of high standards ofrestaurant hygiene ring a little hollow: “We require them to have utensils in asanitary condition, we're talking about a similar approach to preparing food --there are alternatives to trans fats,"  he blathers.  Does that mean that trans fatsare unsanitary now"  Maybe if it’s low-priority, we could gettalked into the notion that unsanitary in hospitals and clinics is the “new”sanitary" See, we can do it, too – play the bad faith topsy-turvy word spingame.  Are these guys actually getting MEDICAL training these days, or are theyall just appalling PR flaks in white coats"

March 9[03:00 GMT]- Would Cass Elliot have a career today" - Readers of a certain age will certainly remember CassElliot, the full-throated singer from the ‘60s vocal group the Mamas and thePapas (“California Dreamin”, etc). The header above links with a YouTube duetbetween Elliot and John Denver, two now long-dead figures from what, inretrospect, seems a much gentler and humane era.

We digress.We’ve put the link up on FORCES not only to give our readers a break from thebad news, but to pose a question: as a fat woman, what would the wonderful CassElliot’s chances be of having a career today" Would she be publicly harangued(as Barack Obama is over smoking) to lose weight inorder to be a presentable or “suitable” performer for public consumption" Wouldshe be told off by newspaper columnists for being a “bad role model”" Wouldthere be discussions amongst the shriller “health advocates” about setting upgovernment-imposed “standards” to regulate who can appear on federally-regulatedairwaves on the basis of whether or not they appear “healthy”"

Anyway, for themoment, sit back and enjoy a nice moment from free 1972 …

March 7 [03:00 GMT]- Fat good, fat bad, fat happy, fat sad - So now, for about 10 seconds, let’s raise concerns aboutwhether people are getting enough fat in their diets. Yes, notwithstanding theobesity epidemic that’s engulfing the world and the threat of ravagingpsychological devastation posed by thin runway models, it’s time to focus onwhether modern low fat diets are causing infertility. According to this ONEstudy from the United States, ovulation-related infertility goes up by awhopping 85 per cent if a woman eats five portions weekly of low-fat foods.

Of course, it’sbeing reported as if it were information that general readers could actuallyuse, when it’s not. One study simply does not give us anything that should bereadily translated into “advice” for individuals about their specific habits andpractices. But undeterred, one of the study’s authors wades in to tell womenwhat they should be eating. It’s the fashionable thing to do, and theuniversity’s Public Relations office probably expects it: “Dr Chavarro saidthat his advice to women wanting to conceive would be to change their diet.‘They should consider changing low-fat dairy foods for high-fat dairy foods; forinstance, by swapping skimmed milk for whole milk and eating ice-cream, notlow-fat yoghurt.’

In British coverage of the same story,another health professional gives the opposite advice: “I'm not convinced that there is any reason for womenwho are trying to conceive to alter their diet, unless they are obese,”says Dr Richard Fleming.

Two nations, two self-promoting “health experts,” two quick quotes. Just anotherday hard day’s work in the dubious business of “health promotion.”

March 9 [03:00 GMT]- Champagne Charlie versus Ronald McDonald- Members of the British Royal family are not supposed to make overt politicalstatements, but the heir to the throne has long been known for dabbling in“issues” . Maybe it’s surprising that it’s taken him so long to jump on thehealthiest bandwagon. So now Charles has been “overheard” advocating a fast-foodban. A statement issued later assured us that the Prince “was keen toemphasise the need for children to enjoy the widest variety of food and not toeat any particular sort of food to excess."  How touching and sociallyhelpful. Never mind. How is the UK’s republican movement doing these days,anyway"

February28[02:30 GMT]- This year, Girl Scout cookies have less trans fat- Here’s Associated Press fleshing out a press release/publicity pamphlet from theGirl Scouts, acting under the assumption that this is somehow of compellingpublic interest. It is somewhat comforting to know that the internet, for allits faults, is offering us perspectives that can compete with the vacuity of“news” like this: For much of the country, it's Girl Scoutcookie time again. And this year, all those cookies, not just the Thin Mintsand a few others, will come nearly free of harmful trans fats.” And, by the way, there is no scientific evidence that trans-fatis harmful - unless you believe in passive smoke!

February27[02:00 GMT]- Trans Fat Alternatives Also Risky - Cholesterol-raisingtrans fats may be disappearing from supermarket shelves and restaurants, but onetype of fat taking their place may be no healthier, new research suggests.

We have trans fat, which is BAD, saturated fat,which is GOOD, and now we have interesterified fat, which we just DON'T KNOWyet. Well, hey, if we "don't know" we can use this one and sue the companieslater. Please note, the "bad", "good" or "don't know" isn't the object of thediscussion. The object is when it will be appropriate to start the lawsuits.Public Health is not the issue here, the money is the true subject here, as thistobacco/fat lawyer's web site clearly shows.

I-me-my-mine Roth
Obesity activist

February21[03:00 GMT]- Savaging the Girl Scouts - “Accordingto NAAO president MeMe Roth, campfires and merit badges only serve as windowdressing for a baked-goods crime syndicate”

Hey, I’m just an alleged lowly “Front for BigTobacco.” Can you imagine the scorn and embarrassment of being a “Front for BigCookies"”

What a sad — yet accurate — name for anarcissistic, self-centered, “Anti-Mentality” agenda opportunist: “MeMe Roth,”president of the National Association Against Obesity (NAAO).

“Oh, look at ME!” says MeMe, “I’m ‘Saving theChildren!’ What a noble thing I’m doing to gut finding for kids outdoor hikingactivities on nature trails so we can save them!”

Hilary Clinton — who launched the anti-obesity program ShapeUp America with Dr. C. Everett Koop in December 1994 — once said it “takes avillage” to raise children. MeMe and her Agenda-Afflicted cohorts would burnthat village down to save it and the children who live there.

Please note that anti-obesityis modeled after anti-tobacco. The Agenda-Afflicted have “progressed” frombeating up on tobacco company executives to nailing grade school girls to theagenda-hype cross-of-scorn. A better example of how far this mindless grifting for Robert WoodJohnsonFoundation grant bucks can go.

So much for Democrats in thenew 110th Congress having any pretense of honoring voters’ mandatefor change.It’s business as usual with a particularly mean-spirited low-note in politicalmantras.

February 12[02:00 GMT]- ForgetTransfats! Step Away from that Copy of Seventeen Magazine!- Ronald Bailey of Reason magazine picks up on a new study which tells us thatreading about diets is correlated with a higher rate of anorexia in teenagegirls. Commenting on this and a Center for Science in the Public Interest callto ban food advertising to children, he comments: “Get it" Advertising makesyou fat; diet information makes you anorexic,” he comments. “Kind of a‘damned if you do and damned if you don't’ situation. It won't be long beforethe food and nutrition busybodies conclude that since information is toxic thatwe need to suspend the First Amendment. Of course, they'll do it "for thechildren."

February 12[02:00 GMT]- The tyrannical doubletalk of the transfat bans- “Smokers have been relatively passive and haveallowed the anti-smoking zealots to run roughshod over them. The question iswhether those of us who wish to eat as we please will allow the food zealots todo the same. These people are cowards, and here's why: If Mayor Bloomberg andother food zealots think I'm eating too many trans fats, let them personallycome and take fatty foods off my plate or remove them from my shopping cart.Since they don't have the guts to do that, they correctly deem it safer to usethe brute force of the state to control what I eat.”

February 7[02:00 GMT]- One stiff study and this country boy is anybody’s!- For the sake of public health, let’s hope that Australian researcher RussellKeast is a bit more restrained in his personal behavior after a couple of drinksat the local pub than he is after a bracing bout of research – ‘cause after justone study published in the intriguingly named journal Appetite, he’s a-lustingafter prohibition!

Yep, the most objectivejudge of his own work – and unashamed to say so, Keast assures us that his direfindings about the demon soda pop are "absolutely conclusive" and thatgovernment should consider banning the sale of caffeinated soft drinks tounder-18s.

Listen to the modesty, therestraint – after the inebriation of just one study (his own, of course):

 “He said banning thedrinks' sale to children under the age of 18, in the same way alcohol wasbanned, could be one approach for governments to explore. ‘I think if that's aregulatory approach, that sort of thing should maybe be considered. I don't knowwhat the best options are, how you would go about such things.’"

Of course, he wouldn’t knowabout stuff like that. Just a simple outback public health researcher on hisfirst trip to the big, wicked city.

January 29[03:00 GMT]- Cheese to join olive oil and raisins on British kids' TV ad ban -  Cheese is junk food! That’s the message from British regulators as theydecide to ban its advertisement during children’s viewing hours, hypothesizing alarger-than-average portion size to bolster their argument of “danger”. Cheesejoins a list of other advertising-banned foods which includes, incredibly,sultanas, raisins, olive oil and various nuts, as well as a variety ofpre-packaged snacks.

A National Farmers' Unionspokesman described the latest ruling as “mad” and “absurd”, but the industrylobby is unlikely to put off the new breed of totalitarian-minded micro-managersthat the Tony Blair government has unleashed under its cynical slogan of citizenhealth “empowerment”.

Tyra Banks Fat PicturesJanuary29[03:00 GMT]- She's fat!  I hate her! - We'll let the photo speak for itself.  Perhaps we're hopelessly oldfashioned but the candid shot to us reveals a beautiful woman striding on abeach.  Certainly we know what we'd look like if caught unawares in aSpeedo on a sandy playa down under.  Her name is Tyra Banks and she used tostrut the cat walks in Milan, Paris and New York.  Over the hill at 33, Ms.Banks has, according to a snide report, really let herself go and now is fat,fat, fat.  Ms. Banks rightly calls the gossip column that slams her girth a"strange meanness and rejoicing."  We'd prefer calling it hate but what wetruly don't like is how the victim of fat phobia apologizes for being less thansvelte.  Never agree with the haters and never apologize.  Hold themirror up to their ugly faces and let their obscene hatred speak for itself.


January 29[03:00 GMT]- Obesity of China's kids stuns officials - For veteran observers of the Big Health politics-and-publicity machine, itsometimes seems like a Big Health Medium Term Planning Committee must crank outthese headlines six-months to three years in advance, stick them in a file, thenqueue them up to be matched with a press release when the time is right.

Don’t reporters, no matter howblasé, jaded and disempowered, ever get bored with it all"

Country by country, month aftermonth, “officials” get regularly “stunned” by the extent of obesity in theirjurisdiction, and become predictably very concerned about “An American-styleobesity crisis” in their own back yard. Wouldn’t it be great if some mediaoutlet had the budget – and the will – to follow the grant-and-corruption trailwe strongly suspect is a universal run-up to every “shocking” new “obesitycrisis”"

By the way, the lead for thisarticle incredibly manages to make it sound like bad new that “urban Chineseboys age 6 are 2.5 inches taller and 6.6 pounds heavier on average than Chinesecity boys 30 years ago.”  We should hope so. Thirty years ago, the Chinese weregetting by on sparse rice rations that were painstakingly calculated to providejust enough calories to maintain an individual, and nothing more. Theavailability of proper adequate nutrition remains an issue in some rural areastoday.

As we read on, it becomes clearthat the real “news” here is that many more of the Chinese people are nowwell-fed.  And the final word is left to a Chinese parent who remembers thebad old days:

Last week at aMcDonald's in Beijing, salesman Liu Guojian beamed while his daughter Xinyi,7, ate a hamburger.
"Our daughter will definitely be taller than us. She has eaten better thanmy wife and I," Liu said. "When I grew up, in winter all we had to eat wascabbage.”

But someone has decided that ascary “obesity” headline is the only way to spin any story that contains theword “food”.

January 25[03:30 GMT]- Salt reduction demanded - A bossy, so-called health promotion group demands that the US Department ofAgriculture (USDA) limit the amount of salt that can be used in meat and poultryproducts.  In this press release dressing itself up as news, the Center forScience in the Public Interest (CSPI) huffily demands that the USDA remove salt from thelist of substances "generally recognized as safe."  CSPI wants salt to betreated as a food additive, a typical distortion of reality that is common tohealth pressure groups.  The CSPI, which is made up of people who haven'tworked a day in a legitimate business, assures consumers that food products willbe just as tasty using the amount of salt the group deems sufficient.  Justas restaurant and bar owners are judged by the elite as too stupid to run theirown businesses by catering to the customer base they wish to attract, oftensmokers, so too food purveyors are too dim to be trusted with keeping theircustomers happy.  CSPI is happy to run other people's businesswithout assuming any of the risk.  The Center for Science in the PublicInterest is supported financially by a pharmaceutical front group so thisorganization doesn't have to worry about where its next pay check will be comingfrom.

January 17 [02:30 GMT] - Monkey see, monkey do - America'srole of global nanny is pre-eminent as this article from Australia makes clear. The regulators down under, or Health Police, as the headline describes them, arechamping at the bit to join the health hysterics in the United States by banningtrans fats.  The author is firmly on board the ban wagon but doesn't haveany facts to justify her position.  This makes for some hilarious reading –the biggest side-splitter being her assertion that New York City is a liberalutopia –as she gamely tries to justify the state's intrusion into areas in which it hasno business. 

  • Theproof is in, so the author claims, that trans fats cause heart attacks,hypertension and stroke.  Too bad that no such proof exists, a fact that doesn't make a dent in the author'sfeeling that the "obesity epic [is] spanning the globe."
  • Whileeven the experts don't know how many lives will be saved once trans fats arebanned, they do know exactly how many billions are spent on drugs that lowercholesterol.  The implication being that no more trans fats, no moreneed for cholesterol-lowering drugs.  Add in the savings resulting fromreduced sick days, lower health costs and the reduction of health educationcampaigns and the public reaps an enormous dividend by eliminating transfats from the face of the earth.
  • NewYork's action on banning trans fats is to be emulated because it wasn't Michael Bloomberg, theanti-smoker mayor who banned trans fats but the board of health, whosedecision to ban wasn't based on political considerations (!!!""")
  • There is "no safe level ofartificial trans fat consumption."  Just like one cigarette leads tolung cancer and a whiff of tobacco smoke gives a non-smoker a heart attack.
  • Banning trans fats,prohibiting smoking in restaurants and bars don't curtail civil liberties,they promote them.

The author indeed has drunkdeeply from the Kool-Aid pushed by the behavior regulators.  Bring on thebans!  We, the great unwashed, will venerate you, our betters, for savingus from ourselves.  For an antidote to such self-destructive delusion, besure to check out the comments under this article from one reader from Canada.























FORCESINTERNATIONAL (Forces, Inc.) is a non-profit educational corporationorganized under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia, USA. Forces, Inc. hasreceived a charitable tax exemption under Internal Revenue Code 501(c)3. Your contribution is tax deductible.FORCES INTERNATIONAL © trademark,logo and original material copyright © 1995-2004 is property of FORCESINTERNATIONAL unless otherwise indicated. Original FORCES material may bereprinted or used in any non-commercial form if proper credit is given toFORCES and original intent remains intact. All other material remainsproperty of its creator/owner.

Better Cigarettes in Seconds!


Help Us

Contact Us

Chapters and Affiliates

Join us

The Constitution ofFORCES International
The Honour Committee


The ABCs of ETS
Buy this book today and understand

The passive smoke fraud as it has never been explained and documented before

Forums and newsletters

The United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter

Read The United Pro Choice Smokers RightsNewsletter

Enter the SpeakEasy forum!


Mr. "WeDrink, We Smoke, We Interrupt"








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
Links To Archived Categories

The Evidence
Inside Forces
About Forces
Book case