Antismoking Ethics And Corruption
March 2 -Sadly The Poor Will Be With Us Forever. Just Don't Take Any Of "Our" Cash! - Three years ago the caring compassionate voters of Washington state approved a measure that hiked the cigarette tax substantially. The voters were told that the money would be used to provide health care for the poor. The warm, fuzzy feelings that accrue to people when they spend other people's money on worthy causes may still be there but the health care is rapidly disappearing down the government sink hole.
The worthy poor are now being asked to cough up some of their own scarce cash to make up the deficits the legislature and the government caused when they diverted a chunk of the cigarette tax health care funds into the general fund to prop up the state's finances. There is one group of cigarette tax fund recipients, however, whose funding will not be touched. Norman Kjono explains how in these morally confused times the specially connected rich folk get to keep their "share" of the loot while those, in whose name the tax was supposedly passed, can go eat dirt.
February 10 - Smoking Bans: The Ultimate Special-Interest Insider's Game - We are now a decade into the process of the same activists using the same junk science excuses and the same negative labels to promote the same ban policies that benefit the same special-interests who still pay considerable sums of money to the same activists. If that seems a bit circular it is, as is tobacco control policy. The foregoing merely illustrates the point that once people embrace the concept that negatively labeling, unfairly stereotyping, and stigmatizing one's neighbors for bucks and influence is a legitimate way to make a living the only matters left open to question are how much they will make by doing so and how long they can get away with it. It also seems to me that after a decade of tobacco control consistently failing to produce results that it touts to achieve policy that it wants - notably including material and sustaining reductions in youth or adult smoking, as will be discussed -- we the people need to finally connect on what is being done to our public health policy and the integrity of our governing processes to benefit powerful and entrenched special-interests.
Perhaps politicians and the public were deceived by tobacco control back in the early 1990s because their pattern of conduct was not yet clear. It is, after all one thing to embrace an apparently noble and plausible goal, but another matter entirely if one continues to support programs that do not deliver the results promised while clearly benefiting special-interests that pay those who promote them. Today the pattern of conduct by special-interest health activists is transparently clear, so there is no credible excuse for continuing to support their self-serving policies. "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me" should be our watch words regarding tobacco control at this decade-long mile-post where we are experiencing a second aggressive push for another variation on the smoking ban theme.
February 4 - Smoking Is Cool - The cigarette creates atmosphere. Smoke curls into the air. There is movement where there was none before. Suddenly, ghosts are creeping around a person's head, floating out of his or her mouth, ascending up toward heaven and disappearing into the blue yonder. Suddenly, the smoker has a completely new form of punctuation. The smoke that trails around as the cigarette moves through the air, held by an expressive hand, adds a new level to the significance of our bodily gestures. A cigarette hanging lazily out of someone's mouth can signify things a person without one could never dream of signifying.
And all of this is visually pleasing. The cigarette creates a new aesthetic truth, an air of mystery and rebellion. Mystery and rebellion are very cool things. They are interesting, alluring and provocative. One is drawn toward these characteristics, and the cigarette is often a quick and easy indicator of all of them.
Bryan Edenfield is a non-smoker but he chooses to be politically incorrect. His article's headline, "Light Up Kids: Smoking Is Cool," will hit its mark. Anti-smokers will be appalled. Their small minds cannot comprehend irony, or people who take any joy in life, or balance in perspective.
Smart kids will just chuckle at Edenfield's message. They already recognize the hateful and hysterical tone of modern anti-smoking propaganda just as Edenfield does. SECONDHAND SMOKE KILLS! No, it doesn't, and that kind of mental bludgeoning inspires rebellion. A caravan of Joe Camels could not make smoking seem so cool.
Kurt Vonnegut, satirist and smoker, is quoted here. Vonnegut considers cigarette smoking "a fairly sure, fairly honorable form of suicide," so he keeps at it, in his eighty-second year. Vonnegut is old enough to remember when freedom of choice was respected, and when hateful movements were properly recognized, and put down.
Vonnegut's personal habits are strictly his own province. His wisdom is what makes him a great writer, and that, is what we should admire. You don't have to smoke, kids, no matter how cool your nasty Anti makes that seem. You just have to keep laughing at her till we lock her back in the attic where she belongs.
January 29 - We Don't Need A Nanny State - Welcome to the Nanny State, where you're well taken care of by hordes of bureaucrats and their ideas of what's best for you. No longer will you have to take personal responsibility for your actions, because your choices will be limited. So, if something goes awry, don't blame yourself. It wasn't your fault.
We're not that far away from this state of limited choices. Pierce County's smoking ban was an example. So was the Kitsap County Health District's recommendation for mandatory usage of bike helmets last year.
Pam Dzama, a former smoker, is rightly worried that the smothering figure of a caring, smothering and ultimately bossy do-gooder is taking the place of the confident and self-reliant persona that built this country. She marvels that intellectuals in the groves of academe muse that too much choice may be a bad thing. Too many choices, they say, lead individuals to make the wrong choices, which lead them down the paths of unhappiness. To them "sound social policy" is an ideal that makes free choice obsolete while personal responsibility becomes irrelevant. It's a nightmare scenario we must all work to avoid.
January 26 - Hatred Of The Tobacco Industry Is Hazardous To Smokers' Health - The University of Minnesota study was accompanied by a Journal of the National Cancer Institute editorial hailing its results and concluding that there are "certainly insufficient data to support the practice of encouraging smokers to pursue reduced smoking as a harm reduction strategy."
That statement is demonstrably false.
Anyone who knows anything about the research on smoking and health ? and presumably that would include the authors of the study and editorial ? knows that the risk of smoking-related disease increases with the number of cigarettes smoked.
Steve Milloy of
Junkscience uncovers one more example of how anti-tobacco special interests pursue an agenda that is demonstrably harmful to smokers. For hundreds of years heavy smokers have been advised to cut back on their consumption or risk ill health. Before the tobacco control industry usurped the role of actual health care providers everyone knew that chain smoking is not a recipe for good health. Overindulgence, whether of alcohol, salt, sugar and even nutritional food can lead to health problems whereas moderate consumption of most things, even on a frequent basis, poses no risk for most people. Smoking was once regarded as merely one of a myriad of factors that influence health. Even the anti-smokers, when pressed directly, will admit that a pack-a-day smoker who keeps himself fit is no more likely to succumb to the falsely labeled "smoking-related conditions" than are non-smokers. The best advice for a three-pack-a-day smoker is to cut down to one pack. That was the conventional wisdom for years before cessation, aided by expensive pharmaceutical products, became the prescription dispensed by ignorant, or brow-beatened doctors and duplicitous "health educators."
Instead of the common sense approach that work for years we have anti-tobacco activists cranking out a study that astonishingly proclaims cutting back on smoking doesn't reduce health risks from tobacco smoking one iota. If the tobacco industry dared to bamboozle the public with such blatant self-serving nonsense it would find itself in court. As anti-tobacco continues to prove that it will lie to advance its own agenda it's long overdue to hold it to the same standards that apply to the evil tobacco industry.
January 20 - I'm Lighting Up To Fight City's Anti-smoking Gestapo - It was only whilst reading the Star's editorial page on the weekend - a grim exercise but good for the odd cackle - that I learned this is National Non-Smoking Week. That merits firing up a dart right there.
[S]moking, while not technically illegal - that is to say, sale and possession of the product is not illegal (yet) - is most definitely a vice in Western society, barely less objectionable than pederasty or mainlining heroin at one's primary workstation, hence the crunching vise of ever-more invasive and radical anti-smoking diktats, bylaws and un-laws inflicted on a huge puffing minority by a bossy bunch of nico-Nazis and health fascists who happen to have the ear of government. Indeed, increasingly, they are the government, at its most officious, arbitrary and zero-tolerance mantra worst.
What might be done with extremists who claimed genetics proved they were the master race? What might be done with alarmists who claimed epidemiology proved AIDS carriers spread diseases casually in the workplace? Look at what has been done with this "secondhand smoke peril" lie. Footnoted lies - what Toronto Star editorialist Rosie Dimanno and others now conventionally call "junk science" - are the tools of hate mongers. Dimanno calls this era's anti-smoking activists "nico-Nazis and health fascists." What should be done with them? At the least, and at the start, fanatical anti-smokers must be vocally and forcefully condemned. Rabid prohibitionism infects today's public health establishments, and through them, our governments. The situation is entrenched via cigarette taxation up to seven hundred per cent, money robbed from smokers, then used to vilify and ostracize them. Debunking of secondhand smoke lies is treated as sacrilege by health cultists, as if it were akin, to denial of the Hitlerian Holocaust. The health cultists are themselves Hitlerian.
"Secondhand smoke" from burning tobacco, a leaf, is no more dangerous than the smokes and smells produced by cooking dinner. The plain truth is, immoderate cigarette smoking, like immoderate eating or alcohol consumption, carries risk. For instance, Yul Brynner reported he smoked four packs a day, and the actor died at age 70, amongst the distinctly small minority of cigarette smokers who die of lung cancer. Like the vast majority of cigarette smokers, Frank Sinatra did not get lung cancer, but lived until old age caught up with him at 82. He smoked his trademark cigarettes till the end. Heavy drinker and smoker Humphrey Bogart died of esophageal cancer at 57 but his widow Lauren Bacall, who also indulges, turns an active 80 this year. Cigar smoker George Burns lived to 100, despite an expressed love of martinis, and a sardonic disdain for vegetables. Most smokers live typical life spans, either longer or shorter, as is the case for everybody. Genes are the main works in the clock. Health regimens may extend life but there is no guarantee. These famous smokers are typical humans. They made their own choices.
Free choice, the bedrock of personal dignity, is what today's health cultists will not abide. That is why their movement is profoundly disturbing, regarding not only smokers' crazed harassment, but the very decency of modern civilization. Vicious extremism becomes the norm when hateful movements are too long overlooked by the people at large. Major media have been sorely remiss in failing to recognize the ugly face of today's anti-smoking movement. For far too long reporters and editors have parroted its sick propaganda. Awareness is growing and more and more decent people, including journalists, are speaking up. Today, possession of an unused ash tray stored in a closet at a New York City place of business, is a crime. Such laws may become grim memories in a year that cannot come too soon. We must fight to make that happen. Whether you smoke or don't, recognize the importance, of battling fanaticism. The nature of the thing is evil, it keeps popping up in various forms through history, and it pervades without end in every direction whenever left unchecked. This is the most righteous of wars.
January 19 - Erecting A Smoking Ban While Violating The Law - In Washington State the lawlessness escalates as King County (Seattle) gears up to impose prohibition in violation of state law. What would prompt elected officials to violate their oaths? Sad to say, it's money. Millions of dollars have flowed into King County under the guise of "health". All the grateful officials must do is ban smoking and push pharmaceutical nicotine products.
King County is not alone in taking its marching orders from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Last month Pierce County decided that big bucks were more important than upholding state law. King County, along with many other Washington localities, is joining the assault upon law-abiding citizens and hardworking, taxpaying business people.
January 14 - Buying Smoking Bans - Washington has become the 2004 "precedent-setting" test state for the anti-tobacco agenda. At virtual light speed citizens of Washington are now confronted with an expanded smoking ban in Pierce County that overrides current state exemptions for restaurants, taverns, bowling alleys, etc., the declared intention of other county officials to take the ban state-wide, Spokane County's new policy that persons who currently work for the county or apply for new jobs with the county cannot smoke at work or at home (nonsmokers are the only permitted employees), and a direct challenge to current state preemption statutes that prohibit local government from passing smoking bans that are more stringent than state law.
Grant money, such as that from pharmaceutical Robert Wood Johnson Foundation is flowing into the state from special-interests to support promoting the smoking bans, and prospectively to pay for costs of counties defending the bans as well. Whether citizens of the state like it or not, it is clear that pharmaceutical special-interests will mandate our local affairs though a New Jersey private foundation. And it seems that there is an adequate supply of compliant politicians in Washington sufficient to enact that agenda, regardless of the expressed will of the people in that state, lead in large part by the state's Attorney General and candidate for Governor Christine O. Gregoire.
Norman Kjono has kept his sharp eye on anti-tobacco's New Year thrust to user prohibition into Washington State. Late last year a health board in one county banned smoking everywhere despite an unambiguous state law that forbids such a smoking ban. When restaurants, bars and bowling alleys cried foul and took their grievances to court, the health board called an out-of-state anti-smoking pressure group and asked for money to defend the ban in court. At one time it was necessary to "connect the dots" to get a clear picture of how special interests are buying public policy. In Washington State today the dots are connected by the special interests themselves. It's obvious and it's ugly.
January 7 - Quod Erat Demonstrandum - Even though we've entered the New Year, let's take a stroll down memory lane to one year ago. We find ourselves in North Dakota where the legislature just voted against a bill that would have prohibited both the sale and the use of tobacco. The representative who crafted the bill enumerated the death toll (1,000 per year) and the costs ($351-million in medical expenses and lost productivity) borne by the state. Provided by the tobacco control industry, these stark numbers shrieked for something to be done. Surely, one would think, the big-hearted, good-health advocates who daily damn the tobacco industry and shake their fingers at smokers could be counted on to clamor for a bill that would halt the tobacco bloodbath.
"[C]ommittee members were frustrated last week with the testimony from anti-tobacco groups that testified against the tobacco ban, including the North Dakota Medical Association, American Heart Association, American Cancer Society, American Lung Association, North Dakota Public Health Association and North Dakota Nurses Association."
That was then. One year later, after having worked their damnedest to keep North Dakotans smoking, the health organizations issued their "report card" to the state grading North Dakota on its tobacco control efforts. The state got a "D" based on the paucity of public spending for smoking prevention campaigns, a refusal to enact smoking bans and a reluctance to raise the cigarette tax.
"How many more preventable deaths must occur and how many more children must become addicted to cigarettes before we say enough?" American Lung Association chief executive John L. Kirkwood said.
Instead of whining to the forgetful press, Mr. Kirkwood need only look into the mirror to have his question answered. He is responsible for the continuing death toll in North Dakota. His organization not only refused to work with the legislature to ban tobacco from the state but actively and aggressively did all it could to prevent the ban from being enacted. The blood of 1,000 North Dakotans drips from his hands. Hundreds of millions of dollars have been drained from a cash-strapped state due to Mr. Kirkwood and his American Lung Association. It's a marvel that he isn't in jail and an outrage that he is damning the same state legislature he lobbied one year ago to kill the bill that would have prevented those needless deaths.
January 6 - The Costly Illusion of Regulating Unknowable Risks (PDF) - Fewer papers have better and more clearly illustrated the enormous fraud of contemporary risk assessment. It's an industry which has a huge and quantifiable cost to society while producing data that is unreliable at best, and totally false at worst. Totally accessible to the layperson, this paper shows how armies of professional scaremongers have convinced politicians that the risk assessment junk science is well over their heads, and that policy-making is thus best delegated to those same scare-mongers. To complicate matters, junk science provides the tools for political advancement and budget-balancing: scientific fraud legitimised via legislation provides great pretexts for the taxation of industries, products and private citizens, while giving the realpower to bureaucrats who act in the name of "health, safety and environment" and risk no political consequences for their actions. There is no mention of smoking in this paper, but it is more than clear that the pattern applies to it too - and to hundreds of other substances, behaviours and industries. It was difficult to select two "teasers" from this excellent paper, but we did, and here they are:
"...As for the cost, U.S. outlays for health, safety, and environmental regulation - substantially driven by risk assessments of conjectural cancer risks - were estimated at over $700 billion in 1999, an amount that exceeded the after-tax profits of the combined U.S. industrial activity."
"Some 20 years ago,, the International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health Organization admitted that 'at the present time a correlation between carcinogenicity in animals and possible human risk cannot be made on a scientific basis."
The scientific situation has not changed today, but the political one no doubt has. And we certainly do not like what "public health" has changed into, and the world it is preparing for us in the near future.
January 5 - Alaska Joins The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation's Strategy to Price-gouge Persons Who Smoke - Even if every false claim that anti-tobacco activists proclaim about tobacco was true it would not justify such willful and crafted price-gouging of "Target Group" consumers because such a fact situation would mandate public policy adverse to tobacco control's financial interests.
If what the anti-tobacco enterprise proclaims about tobacco were true tobacco would certainly qualify as a Weapon of Mass Destruction that is continuously and repetitively employed. 420,000 dead per year is nearly 15 times those who perished in the tragedy of September 11, two years ago (the equivalent of 945,000 dead from tobacco over that period). In today's 2004 political environment, the only rational and honest public policy that could rise from anti-tobacco's claims about tobacco being true and 420,000 therefore dead each year from those products would be to immediately prohibit the manufacture and distribution of tobacco products and to round up and deport tobacco company executives to Guantanamo as known terrorist enemy combatants.
Clearly such a prohibition was and is within the current powers of state and federal government, but to do so would also cut off the $206 billion-plus MSA gravy train and eliminate the now-stable source consumer base for pharmaceutical nicotine replacement products. The twisted nature of today's special-interest political cabal is simply amazing: one can be fined, fired, lose a professional license in some states, or lose custody of children, etc. over consuming a legal tobacco product, however those who anti-tobacco claims are directly responsible for nearly a million dead on US soil are rewarded with a state-revenue-sharing tobacco settlement that not only keeps them in business but also increases and protects their profits derived through distributing allegedly lethal products.
Norman Kjono is not the first to marvel at the hypocrisy of those who moan and groan about the death toll supposedly wrought by tobacco yet who refuse to make illegal the manufacture of such deadly devices. Rarely, however, has the dichotomy of anti-tobacco's words versus their actions been so strongly addressed. As we noted last year when the American Lung Association rushed to the podium to denounce a state bill that would have made tobacco sales illegal, anti-tobacco's hands are drenched with blood with more blood on the way as long as long as they support a status quo that slaughters millions.
November 27 - Now Here's A Huge Conflict Of Interest - The American Heart Association on Thursday announced it had signed a "formal alliance" with the U.S. Labor Department's Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). The agreement signed Thursday calls for OSHA and the AHA to develop training and education programs on automated external defibrillators in the workplace. The two agencies also will work on "employee wellness" guidelines that can be incorporated into workplace safety and health programs.
The chill in the air is caused by the scary prospect of a corrupt health "charity" entwining itself into the nation's workplace regulatory agency. Placing this advocate of behavior modification and social engineering into a position of power bodes ill for America's work force. As
Wanda Hamilton notes:
With good reason, the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration has NOT deemed ETS an occupational safety issue and, therefore, has NOT called for restrictions on smoking in the workplace. Actually, there was no way they could do that without also banning so many other substances that shared properties with ETS that they would have shut down industry altogether.
But now the American Heart Association, which is NOT part of the government and which is not answerable to the people or the legislators, has become a "partner" with OSHA to "manage" heart health in the workplace. Having such a corrupt and dishonest and money-hungry private organization be part of any government program is not good news for workers or their employers.
November 21 - How It Works - Bamboozling The Public With Shoddy Science - A new "study" claims a rise in heart attacks treated at a Brooklyn hospital can be traced to the Sept. 11 attacks. But it's hard to decide which had less thought go into it - this inadequate research or the American Heart Association's decision to promote it.
junkscience.com, is far too kind regarding the American Heart Association's promotion of this bit of scientific dreck. AHA has too many highly paid con men on the payroll to undertake an action without thought. AHA knew exactly what it was doing.
Milloy marshals the preposterous claims of this study into a row then smacks them down like a row of dominos. Of especial interest for those who have dealt with the doublespeak of anti-tobacco pressure groups such as the American Heart Association will especially enjoy the final paragraphs of this junk science autopsy. Pulling information out of so-called health education outfits is like extracting impacted wisdom teeth. It takes a strong stomach and great determination. Milloy's revelations are worth all the effort.
October 27 - Helena Study May Be Anti-tobacco's Waterloo - With the insertion of a classic junk science study into the controversy surrounding the New York smoking ban, it's worth recalling another debunking of a laughable attempt to justify smoking bans. When the city of Helena Montana banned smoking in restaurants and bars for a period of six months, two local doctors conducted a "study" to prove that the ban had saved lives. So far out of established protocols, this study outdid the worst junk science seen thus far. Instead of being consigned to the trash can, the study was used in a failed attempt to prevent the Helena ban from being overturned. Now its reared its ugly head in an attempted, failed, we hope, of keeping the New York smoking ban intact. Jacob Sullum eviscerated this so-called study last spring and was the subject of the usual smear by Mr. Junk Science himself.
Stanton Glantz is the quintessential Lying Anti. A long line of Glantz debunkers had already formed before Jacob Sullum joined it. Here's some commentary that began after Glantz tried to explain his exquisitely ridiculous Helena, Montana secondhand smoke "study" last April. Links are provided both to Sullum's calmly devastating criticism of the Helena malarkey, and to Glantz's typically vituperative response, to Sullum. Reader comments follow. The readers' opinion board has been neglected of late, but it's still open, and it's always fun to poke some more holes in a blowhard. Stanton Glantz is filled with an inexhaustible supply of hot air. Check this out for a good laugh, and add your own barbs, if you like.
On a positive note, the general public is also catching on to the absurdity of the Helena Study. Letters to the editor from two Seattle residents shows that Lincoln was right. You cannot fool all of the people all of the time.
October 21 - Secondhand Junk - I could only laugh last April when I first heard about a study claiming that a smoking ban in Helena, Mont., cut the city's heart attack rate by 58 percent in six months.
First, the study isn't easy to evaluate -- but not because it's rocket science. There simply is no study to evaluate. The results were issued in typical junk science style via a quick-and-dirty slideshow presentation at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology. Six months later, the study still is not available to the public.
Laughable though this ersatz study is, the august pages of the New York Times found the space to print a paean to its revelations, sung by an anti-tobacco acolyte. With all the denigration the Times has faced over its credibility of late it's amazing the paper would risk sullying its image even further by printing a piece of garbage that praises an anti-tobacco "study" that stinks to high heaven.
Basically the Helena study was the creation of a pair of anti-smoking doctors who, after the city banned smoking everywhere, counted the number of incidents where people sought medical assistance because of heart problems. They then compared the number with incidents occurring before the ban. Although the numbers were extremely small, by necessity since Helena is a tiny city, and the time expanse to record heart problems was limited to six months, the period in which the ban was in effect, the doctors found that there were fewer heart attacks during the smoking ban. Now that the ban has been rudely consigned to the trash bin, heart attacks have resumed their pre-ban level. And pigs really can fly.
Lurking around the fringes of the "Helena Study" is statistical manipulator extraordinaire Stanton Glantz, mechanical engineer and resident anti-tobacco guru at the University of California at San Francisco. Like a fly feeding on doggie poo, Glantz darts, weaves and buzzes, taking what he needs to advance his agenda, then moving off to fresher dung.
On the other hand, I'm not surprised to see Stan Glantz's involvement in the Mirage of Helena.
Glantz's colleague on the Helena study tried to pass him off to me as "professor of statistics." But I know better. I've observed Glantz for some time. I've debated him on the radio. He's a shameless say-anything, do-anything anti-smoking zealot.
Steve Milloy has Glantz' number. It's astonishing that the New York Times, consumed by its anti-tobacco fanaticism would, even by implication, support the manure dump that is the Stanton Glantz trademark.
October 10 - Tax Money Given To Anti-tobacco To Lobby For Anti-Smoking Laws - Let's get this straight. The government of New Zealand taxes its citizens, including New Zealand smokers, and uses taxpayers' money to pay private (and incidentally loony) anti-smoking organizations like Action on Smoking and Health, to lobby the government of New Zealand, for fanatical anti-smoking legislation, such as smoking bans, and tobacco taxes. This has been going on for years. The government of New Zealand has been writing out the checks to the loony groups. Yet the government of New Zealand didn't know this was happening. They say they didn't anyway. Members of Parliament want an investigation.
We hope they sort things out. In fact something like this corrupt and convoluted taxpayer financing of health hysteria is going on all over the world. In the Nazi era Hitler used the confiscated wealth of the Jews to finance his mad persecution of the Jews. Today, in a host of countries, it is primarily cigarette tax revenue that is used to persecute smokers. In the US, "hidden tax" revenues from Tobacco Master Settlement payments, also financed by cigarette smokers, are often spent by states to the same mad end.
So, if the New Zealand situation comes as a surprise to the country's MPs, it's no surprise to FORCES. New Zealand anti-smoking groups have been happily spending public funds, lobbying government and the media with a hate campaign, for years. In this they are not different from their counterpart organizations across the globe. It's business as usual to them. According to this article, under contract with the New Zealand government, in return for payment amounting to millions of New Zealand dollars, "ASH is required to appear in the media at least 50 times a year and liaise with MPs. The Smokefree Coalition is paid to lobby to 'create a climate of support'." Reached for comment, regarding the practice of lobbying Members of Parliament for specific legislation, Trish Fraser of ASH casually confirms, "We do use Ministry of Health money for that."
People wonder how anti-smoking could possibly have reached such monstrous proportion worldwide. We point again to the Nazi precedent. Joseph Goebbels believed if a lie is told often enough, from a position of authority, it becomes the truth, to the masses. Prohibitionist zealots have always been among us. This is simply their heyday. So entrenched has their cultist psychology become in decadent international culture, they are a formidable foe, to sane public policy. Still individual citizens and interested groups fight them everywhere.
A New Zealand bar and restaurant smoking ban seemed a done deal even though the parties affected, business owners and their patrons, do not want it. Bruce Robertson, chief executive of the New Zealand Hospitality Association, points to the new investigation of corruption in New Zealand's anti-smoking movement, and pleads for a reconsideration of sanity. The smoking ban bill, he says, "should now be referred back to the select committee for reconsideration with an open mind, rather than the prevailing attitude whereby the government obviously has a fixed view on the subject and either will not or cannot listen to reasoned argument." We pray some day they will or can. Keep trying, Mr. Robertson.
October 7 - More Proof Anti-tobacco Lies - Here's one from the archives, suitable for enhancing perspective, in these prohibitionist times. Dateline 1998. British smokers were protesting increasing cigarette taxes and smoking restrictions. Clive Bates, Director of Action on Smoking and Health, called the smokers "a tobacco industry front group," and said the smokers' concerns were "scaremongering." After all, Mr. Bates explained, "No one is seriously talking about a complete ban on smoking in pubs and restaurants ... separate smoking and non-smoking areas should be set up in pubs and restaurants. We reckon that would have strong support from both smokers and non-smokers."
Five years have passed. Anti-smoking moves in calculated steps and it is never satisfied. Cigarette taxes have continued rising exponentially all over the world. Absolutist bar and restaurant smoking bans are appearing in Great Britain just as they are in numerous other countries. A comprehensive European ban is being pushed by the European Union and the World Health Organization. No organization has been more instrumental in, or delighted with these developments, than Action on Smoking and Health. Their line today is that they are not seeking total tobacco prohibition, don't be silly, they don't want to send tobacco smokers to jail. They are, folks. They do.
September 2 - Political Considerations Direct Scientific Outcomes - The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) yesterday said it would not force automakers, oil companies or others to reduce "greenhouse-gas" emissions from motor vehicles, a decision that might complicate efforts by states to limit the release of carbon dioxide. The EPA denied a 1999 petition from environmental groups, which had asked the agency to use its powers under the Clean Air Act to regulate carbon dioxide and other gas emissions from new vehicles. Instead, the agency concluded that carbon dioxide, hydrofluorocarbons and other emissions did not meet the legal definition of "air pollutants" under the Clean Air Act.
How can this be? The EPA, which made eliminating secondhand smoke a national crusade, blithely gives the fumes emitted by fossil fuels a pass. Norman Kjono explains:
The EPA refuses to classify emissions from burning hydrocarbons in automobiles and busses as air pollutants. Of course, the fact that hydrocarbons come from burning oil rather than tobacco wouldn't have anything whatsoever to do with that EPA conclusion . . . Considering that the Bush administration cabinet and its senior officials could serve simultaneously as the board of directors of oil and utility corporations, there may be a strong message indeed in the EPA's present conclusion about air pollution. The message appears to be that in today's political culture legitimate science bends to the will of vested economic interests. But we've know that for years now, at least since the December 1992 EPA report on secondhand smoke. So the current EPA ruling is more of a confirmation of the obvious than a new or honest scientific work product.
Well, that's interesting. I suspect that secondhand smoke can no longer be classified as an air pollutant, either!
Notably the EPA refuses to classify carbon dioxide as a pollutant, and also refuses to classify many other emissions from burning hydrocarbons as pollutants, too. Many of the constituents of secondhand smoke are also emissions from hydrocarbons and automobile exhaust. Hydrocarbon exhaust from cars and buses also contains many toxic substances that secondhand smoke does not.
July 22 - Prime time Consumer Freedom - "I would not be surprised to see McDonald's paying more than $50 billion over the next decade" in "punitive damages" and "compensation for pain and suffering," greedy trial lawyer John Banzhaf told a British newspaper yesterday. But thanks to ABC News, around seven million Americans saw the Center for Consumer Freedom's advertisement mocking buffoons like Banzhaf, who are trying to turn food companies into their next cash cow.
A 20/20 "Give Me A Break" segment on obesity lawsuits gave Banzhaf plenty of time to make his case -- but even veteran newswoman Barbara Walters concluded, "That sounds crazy...whatever happened to self-control?"
Q: What is wrong with self-control? A: Lawyers just can't get filthy rich and change the behavior of US citizens, that's what is wrong with self control. Personal responsibility and free choice just does not enter into their equation. Greed is a good thing as long as Banzhaf is reaping the profits.
July 17 - So That's How It Works - LOS ANGELES (AP) - `"American Family,'' the first Hispanic drama on broadcast television, will return to the Public Broadcasting Service with 13 new episodes.
The series, from filmmaker Gregory Nava and with an ensemble cast including Edward James Olmos, Raquel Welch, Sonia Braga and Esai Morales, is about an extended east Los Angeles family.
Johnson & Johnson, which had been the sole corporate underwriter for the first season in 2002, will be joined as a sponsor by the American Legacy Foundation, a nonprofit anti-smoking group.
Care to predict how many episodes will dispense anti-smoker slander and anti-tobacco disinformation? Johnson & Johnson (along with its marketing, "non-profit" front group) makes money pushing smoking cessation devices while the American Legacy Foundation's only reason for existence is to "persuade" smokers to quit. And by the way, since the ALF's mission was set forth by the tobacco settlement and that mission does not include sponsoring television shows, the payment given to it should be reduced by the exact amount it has given to PBS to produce a network drama.
June 27 - Slam The Cell Door Shut And Throw Away The Keys - On occasion our rhetoric waxes a bit heated. Contemplating the outrageous civil liberties violations, scientific fraud and outright thievery committed by anti-tobacco we have called for the jailing of the most egregious offenders. Until now such a call for justice has had a hollow ring. This is America after all where murderers, if rich and famous, do get away with it. No special interest group is as wealthy as anti-tobacco and with friends in every statehouse and even on the bench the likelihood of anti-tobacco being held accountable seems remote.
Until now. It is with satisfaction that we note Dan Morales, former attorney general of Texas, is confined in jail while awaiting trial in a federal court. Not long ago Morales was crowing about his part in the so-called tobacco settlement. The tobacco settlement, affecting all 50 states, is the largest transfer of wealth from working Americans to those who produce nothing. In total, $260-billion dollars will be stolen from taxpaying, law-abiding citizens. Billions have been and will be paid to private attorneys who, through government connections, shaped and guided the tobacco settlement. Morales had hoped to use his part in the settlement as a spring board to higher office but the voters of Texas, to their credit, know a con man when they see one and he lost his bid to be the Democratic candidate for state governor. After that defeat it has been one long slide downhill for Morales, culminating in jail time.
Although the specific charges that brought him to stony lonesome are not specifically related to the Texas tobacco settlement, he would not be facing those charges had he not been the prime mover and instigator. Had there not been a tobacco settlement or had Morales not played such a prominent role he would still be a two-bit pol with a political future. Now he's a jail bird and his face through the bars sure does look worried.
June 12 -Liberals promote 'reefer madness' in Canada - Observant people have noticed a strange inconsistency of those who advocate the legalization or decriminalization of marijuana while simultaneously endorsing every public policy that results in the de facto prohibition of tobacco. The same politicians, columnists and do-gooders who wax eloquent about the wonders of marijuana and who deplore the insanity of the "war on drugs" are very happy to eject smokers from restaurants, take children away from tobacco-smoking parents and price cigarettes out of the reach of those of modest means.
None have examined this phenomenon more thoroughly than Warren Klass, president of FORCES-Canada. We reprint an opinion piece that appeared in the Providence Journal.
June 9 - Pictures Worth Thousands Of Words - IF TRUTH IS ON THEIR SIDE, WHY DO THEY LIE? One pro-truth, pro-choice activist has taken the time to prepare graphs and pie charts illustrating how overblown, if not downright deceptive, are the claims of anti-tobacco. Stings of numbers are numbing, a fact anti-tobacco exploits, whereas a simple picture using the data anti-tobacco produces shows that smoking hysteria is just that.
Take a look at the pie chart representation of the 430,000 plus Americans killed by smoking. With nearly half representing the very old, of what use is this figure to anti-tobacco except to muddy the waters? Low birth weight? Obviously not caused by smoking mothers. Attention disorder syndrome? Ditto.
In an act of real public beneficence and generosity, the activists offers these pictures to the public. Present them to policy makers and members of the media. Those who view them and still hew to the anti-smoking line are either willfully dishonest or are so mentally disturbed as to make them public dangers.
June 9 - Manufacturing Public Support - These are heady days for Joe Cherner, the erstwhile stockbroker who made a fortune then devoted his brilliant talents to ending smoking in New York City, New York state, then the world. Although he now lives in France where he needn't be exposed to the consequences of his smoke-free wet dreams, he is all over the country preaching his creed and twisting legislator's arms. He surfaced in Delaware where, masquerading as a resident, he sang the praises of the smoking ban that is ruining that state's hospitality industry. His name simultaneously appears as a big wig at something called the Smoke Free Action Network in Washington, DC which takes credit for delivering 856 letters to the New York state legislature supporting a total smoking ban.
One alert resident of New York took a look at this effort and discovered the following which has since been sent to the New York legislature:
Sent to ALL the New York legislators:
I would like to call to your attention that this website: SmokeFree.Net is sponsoring an EZ letter writing campaign in support of the NYS smoking ban and opposing any amendments to the existing ban. The website boast of 856 letters of support however, after examining their senders list I notice that, to date there are approximately 118 NON New York state residents soliciting our legislature and over 60 individuals sending multiple letters(3 or more, some as many as 6).
I am outraged at such an underhand anti-smoking ploy and feel that it should be exposed for what it is.
June 9 - Prevention Programs And Scientific Nonsense - Anyone who reads FORCES regularly is certainly aware of our conviction that something is very rotten in the world of public health policy making. Moreover, it has come to our attention on numerous occasions that we, as members of that public for whom "interventions" are intended, are not the only ones. Many people of integrity in the world of health, education and science - and indeed, in public health, where all three of these fields intersect, are worried themselves, if not downright scandalized - about an increasingly "acceptable" lack of integrity in science, bureaucratic function creep, and an atmosphere of intimidation toward dissenting opinion. Usually, they are afraid to speak out about for fear of losing their jobs.
Thus, it is always refreshing when someone from "inside the system" musters enough courage to be critical. This article, published in Policy Review Online, chronicles the hostility that met one presenter at an annual meeting of the Society for Prevention Research when she critiqued methodological flaws in the evaluation of certain programs intended to prevent substance abuse among young people. What she found was that "the response to my attempt to examine the scientific base of some widely advocated prevention programs was an ad hominem attack coupled with defensive arguments justifying the violation of basic tenets of evaluation practice in prevention research." In her interesting exploration of why this might have occurred we are introduced to terms like "anti-science" and "post-modern researcher". In the end, she concludes that deference to authority, not truth, is the reigning value in what has become a proudlyirrational public policy culture.
May 21 - Threatening The Opposition - To believe that second-hand smoking may not be very harmful has become a thought-crime almost akin to Holocaust denial. Those who dare express doubts must expect gales of hysterical abuse from every point of the PC compass. Their integrity will be questioned, along with the marital status of their parents. The difference, of course, is that while the evidence for the Holocaust as historical fact is overwhelming, by no means has it been proved that inhaling other people's tobacco smoke causes the suffering attributed to it.
The recent release of a massive study showing no risk to nonsmokers from secondhand smoke has brought forth the vitriolic denunciations the anti-tobacco enterprise so dearly loves. The authors are pawns of Big Tobacco. Their methods are invalid. The study is a sinister plot advanced by special interests to undermine the health of the world. Long on invective and short on concrete criticism, the operatives bleat and bray to an increasingly skeptical public.
Tom Utley captures the snarling panic that defines anti-tobacco approach to dissention to its self-proclaimed gospel. He notes that stripped of the adjectives and innuendo the excoriation boils down to, "I won't look at the facts and will, instead, hold my breath and turn blue." Like children, or religious fanatics, anti-tobacco is throwing a temper tantrum. Unlike ill-bred children, however, anti-tobacco can muster up a smear machine that threatens to crush all dissenters.
"Exposure to environmental tobacco smoke could not plausibly cause a 30% increase in risk of coronary heart disease," they said. "It seems premature to conclude that environmental tobacco smoke causes death from coronary heart disease and lung cancer."
In the present climate of opinion, that is an extraordinarily brave thing to say. It is particularly courageous of Dr. Enstrom, who works at the school of public health at California University, Los Angeles, which I imagine to be the very Kremlin of political correctness in the world capital of the phenomenon.
Prof. Kabat teaches at the department of preventive medicine in the State University of the relatively civilized New York -- at least, New York was civilized, before the unspeakable Mayor Bloomberg turfed the city's smokers out of its bars and restaurants and on to the streets.
Dr. Enstrom and Prof. Kabat are indeed very brave men. They have pointed out the the emperor has no clothes and the con men growing rich off of spreading secondhand smoke fears are furious and vow destruction. Too bad for anti-tobacco that each have reputations that are unsullied and that what their study reveals is true. The secondhand smoke fraud is reaching the end of the line.
May 21 - Health Police On A Rampage - The demise of a supposed major risk to public health might be expected to prompt celebration among medical experts and campaigners. Instead, they scrambled to condemn the study, its authors, its conclusions, and the journal that published them.
Researchers who dissent from the party line face character assassination and the termination of grants. Those who report their findings are vilified as lackeys of the tobacco industry, and accused of professional misconduct (in 1998, campaigners tried to have this newspaper censured by the Press Complaints Commission for our reports on passive smoking. They failed.).
The termination of grants is pertinent to the just-released Enstrom/Kabat study that shows secondhand smoke is not hazardous. The four decade study received funding from the American Cancer Society and, during its recent stages, from the Tobacco Control Office of California's Health and Human Services. Both entities, although acknowledged anti-tobacco organizations, claim to be scrupulously fair open to scientific inquiry. As it became clear that Enstrom/Kabat were veering from anti-tobacco orthodoxy, California's Tobacco Control cut funding. It didn't find anything amiss with the methods of the researchers but a conclusion that secondhand smoke is not the deadly toxin anti-tobacco claims it to be would be highly embarrassing to an organization that exists only to eliminate smokers. Such is the value of scientific query to the prohibitionists.
In reality, the conclusions reached by Dr. Enstrom and Prof. Kabat, are similar to the conclusions reached by the World Health Organization several years ago. The difference between the WHO and the two researchers is that Enstrom and Kabat are not hiding their findings that secondhand smoke is not harmful to nonsmokers, as the WHO attempted to do. For their candor and honesty, the two are being demonized. This time, however, the smears will not work.
May 15 - U.S. Lowers Blood Pressure Guidelines - Millions of people who thought they had healthy blood pressure are about to get a surprise: The government says levels once considered normal or borderline actually signal "prehypertension," and those people must take care to stave off full-blown high blood pressure.
It's a major change, in new federal guidelines being released Wednesday, that affects people with blood pressure as low as 120 over 80 - once thought to be a good level but now considered not good enough.
So what was once acceptable is now considered too high. Just like the new weight standards, a stroke of the pen has now thrust millions of healthy people with normal blood pressures into the realm of the unhealthy. And what do unhealthy people need?
Well, for one thing they need drugs. For another they need to be told what to do. Lowering the blood pressure considered healthy is a boon for the pharmaceutical industry and great news for the every expanding health establishment. As with smoking and eating, it all boils down to someone getting rich off behavior control.
May 8 - At Least She Didn't Take The Silver - Lansing, Mich. - The former office manager of Tobacco Free Michigan was charged with embezzling $50,000 from the nonprofit group. Rebecca Chapman, 32, is the latest of a string of residents charged in recent months with embezzling money from Lansing-area agencies.
Chapman was charged Monday in Lansing District Court with embezzlement, forgery and other felony counts. She is free on $50,000 bond. Her lawyer, James Bliss, declined to comment saying he was studying the allegations. - Associated Press
April 17 - The Jackals Are Snarling - Like a Victorian morality tale where the evildoers finally face their comeuppance with an ill bred display of back stabbing, the players in the tobacco shakedown are pointing accusatory fingers at each other as the case against former Attorney General Morales wends its sordid way through the court. In the heady days after the Texas tobacco settlement was announced, Morales' face filled television screens and his triumphant accolades to himself were spread throughout the newspapers. He was mentioned frequently as a strong contender for the governorship.
How the mighty have fallen. Despite pulling off the "most important" public health initiative in history, Morales lost the Democratic gubernatorial primary and soon after found himself in hot legal water. Last month the hot water reached the boiling point when Morales was named in a 12-count federal indictment, one of which alleges that he cut in a buddy on the tobacco settlement case fees. Now the five lawyers that he hired while state attorney general to represent the state in the tobacco litigation are seeking a protective order to prevent Morales from disclosing information about the tobacco case to parties outside of the litigation.
To the public this looks like the tobacco settlement lawyers are mighty fearful that Morales, sitting in the hot seat, may spill the beans about all sorts of sordid details about how Texas shook down the tobacco industry. His former comrades are quite willing for Morales to face the music, as long as they aren't included in the chorus.
April 11 - Stanton Glantz's Margin Of Error - A low point in the history of junk science was reached recently with the announcement of a study conducted by two doctors in Helena, Montana, that "proved" banning smoking cuts heart attacks. Although the smoking ban lasted only six months and Helena is a very small city, the anti-tobacco doctors, who were proponents of the ban, issued press releases trumpeting the results as yet one more reason to ban smoking in restaurants, bars and other private property.
The study, laughable on its face, veered into the bizarre when Stanton Glantz, an anti-smoking activist working at the University of California, endorsed its results. Although Glantz has produced a wagon load of junk science in his career, he is a smooth operator who takes great pains to maintain the illusion that he is a scientist. Endorsing the glaringly shoddy study from Helena is a departure that is more interesting than yet another invalid study cranked out by two anti-tobacco country doctors.
Among others, Jacob Sullum examined the study and found it wanting. Glantz has responded to Sullum's criticism, although not to Sullum himself. Posting to an internet site that caters to the Kool Aid drinkers in the tobacco control industry, Glantz answers him by .... you guessed it, calling Sullum a tobacco industry apologist. He also takes issue on a few quantifiable points which Sullum neatly answers.
March 21 - Make smoke, not war - From England, here is a nice essay from Sean Gabb, who has much to say about the insult to free speech recently perpetrated with the prohibition of tobacco advertisement: "What we have, therefore, is an act of censorship. Perhaps it is difficult to feel as sorry for the Directors and shareholders of a big tobacco company that for some political martyr. But this is, even so, censorship. As such, it is to be protested."
We are, of course, in full agreement with Mr. Gabb - except, perhaps, in tactics. Protested, Mr. Gabb?... The health Nazis couldn't care less about the protest of those who smoke, and/or defend self-determination and freedom. To them, just the perception of health overrides anything by default, including - and especially - freedom of speech, expression and information, scientific ethics, and the liberty of individuals to do with their lives as they see fit. Never mind protesting; to change things, it takes positive action, such as civil disobedience, continuous, systematic and well-planned strikes by the interested categories (hospitality industry, tobacco industry, etc.), and individual/collective actions such as refusing to file an income tax return at the end of the year (that would get the government's attention) - not to mention, for smokers, to really start going by the book on the job.
Do I have to observe the antismoking laws, and smoke in the street like a whore? Very well... but I just happen to notice that the electric cables in this building do not exactly comply with regulations - better call the safety inspector... oh, look at that: the way the inventory is kept in this warehouse is not by the book, and maybe is even illegal... I better make an anonymous phone call to the taxman... catch the drift? And if somebody has something to say, what the hell, why should I be the only one who has to obey the law because I smoke? Having adopted the zero tolerance nonsense, we may as well use it universally - and get those who oppress us to comply to the letter with the ten of thousands of little laws that people inevitably break every day. Censorship and oppression are to be actively fought with any means available, and anything goes. We are at war, and the examples above will cause damage - and have an effect. Protesting is just for civilised people in a free environment where everybody is equal - which is certainly not the case of the health Reich and its followers.
March 7 - Attorney General Indicted Over Tobacco Settlement Payola - Former Texas Attorney General Dan Morales was charged Thursday with trying to steer hundreds of millions of dollars in attorney fees from the state's settlement with tobacco companies to a friend.
"This is a case of an elected official charged with abusing the public trust," U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton said. "This indictment alleges that he violated that trust by backdating contracts, forging government records and converting campaign contributions to personal use."
From coast to coast, state attorneys general feel a chill wind a' blowing over the announcement that one of the architects of the tobacco settlement is facing serious charges arising from alleged misconduct while shaking down the tobacco industry. Although Texas settled with the tobacco industry on its own, its settlement, as well as the settlements in Mississippi, Florida and Minnesota, presaged the nationwide tobacco settlement that will cost smokers over two hundred billion dollars.
Morales' legal woes round out the bad karma that hit each of the politicians in these states who wrapped themselves in the tobacco settlement. Skip Humphrey, the attorney general in Minnesota who trampled innocent bystanders to gloat before TV cameras about his role in breaking the tobacco industry, came in third in his race to be governor. The anti-tobacco organization he set up is facing the possibility of being de-funded.
Mississippi's attorney general, Michael Moore's political career is in the toilet despite high hopes -- and endless media attention during the early days of the tobacco shakedown -- of climbing to a higher office on the backs of corporations and the customers they serve.
Only Lawton Chiles, governor of Florida and instigator of that state's tobacco industry shakedown, escaped embarrassment after leaving office and that's only because he died, prematurely, while puffing away on his exercise bike.
The fate of these four grifters is indicative of the moral bankruptcy of anti-tobacco and a cheery moral object lesson for decent Americans.
February 25 - Anti-tobacco Opposes Cigarette Tax Increase...Unless It Gets A Cut - A coalition of public health groups yesterday vowed to campaign against Gov. James E. McGreevey's proposed 40-cent tax increase on a pack of cigarettes if he doesn't rescind his proposed cuts to anti-smoking programs.
At the same time, the groups said they would support an even bigger tax increase -- half a buck per pack -- if the extra dime was set aside for anti-tobacco efforts.
These desperate days are causing anti-tobacco to loose its cool. For years the goons have gone from state to state selling the lie that raising the cigarette tax induces people to quit. In reality what it does it induce them to buy their smokes out of state and maybe reduce consumption a bit. The cigarette tax is about maxed out but old-school politicians in New Jersey still think they can balance the state's budget but sticking it to the smokers once again. This time the anti-tobacco crowd is promising to oppose the tax increase unless they are given a hefty cut. Their preposterous blackmail attempt is doubly amusing since anti-tobacco is one lobbying enterprise that has lost almost all of its clout and its naked greed in New Jersey is bound to reduce anti-tobacco's influence even more. Keep begging for the bucks, show the public what you are really about.
On a cultural note, please note who sponsors the online publication reporting this story. Ever wonder why there is nary a negative word about the pharmaceutical front group named the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the special interest group that lobbies for smoking bans? Wonder no longer, just look at who is paying the bills.
February 7 - There Ought Not To Be A Law - Today, the distinction between personal morality and public policy is collapsing. Much of the blame rests with political correctness. This evolved form of liberalism declares that certain ideas and attitudes are improper and, so, should be prohibited by law. For example, because it is improper to view women as inferior to men, discrimination against women should be prohibited. The law should encourage correct attitudes and discourage incorrect ones.
Political correctness stands in sharp contrast to the traditional American value of legally respecting, not restricting, everyone's right to their personal beliefs. The beliefs may be accurate or false, virtuous or vicious, but everyone has the right to use their own judgment to arrive at their own conclusions.
It's a common story. A politician pushes for a smoking ban because his mother, or grandfather or best friend was a smoker who died. The personal becomes legislation. Wendy McElroy, author, feminist and member of the FORCES Honour Committee, argues for less laws and less interference by the state into affairs best left settled by individuals.
February 4 - Minnesota Anti-tobacco Steps In It Again - There is nothing more fun than spending other people's money. Target Market, the youth arm of the state's tobacco settlement slush fund, loves spreading its ill-gotten gains to ad and travel agencies, as well as concert promoters and bands. Their last foray into the entertainment business was a fiasco when a raunchy band was hired to perform at an anti-smoking concert. Not only were the band members unabashed celebrants of the party ethos of hard drinking and drugging, the lead singer claimed his raspy voice as the result of chain smoking. Parents were outraged and Target Market swore that such a debacle would not reoccur.
Surprise, surprise. The anti-smoking group was lying! It' latest concert promises to be quite an eye-opener. We link to Anti Target Market.
January 22 - Anti-tobacco Unmasked - The tobacco control industry tells us that smoking kills 500,000 Americans per year. Passive smoke kills anywhere from 65,000 to 100,000 nonsmoking Americans per year. Smokers cost society in medical costs far in excess to what pay in on taxes and the tobacco settlement. Smoking causes asthma in children, sudden infant death syndrome, juvenile delinquency, mental illness and nearly every form of cancer. According to anti-tobacco smoking is the single most horrendous scourge the world, let alone America, has ever suffered.
So horrible is smoking that when a brave legislator proposes a law to ban tobacco sales and tobacco smoking in his state, he can surely count on the hundreds of health groups who damn smoking daily to jump on board. Not quite.
Representative Mike Grosz, Republican of North Dakota, received a very cold shoulder when he announced his bill to end the carnage by making smoking and the sale of smoking material illegal in his state. Not surprisingly, considering the greed of politicians, his bill died an overwhelming death when presented to his fellow legislators.
What is scandalous is that the American Lung Association, American Heart Association, among many other so-called "health" organizations
trooped to the capitol to speak vehemently against the bill. So adamant that the carnage must continue were the guardians of public health that many legislators were stunned. After years of testifying about the horrors of smoking, their refusal to embrace a plant to end tobacco addiction and disease is inexplicable.
While it is true that the American Lung Association, American Heart Association, American Cancer Society make money off each cigarette sold, financial enrichment surely take a far distant place to ending the plague of tobacco. With the true nature of anti-tobacco on display in South Dakota's capitol, the people who run these health groups are revealed to have blood on their hands. They are profiting from the death, illness and disorder that smoking causes. That they want it to continue makes them far worse than the corporations that sell the stuff.
January 14 - Excoriating The American Lung Association - We beg to differ with the American Lung Association that Oklahoma has squandered its tobacco settlement money. Oklahoma got an "F" from the association in how it funds smoking cessation programs. This meaningless grade by an increasingly militant association ignores the fiscal crisis extant in this state and in most others.
The Oklahoman gets an "A" for recognizing a shakedown when it sees it. Most of the press, so far, has ignored the American Lung Association's self-serving "report card" to the states on how they are doing in the tobacco wars. The thrust of the ALA's grading project is designed to shame to politicians into shuffling more of rapidly diminishing state funds into the pockets of well-oiled special interests groups, including the ALA. Considering the fiscal straights most states find themselves in, the ALA's campaign is a losing proposition but it is refreshing that a newspaper has the guts to point out that the pressure group is indeed militant and greedy.
Where the Oklahoman falls short is its reiteration of many of the ALA's talking points. By remarking that "most everyone hates tobacco or is at least not overly fond of it", the editorialists are revealing their isolation from normal people. Most people don't even think about tobacco, recognizing smoking as a personal preference that is trivial in the scheme of things. The paper also needs to educate itself about smoking cessation products and their abysmal failure rate of 85 percent. Still, seeing the ALA beaten up in the pages of a major newspaper is refreshing and could turn out to be habit forming.
January 8 - Whining For More Loot - But Norman Kjono, a spokesman for Forces International, a group that supports smokers' rights, said the American Lung Association is simply "arguing for their own pocketbooks" in suggesting that tobacco settlement money should go to antismoking programs.
"They want the money spent on themselves and their programs, rather than other public uses," he said.
Although economic bad times plague each state in the union, the legislators must also endure a plague of locusts in the form of tobacco control operatives screeching for money. The American Lung Association is particularly egregious in its demands that its bank account be filled at the expense of every taxpayer in the United States. It's gimmick is to issue report cards to each state rating its commitment to anti-tobacco policies. Needless to say all states are failing.
The ALA is especially angered that the tobacco settlement, a $200-billion plus shakedown of America's smokers is plugging states' deficits rather than enriching anti-tobacco special interests. It's press releases imply that the settlement was to be used to fund anti-smoking programs. Not true. The settlement money, ill-gotten booty though it is, can be spent anyway the states see fit. Not surprisingly all states consider wasting that money on ridiculous television anti-smoking ads and expensive programs is not going to cut it with voters. Economic and political reality has hit the tobacco control industry and it isn't happy.
Minnesota Anti-tobacco Outfit Thumbs Its Nose At The Law -1/6/02 Anti-tobacco is mighty self-righteous as it waxes indignant over the supposed (but never proved) misbehavior of the tobacco industry. The fulminations are especially bitter when the kid card is played. After all, as we all know, the anti-smoking frenzy is all about the children. With its self-proclaimed mantle of propriety and rectitude at stake, anti-tobacco's refusal in Minnesota to follow the law would at first seem wildly reckless. As one teen anti-anti-smoking group is discovering, however, anti-tobacco is between a rock and a hard place. If it coughs up the information it is legally obliged to provide it risks exposing for all to see just how fast and loose it plays with public funds. If it keeps the damaging information obscured it risks annoying state politicians who already take a dim view of Minnesota's anti-tobacco cabal. It's culture of secrecy and deception may be at an end, however, as the Minnesota Partnership for Action Against Tobacco is ordered to obey open meeting laws and turn over ALL requests for data under the Minnesota Data practices Act. We link to FORCES-Duluth for the full story. The New Year has started on a positive note.
It Ain't About Health. It's About Destroying Corporations 1/6/02- From Nova Scotia comes yet another scheme to deal with underage smoking, a problem caused by anti-tobacco activists who are more responsible for underage smoking than a hundred Joe Camels. To teach the youngsters the value of citizenship, the good and wise rulers have decided to criminalize an activity that was accepted, if not endorsed, as a normal rite of passage during a more enlightened era. Henceforth all those under the age of 19 who are observed smoking tobacco will be subject to police action. Although the police themselves are not enthusiastic about the new law which, if vigorously enforced, will drain resources from actual crime-fighting efforts, the politicians say the law is needed because "We think that kids have to understand this is not something they can do with impunity."
One who disagrees with the new law is the ubiquitous Garfield Mahood, executive director of the Non-Smokers' Rights Association who veered wildly from anti-tobacco's approved talking points to a semblance of honesty. Noting that penalizing smoking inadvertently makes the practice more attractive to rebellious teenagers, Mahood let loose with a howler:
"The tobacco industry likes to position tobacco use as adult behaviour. The cigarette becomes the badge that signals entry into adulthood. Nova Scotia is playing right into the tobacco industry's trap."
So in the wild and crazy anti-corporate fog in which Mahood lives, the tobacco industry is responsible for a law that cracks down on teenage smokers. Mahood doesn't care if every teenager took up smoking, as long as the smokes don't come from Big Tobacco. As a shill for pharmaceutical nicotine, Mahood makes a very good living indeed reviling the companies that make and sell the real stuff that people enjoy.
Anti-tobacco Politician Speaks With Forked Tongue - 1/6/02(NY Times requires free registration) - The New York Times reports that the rabidly anti-smoking Congressman Henry Waxman (D-CA) and 14 House Democrats have written a letter to Secretary of Health Tommy Thompson complaining that the Bush administration is dispensing data that "distort and suppress scientific information for ideological purposes." In particular, Waxman is incensed that The National Cancer Institute, which used to say on its Web site that the best studies showed "no association between abortion and breast cancer," now says the evidence is inconclusive.
The supposed link between abortion and breast cancer came from a series of studies that did show an association, higher, in fact, than the association between secondhand smoke and lung cancer, although both "risks" bordered on statistical insignificance. At the time keen observers noted that because abortion rights are sacred, the studies linking it to breast cancer had to be ruthlessly buried while the even more tenuous association between secondhand smoke and lung cancer had to be promoted as "fact" to further the prohibitionist agenda.
Waxman, of course, is one of the more strident politicians who endorses the myth of secondhand smoke as a serious health hazard. For him to complain about the present administration using science for ideological reasons, as he and his patrons have done for a decade, is the height of hypocrisy.
Exporting Hysteria - 1/6/02 Alcohol is far more dangerous to teenagers than previously thought and may have long-term health and lifestyle consequences, including permanent brain damage and financial hardship, research has found.
- Teenage drinkers have a worse memory, vocabulary and general knowledge than non-drinkers.
- Teenage drinkers do worse at school and have an increased risk of social problems.
- They suffer from depression, are suicidal and violent
- Binge drinking damages brains
- Binge drinking destroys the frontal lobe
- Binge drinking alters personality
- Binge drinkers don't graduate
- Binge drinkers don't marry
- Binge drinkers don't get a job
Although few would disagree that actual binge drinking is to be avoided as a habit, the hysterics in Australia have been conned by prohibitionist interests in the United States who released the report solely to curb advertising and grease the wheels to bring alcohol hysteria back to the font scenes of social control.
Too bad the Australian press swallows the junk science behind the report lock stock and barrel. In the United States the ink was scarcely dry on the researchers' press releases when actual researchers pointed out severe problems with the conclusions the prohibitionists had drawn. Instead of an epidemic of youthful binge drinking, the bebunkers uncovered glaring errors in the methodology used by the anti-alcohol crowd. Since alcohol is still widely advertised in newspapers and on the radio and television, even the New York Times joined the chorus crying foul. For now, in the United States at least, the blatant dishonesty that was used to take down the tobacco industry will not be allowed to shakedown the alcohol industry. Expect more anti-drinking scares, however, with fuzzier conclusions and subtler data manipulations.
JUDGE CURBS EPA'S WRETCHED EXCESS - May 4, 2001 - In a decision that adds to the growing momentum to rein in the Environmental Protection Agency, a federal judge issued a blistering rebuff to the agency's authority to conduct an endless investigation into an alleged health hazard. The ruling culminates a 20 year EPA investigation of a man's property in the Chicago suburbs. Despite the lack of evidence and the judge's ruling, the EPA "believes" that in the midst of all the junk there must be a toxic time bomb ready to explode. For "believes" substitute "feels" and the EPA's position is clear: "We will test and retest until the results we want are realized no matter what it takes" The growing examples of abuse accumulating on the EPA's doorstep is a clarion call that this out-of-control agency needs a thorough Congressional investigation and an intense scrubbing from top to bottom.
EPA CITED FOR LAX OVERSIGHT PROCEDURES - May 1, 2001 - The General Accounting Office slammed the Environmental Protection Agency for its inadequate review process regarding the billions of dollars the agency passes out to nonprofit grantees. Senator Kit Bond wrote a letter to the agency urging that the EPA Administrator alter the management policies established during the Clinton Administration where abuses in the grant process ran rampant. Under Carol Browner, former EPA Administrator appointed by Bill Clinton, grantees used grant funds for improper purposes such as illegal lobbying and legal expenses. With Bill Clinton, Carol Browner and her mentor, Al Gore, out of power, the abuses of the Environmental Protection Agency are coming to light and will be addressed. A 50 percent cut in its funding would solve most of its problems.
FORMER EPA HEAD ERASES THE EVIDENCE - April 30, 2001 - Despite an order by a US district judge, a contractor erased the computer storage devices of former EPA administrator Carol Browner. The destruction occurred on the last day of the Clinton Administration and one day after Judge Lamberth ordered the agency to preserve all records relating to a lawsuit filed by the Landmark Legal Foundation. Landmark seeks documents relating to the involvement of outside groups in regulatory actions taken by the EPA. Under Carol Browner, the EPA was a tool of the special interests and a close examination of its internal records is long overdue. The destruction of incriminating records is a part and parcel of the EPA's records of disinformation.
AUSTRALIA: SURGERY BAN ON SMOKERS - February 11, 2001 - Doctors are refusing smokers potentially life-saving surgery until they quit their habit. Physicians and surgeons at Melbourne's top hospitals told the Herald Sun they are denying smokers elective treatment such as lung and heart transplants, lung reduction surgery, artery by-passes and coronary artery grafts. Alfred Hospital respiratory physician Associate Professor Greg Snell said reasons for the ban were medical and moral... "It is within our mandate to ration services and smoking is one way to define the patient population. "It is common practice to not do elective surgery, and certainly some lung operations, on people who smoke."
SMOKER DIES AFTER DOCTORS REFUSE TO TREAT HIM - February 11, 2001 - ' The man, 56, is thought to be the first person to die since Australian doctors decided to take a stand on smokers and their treatment which, critics say, borders on "moral fascism". Some doctors have refused to perform transplants and other life-saving operations on smokers on "medical and moral" grounds.'
FORCES Editorial - FUTURE FORWARD - MEDICAL CARE AS A PRIVILEGE OF THE OBEDIENT AND VIRTUOUS - February 11, 2001 - "Smokers' rights - c'mon, isn't that kind of a trivial sort of issue in the great scheme of things?" That's a question that we get from time to time, but FORCES has always had a profound understanding of the dangers to a liberal society that are posed by entities that seek the collective goal of a "better, more efficient and productive society for all" by means of controlling the behaviour of individuals, and using fear and coercion to enforce conformity. Those potential dangers are becoming present reality.
THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME - This is not the first killing of smokers by the mafia in white coats. It has happened before in England. While the old article is no longer on line, click on the header to see excerpts of it.
CIGARETTE SMOKING IN RENAL TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS - "In examining the additive effects of covariates, patients who smoked but quit more than 5 yr before transplantation appeared to have better outcomes than patients who had never smoked. The reason for this is unclear. This effect was independent of other, major determinants of graft survival posttransplant. We might speculate that patients who were able to quit smoking were also patients who had other attributes that led to improved survival (!), attributes that were not taken into account in the multivariate analysis. For example, patients who were able to quit smoking may have been more adherent to medications (on what grounds are these cons speculating?). It is also possible that patients who were able to quit smoking adopted other lifestyles and habits that improved their survival after transplantation. In any case, this result should be interpreted with caution..." Actually, the cons have said that they have no clue, but look at how neatly the antismoking seed is implanted - and so is the justification to deny transplant, and let the smoker die.
Explosive report! - PHARMACEUTICAL MULTINATIONALS: BUYING GOVERNMENTS, SELLING ANTISMOKING - For the first time ever in the history of the disgusting antismoking saga, FORCES publishes a complete list of names, dates, organisations and sums paid by just ONE of the pharmaceutical giants, Johnson & Johnson. Through its philanthropic organisation, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the tentacles of this super giant control or influence all the vital power centres in America and, directly or indirectly, in the West. You will be surprised to see who is on the payroll: trusted, credible faces you often see on television, people on the board of directors of your favourite newspaper, or perhaps that famous researcher... maybe even someone at the Surgeon General office, or the head of that "disinterested" group trying so hard to get you to quit smoking - and kick you out in the cold if you have a puff - to "protect," of course, the non smokers from non-existing dangers.
Dr. Koop, one of the fathers of the antismoking cartel - SUED FOR STOCK VIOLATIONS
DR. KOOP.CON. Dr. Koop, one of the fathers of the antitobacco cartel, "America's family doctor", sworn enemy of smokers, heavy spreader of FALSE information about tobacco and disease. The stocks of his enterprise are plummeting. Click here to see the chart. But this is not all. The American media, so alert when it comes to divulge the last scientific fraud about the dangers of smoking, seems to keep really quiet about this news.
"You should be aware that class action complaints involving the securities of the above companies were filed on behalf of investors by the law firm of Cauley & Geller, LLP, often in cooperation with other major experienced securities firms.If you purchased securities of any of these companies and suffered a loss on your investment, you may be a member of the shareholder class and should consider contacting Cauley & Geller concerning your legal rights and interests in these cases. You can contact the firm at 888/551-9944 or via E-mail at: firstname.lastname@example.org. You are encouraged to visit our website at www.classlawyer.com."
It seems like this prominent member of the health cartel is getting back a dose of the medicine he has so abundantly administered and advocated against smokers and tobacco industry. We are looking forward to a time when more antitobacco gangs are sued, and hopefully tried and sentenced for the frauds and suffering they have inflicted upon society and smokers. The time for justice is LONG overdue. Is this gloating and revenge? You bet it is! For more information on the lawsuit against Drkoop.com, click here, and here.
THE UNCONFLICTED PROF. DAYNARD - Richard Danyard is one of the pillars of the antismoking cartel. Like the rest of his kind, he portrays himself like the "pure" crusader against evil tobacco. Money and riches from the greatest extortion in the history of mankind have nothing to do with his crusade... nothing at all. No conflict of interest whatsoever. Sure. We link with Walter Olson's Overlawreyed.com. Here is a teaser of what you get when you click on the header:
"...No competing interests declared? Not any? Daynard directs the Tobacco Control Resource Center & Tobacco Products Liability Project, and from the way he's been described in countless press clips over the years (samples: coverage originating in the Washington Post, L. A. Times, AP), you might conclude that he's contented himself with rendering whatever assistance he can to such suits as a kind of cheerleader from the sidelines, with nothing at stake beyond ideological zeal. So it might have come as a distinct surprise when it was reported in late 1998 that for some time he'd been (in his own view) the owner of an actual contingency share in moneys to be legally extracted from tobacco companies."
THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY -- TO WHOM IS IT ACCOUNTABLE? - "The marketing budgets of the drug industry are enormous -- much larger than the research and development costs -- although exact figures are difficult to come by, in part because marketing and administrative expenses are often folded together and in part because some of the research and development budget is for marketing research. According to its annual report, Pfizer spent 39.2 percent of its revenues on marketing and administration in 1999 ; Pharmacia & Upjohn is reported to have spent about the same."
IS ACADEMIC MEDICINE FOR SALE? - Editorial by the New England Journal of Medicine detailing how much power over
research, publication, and researchers the big pharmaceutical and medical supply companies (such as Johnson & Johnson, Glaxo-Wellcome and SmithKline-Beecham) have, and the resulting subservience of science to their commercial and political agendas. "Academic medical institutions are themselves growing increasingly beholden to industry. How can they justify rigorous conflict-of-interest policies for individual researchers when their own ties are so extensive?"
BATTLE FOR THE ASHES - "Getting people to quit smoking used to be a public health issue. Now, writes Mark Ragg, it has become big business." It looks like the pharmaceuticals are coming all the way out of the closet on the smoking issue. Note there is no mention of Johnson & Johnson. Maybe that's because the U.S. is their "territory."
TOBACCO STUDY FUNDING ATTACKED - Simon Chapman is a major operative of the Australian antismoking cartel. Already caught once manipulating data that was not favourable to the second-hand smoke fraud, he is in hot water again. Chapman is also involved with the World Health Organisation.
PUBLIC MONEY USED TO PURSUE POLITICAL AGENDAS- The recent outrage by the anti-tobacco cartel itself against the Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights investigating its opponents really makes us smile. Over two years ago FORCES USA published this report denouncing and documenting the wrongdoing of the anti-tobacco cartel. The report was sent to the media, but little we knew then that corruption reached the media long before our documents did.
Has ANR become too dangerous a competitor for the other antismoking gangsters? It looks that way. The antismoking industry is nothing but the mass-production of fraudulent evidence and hate propaganda designed to grab huge sums of public money to further bamboozle the public. But the competition for control among various factions and gangsters of the cartel is as fierce as it was among the Chicago mobs of the 30's, from which anti-tobacco does not differ a bit.
THE FILES OF THE ANTI-TOBACCO CARTEL ON FORCES,
...and some comments from us
THE UNANSWERED COMMENTS
(of course they are unanswered, they are the truth!)
Article by Walter Olson
on state of California paying a
private anti-smoking group to conduct political surveillance
on opponents of anti-tobacco cartel
PLEASE, ADD US TO YOUR LIST!
(IF WE ARE NOT THERE ALREADY)
Added January 7, 2000
After the first letter sent via e-mail by Gian Turci, FORCES' CEO, to Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights to make sure that FORCES INTERNATIONAL and all its chapters ARE on the enemy hit list of ANR (see inside) we have received an evasive response from ANR, in typical anti-tobacco cartel style when it comes to specific questions requiring specific answers.
The good news is that we actually are. Click on the table on the right to find out. A sincere thanks to ANR for bestowing us with that honour.
Being an enemy of the anti-tobacco cartel is in fact a badge of honour for FORCES, and we hope that we are on ALL the black lists of the cartel. We have no doubt that there are many such lists out there. As our CEO wrote:
"Exposing misinformation and liars is always a honourable mission. That is the very reason we are in the business of exposing nearly 40 years of misleading information by the anti-tobacco cartel."
Also, Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights has published a response to the LA Daily News article (click on the table on the right). We have written a rebuttal to that response and its false and distorted statements, and sent it ANR to a few weeks ago. So far, no response. Not that we expect one. Being silent when faced with direct questions that force direct answers has always been the favourite way of the cartel to avoid admitting their distortions. We don't blame them... what else can they do?
NCI'S MONOGRAPH 10:--
YESTERDAY'S RECYCLED GARBAGE MAKES TODAY'S NEW MANURE - What a joke! The NCI portrays the 1997 Cal/EPA report (which made headlines -- and was debunked -- two years ago) as "new" and "the most comprehensive report on the health risks of second hand smoke ever conducted."
New??? Indeed, the tobacco control gang at NCI must be desperate to try to pull this off to make it appear as if new, fresh "evidence" is coming up. In this subsection we can see that more "studies" on smoking are getting recycled to create the effect of a continuous stream of "evidence" that the antitobacco cartel-related press pumps out for propaganda.
PUBLIC SPONSORS MUST FOLLOW ETHICAL RULES TOO - This letter to the editor of the BMJ by Ivar Sønbø Kristiansen, associate professor, Institute of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, shows once again the fraudulent nature of the anti-tobacco health cartel. 'The National Council of Tobacco and Health asked a research team to change its methods for analysing the economic consequences of smoking: the methods had been agreed on before the project started, but the council later asked the team to switch to a method that would make smoking seem more "costly" to society." '
THE "INSIDER" MOVIE SAGA: INVESTIGATING LIES AND TRUTH - The truth and the lies behind the latest piece of anti-tobacco propaganda. Schemes, corruption, frauds, distortions, lies, cheap shots, and much more... Truly, antismoking at its fullest!
POLITICS OVER SCIENCE - "Anti-tobacco activists admit politics more important than science" - Americans for Nonsmokers Rights [the gang of the ill-famed Stanton Glantz] refuses to correct or retract an article written by a prominent anti-tobacco "scientist," despite a plea from the scientist. ANR states it must put its "political credibility" ahead of the scientist's "scientific credibility." Check out this revealing e-mail exchange. Don't forget to thank ANR for its candor. And while we're on the topic of the anti-smoking industry, don't forget to order Don Oakley's great new book, Slow Burn: The Great American Antismoking Scam (And Why it Will Fail). It's available from the junkscience.com store at a lower price than amazon.com!
FEDERAL LITIGATION AGAINST THE TOBACCO INDUSTRY: ELEVATING POLITICS OVER LAW - Powerful essay by Todd F. Gaziano from The Heritage Foundation on the abuse of the law by anti-tobacco politics and anti-tobacco gangsters -- from Bill Clinton down.
HEALTH DEPT UNDER INVESTIGATION -"These are just more examples of what we perceive to be a real problem within the department," said Assemblyman Scott Wildman, D-Los Angeles, chairman of the audit committee, "a department that has put more obstacles in the way of making legislation rather than making it happen."
Better late than never, Assemblyman. The California Department of Health Services has caught the attention of legislators worried that recent activities confirm reports that the powerful department has suppressed information crucial to the legislative process. The latest flap concerns a survey showing that cancer rates around a rocket propulsion plant are higher than normal. The department never released the survey and an anti-nuclear group obtained the survey through freedom of information requests.
The buried cancer survey echoes the suppression of a survey taken last year regarding the unpopular law that prohibits smoking in bars.
Last year the National Smokers Alliance unearthed a companion survey to one commissioned by the Health Department to back up its claims that the ban on smoking is supported by Californians. Although it's open to interpretation whether the ban enjoys popular support, the shocker was that the companion survey was deliberately suppressed to mislead the legislature while it was considering whether to overturn the ban. The hidden survey shows that bar owners and their employees are overwhelmingly opposed to the smoking ban.
For more than a decade, the state's health department's aggressive anti-smoking agenda has garnered the support of many policy makers. As its tactics become increasingly extreme and unjust, the department has found itself enmeshed in a web of falsehood so obvious it can no longer be ignored.
POLITICAL CORRUPTION - Norman Kjono, whose hard-hitting articles are a mainstay on FORCES, is a keen observer of anti-tobacco corruption in Washington State. In a series of letters to the governor and the attorney general, Mr. Kjono spells out in detail the correlation between the state's anti-tobacco campaign and the dramatic rise in underage smoking rates. He shows that the failure of Washington's anti-tobacco program is intentional and that the intended beneficiary of that failure is the pharmaceutical industry. Further, by noting that resultant behavior in light of the present facts prove prior intent by Whasington's policy makers.
While the anti-tobacco cartel clamors throughout the United States for its cut of the tobacco settlement, Washington State has the dubious distinction of being the state where anti-tobacco, with the able help of its two highest state officials, has received everything it demanded. The Washington settlement creates a perpetual cycle of underage smoking, fueled by anti-tobacco education and then treated by pharmaceutical nicotine.
To add clarity to what is contained within, it must be pointed out that Governor Gary Locke was the Chief Executive of King County (Seattle) when Project ASSIST was foisted on Washington State. From its inception, Governor Locke has been an unflagging supporter of its goals. The acronym DOC in Washington DOC stands for Doctors Ought to Care.
PASSIVE SMOKE: THE EPA'S BETRAYAL OF SCIENCE AND POLICY - This book, by Dr. John Luik and Dr. Gio Gori, may go a considerable way toward changing this state of affairs. It is a powerful and shocking critique of today's science and public policy procedures, highlighting the social and political dangers that these pose. Written in a lively and accessible style, it is an indispensable and timely "wake up call" for both the public health community, and citizens.
The authors address in detail the specific problem of the frauds about Environmental Tobacco Smoke by the Environmental Protection Agency of the United States, an agency which has the power to affect many countries outside the US.
ASH Misinforms the Public Once Again - Good old ASH. They do not miss a chance to misinform the public.
Cigars Impair Blood Vessels: WHERE IS THE TRICK? - ... But how do we justify heart disease from a form of smoking that precludes inhalation? This is a tough problem for any honest individual, but for the anti-tobacco cartel minions the solution is simple: with the one-size-fits-all anti-smoking wild card: junk science. How do we produce a study that can also bear some resemblance of credibility? "No problem again," says the cartel. All it takes is a few "trade secrets" and -- Hoopla! -- the magician walks through the China Wall. Carol Thompson explains the magic.
The NTP Board of Scientific Counselors on Carcinogens Subcommettee (excerpt from ETS discussion): A Direct Assault on Key Scientific Principles - Here is yet another piece of evidence of the scientific and moral corruption of anti-smoking "science", and the sold-out scientists at the service of the anti-tobacco cartel. Notwithstanding the ABSOLUTE unreliability of the evidence examined, the NTP Board of Scientific Counselors on Carcinogens Subcommittee decided unanimously what was already politically established: to recommend that ETS be listed as a human carcinogen, in spite of the Osteen ruling. This stomach-turning blatant display of corruption in the face of reality is yet another indication that these gangsters feel protected in their behaviour by the powers that be; thus they can get away with the murder of science for political gain.
Science, Politics, and Ethics: The Case of Environmental Tobacco Smoke - "The right of individuals to smoke has been a vexing obstacle in the campaign against smoking. Strategists have long sought to restrict this right, if it could be represented that exposure of non-smokers to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) constitutes a health risk. Massive resources have been directed toward producing the desired evidence, but 15 years of investigations have yielded ambiguous results which permit openly hypothetical conjectures."
Epidemiology, Risk Assessment, and Public Policy: Restoring Epistemic Warrants - "The ethics of science negates causal statements of fact if experimental predictivity is absent. In this context, conjectures may have a place in public rhetoric but the presentation of untested or untestable hypotheses as if they were objectively predictive is unethical in the context of science, and equally unethical in defining public policies." Essays on science ethics by Dr. Gio Batta Gori
Science, Imaginable Risks, and Public Policy: Anatomy of a Mirage - "Experimental predictivity, qualified by probability criteria, is the test that enables scientific inferences of causality and objective statements of fact. Yet, especially during this century the rational discipline of science has been assailed as arrogant by a rising fashion of intellectual laissez faire. In this ambiguous climate, health risk claims that are void or extremely weak in factual content are represented as if scientifically objective and forced at all levels of policy deliberations,especially in cancer risk assessment. Such pretensions deny essential guarantees of public fairness and undermine the credibility of science." Essays on science ethics by Dr. Gio Batta Gori
The Stacked Deck - The incredible saga of EPA and passive smoke: The lie that secondhand smoke causes lung cancer in nonsmokers; The EPA report reviewers were a stacked deck; The authors of key chapters were hand-picked, in violation of federal law. Instead of exposing the EPA's fraud and corruption, the media have covered it up. The names of those who have consciously twisted the evidence. And the corrupt EPA officials have never been punished for their offenses.
The Cheat Criticizes the Liars, the Liars Refute the Cheat - Isn't this touching? The anti-tobacco gang in Massachusetts (Connelly) is taking on the anti-smoking cartel in California (Glantz-Goldman). While we are pleased that at least JAMA keeps its distance from the Glantz-Goldman pack of deceptions (... sorry, we meant to say "study"), we have to remember that the whole anti-tobacco enterprise is based solely on tortured data, questionable assumptions, and twisted mathematical models designed to achieve a social and political end. It follows that any disagreement between operatives of the cartel, though enjoyable and useful, is still a disagreement between false assumptions and corrupted politics.
Secondhand Smoke and Cancer: Where Is the Proof? -Here is a letter of Dildar Ahmad, MD, W. Keith Morgan, MD - Chest Diseases Unit London Health Sciences Centre, London, Ontario. Though these people are certainly not friendly to the tobacco industry, for they repeat the usual obligatory slashing of the tobacco industry/bad guys routine, we can see some unexpected honesty when it comes to secondhand smoke. And if somebody objects to the fact that we are prejudicial against the health establishment, all we can say is that after the "performance" on primary and secondhand smoke and illegal drugs, the health establishment has become the synonym of political repression and scientific dishonesty. So, when somebody speaks out against propaganda, even if he still belongs to the other side of the barricade, we can't help but be surprised. For doctors to speak out against the anti-tobacco cartel's lies and falsifications, it takes a lot of guts, nowadays.
When You Can Prove that Anti-tobacco Lies, the Perpetrators Just Switch to Another Liar - Thank to the commendable and relentless work of Wanda Hamilton from the Sun Network, it turns out that the huge figure by the American Cancer Society (scaled down and parroted, of course, by the Canadian anti-smoking cartel) about the 53,000 lives claimed by secondhand smoke(!!), and attributed to the EPA, never came from that agency. Pushed in a corner, and after dancing between assorted answers for quite a while, the ACS now admits that the figure comes from such a professional counterfeiter as Stanton Glantz. Not even the EPA has the stomach to lie this much, as they claim "only" 3,000 "victims." The real figure, of course, is zero, for NOT ONE of the ETS-attributed deaths can be substantiated.
The corrupt media that has promoted the false advertisement is, of course, far from admitting its complicity in the fraud.
About Prostitution - How many times have we heard that we should not believe the research funded by the tobacco industry because it is corrupted? Can't count anymore? Faced with the colossal defeat resulting from the US federal court exposing the EPA passive smoke scam, the anti-tobacco cartel is at it again, stating that the tobacco industry paid scientists a few thousands dollars to analyze the EPA report and influence the judge. Here we report the event, as well as documentation showing just a small part of the hundreds of millions of dollars that the anti-tobacco cartel receives each year to spread lies and propaganda, while getting rich in the process. What makes the words of the cartel more credible than the words of the tobacco industry? NOTHING.
The EPA ETS Fraud - For years, FORCES and many uncorrupted scientists have maintained the passive smoke is not dangerous for non-smokers. The health and political authorities have chosen to ignore the truth, and implement smoking bans everywhere. The 1993 EPA Report on passive smoke is the pillar of every smoking ban. And now, it has been demolished by a US federal court. Hoping, however, that smoking bans will be reversed is naive, for that assumes that the health authorities are honest.
The EPA corruption unveiled by its own personnel! - Though the EPA was created for the noble purpose of protecting the environment, it has now evolved into an instrument of politics and power. The corruption of the EPA is not limited to manipulations of secondhand smoke results; in fact, it extends far beyond this issue, as these whstleblower scientists clearly demonstrate -- at the risk of their own careers.
A Corrupted Study on Corruption -- by the Corrupted - The political prostitution of science and medical profession, and the arrogant insults to the intelligence of people cannot find a better example than in this "study".
Antismokers Caught Deleting Unfavourable Evidence in Passive Smoking Studies - The parade of the criminal dishonesty of the anti-tobacco cartel all over the world continues.
The WHO cover-up on Secondhand Smoke - Finally, some truth is coming out on the secondhand smoke scam. An article in the Telegraph from the U.K. published on Sunday, March 8 breaks the news: "The world's leading health organization has withheld from publication a study which shows that not only might there be no link between passive smoking and lung cancer but that it could have even a protective effect."
The WHO Does It Again: Suppresses Study on Marijuana - Apparently, the WHO is in the habit of suppressing scientific studies that are against the political agenda of its main financial contributor, the United States. This time, it is a marijuana study that ended at the "bottom of the pile." How many other studies and information is WHO withholding from our knowledge?
The Bryden Report - In October 1996, John Bryden, MP (Hamilton-Wentworth) presented the report "Canada's Charities: A Need For Reform" that was quickly "forgotten" by the government, and got very little coverage by the media. The report details a number of problems with charity accountability in Canada, and references several antismoking groups -- including The Canadian Council on Smoking and Health, the Canadian Cancer Society, and the Heart and Stroke Foundation. With respect to the nonprofit lobby group the Non Smokers' Rights Association and a charity called the Smoking and Health Action Foundation, Bryden made the following observation:"...in comparing the charity's T3010 form with the non-profit group's annual financial statement, it appeared that the charity's revenues - mostly in the form of government grants - were being used to pay the salaries and operating costs of the advocacy organization that shared the same premises and apparently the same paid personnel."
The Text of the Epidemiologist's Review of EPA Report on Passive Smoking - FORCES Canada has come in possession of this interesting document. It was written by the EPA's reviewing Epidemiologist. The 1992 EPA study on passive smoking is the "big gun" of the antismoking industry, fired continuosly to add credibility to their claims. Well, read the comments yourself. Then consider that this study is at the basis of US and Canadian government decisions to suppress the right to smoke, and to interfere into the lives of citizens, and their business. If the big gun is this flawed, what about the rest of the ammunition?
Text Of EPA's Research And Development Environmental Criteria And Assessment Office (EPA Report On Passive Smoking) - More hard evidence about the EPA's political manipulation of data on passive smoking. This time, here is the communication of the Criteria and Assessment Office to the EPA's Directorate. Notice the opposition of the Assessment Office to the classification of passive smoking as a Class A carcinogen because of lack of evidence. ETS does not deserve this classification, but the politicians know better. They know when it's time to lie to the nation, to the world, and to the foolish believers. PLEASE NOTE: all original evidence on file.
Protecting The Lies While Withholding The Truth - Citizens are expected to believe any information coming from the state-run anti-tobacco information cartel. However, when citizens ask for just a little bit of evidence about the brainwashing propaganda they are forced to digest all day long, they encounter Soviet Union-style CENSORSHIP. Nowadays, in order to become a national hero and a media pet you just have to hold some degree, wave the Nanny State flag, and speak against tobacco. We can only conclude that living in the political sewers for twenty years has finally paid off for the perpetrators, now that the sewers have ruptured into the political streets of United States, and Canada.
Influential Restaurant Study By Anti-Smoking Guru Blasted - Bombshell critique by prominent economist on the work of "Guru" Stanton Glantz "study" of the effect of smoking bans on hospitality business raises startling questions about competence and integrity of Prof. Glantz, and his associates. We link with the National Smokers Alliance web site.
Cooking The Books: A Restaurant Study - What happens when a researcher "cherry-picks" from the published works of other researchers, ignores warnings from those researchers about the limitations and uncertainties of their data, and misleads the public by grossly exaggerating his findings to the press? Unfortunately, if the researcher's work is anti-smoking, it receives widespread media attention and is cited as "gospel" by anti-smoking groups and public health officials as they continue their efforts to ban smoking in restaurants and bars. Such is the case with Michael Siegel, MD, MPH, of Boston University's School of Public Health - by Martha Perske We link with the National Smokers Alliance web site.
Text Of EPA's Research And Development Environmental Criteria And Assessment Office (EPA Report On Passive Smoking) - More hard evidence about the EPA's political manipulation of data on passive smoking. This time, here is the communication of the Criteria and Assessment Office to the EPA's Directorate. Notice the opposition of the Assessment Office to the classification of passive smoking as a Class A carcinogen because of lack of evidence. ETS does not deserve this classification, but the politicians know better. They know when it's time to lie to the nation, to the world, and to the foolish believers. PLEASE NOTE: all original evidence on file.
Oral Comments to CAL-EPA on Section 7.2 of External Review Draft - Excerpt: ETS and Lung Cancer - A report written by Dr. William Butler, Ph.D. showing the faulty conclusions of the EPA classification of secondhand smoke. The EPA report was largely based on the Fontham Study. In studing the raw data, Dr. Butler found MAJOR errors in the report the EPA used as a main guideline to take action against smoking. Coming soon, the full report as submitted to the U.S. Dept of Labor denouncing the "conclusions" of the Fontham study. It states why the secondhand smoke classification is based on untruths and misclassification.EXPOSING A "GRASS ROOT" ORGANIZATION: TOBACCO-FREE KIDS - Now that lies have been institutionalized as the political norm in America (starting from the President and all the way down to the anti-tobacco cartel), the fact that an anti-smoking scam such as Tobacco-Free Kids passes itself as a "grass-root" organization is not news anymore. As long as it is done for a "good cause" such as anti-tobacco, lies are produced and blindly promoted by the medical profession, funded and encouraged by the state, and financed by "credible charities" such as the American Cancer Society, and the Robert Wood Johnson foundation. But just for the record, how much of a profitable business is the "grass root" TFK? Very profitable indeed. Here are links with The Capital Research Center. Judge for yourself :
Anti-tobacco and its pharmaceutical partners are pushing instant addiction - A letter from Norman Kjono to Henry Waxman, congressman, big time apologist for the pharmaceutical industry. The letter, with supporting graphs, eloquently demonstrates how anti-tobacco activists are peddling the line that one smoke produces addicted children. Big Drug then ministers to the addiction with its pharmaceutical nicotine devices. It's a great scheme to enrich the activists and their partner, Big Drug.