As per centralized strategic directions of the international antismoking Gestapo, any suffocation of the right to smoke, drink, and eat (and the consequent economic and social damage) is never put in the political or economic sections of newspapers and magazines; it is always sitting in the “health” section.
Bankruptcies and constitutional violations, the subliminal message implies, are a necessary costs to improve health by a few statistical and questionable days and thus, with great perversion, such news ends up in the health section – right beside the latest and greatest statistical/epidemiological misrepresentation by some “respectable” university about our lifestyles and the virtual deaths and diseases these “cause” in the opinion of the latest “expert” who lacks real scientific evidence.
Smoking, as usual, paves the way. While the “aligned experts” board their new Mercedes, gained with ill-gotten rewards for statistical prestidigitation and guesswork, they tell us to blame ourselves for missing out on immortality. Then they set out, daily, to remove a few more joys from the skeletal list of remaining legal gratifications. After all, the ideology is that 73.5 years of sterile emptiness and panic are clearly worth much more than 73 filled with the joys of cigarettes, beer, tasty cuisine, and all that other rot like free choice, dignity, and humanity.
So, when some study comes up showing that our smoking, drinking, or eating pleasures could do some good for our health, the defence mechanism of “public health” immediately kicks in, very much like a severe allergy dysfunction. If the study is financed by some of the demonized industries (and miraculously managed to pass the political blockade of the scientific journals), that gets highlighted to the extreme, so as to impress that the heretical results don’t have to be believed because tainted by greed. Greed is an element that, as we all know, is totally absent from studies that “show” that we are killing ourselves and others. If the study is not financed by the demonized industries then it is plain ignored, as God forbid that the citizens get information contrary to the “public health” credo – in this case, that “smoking kills”.
This is exactly the case of this new and large 32-year-long study. This one was not conducted with the usual form of fraudulent methodology based on quick-and-dirty questionnaires regarding distant memories so common for passive smoking. The study shows that personal and parental smoking – active and passive – “in teenage and early adult life lowers the risk for allergic sensitization in those with a family history of atopy … the findings are consistent with the hypothesis that the immune-suppressant effects of cigarette smoke protect against atopy”.
"We found that children who were exposed to parental smoking and those who took up cigarette smoking themselves had a lower incidence of atopy to a range of common inhaled allergens. …Conclusions: Personal and parental smoking is associated with a reduced risk of allergic sensitization in people with a family history of atopy." [*]
How outrageous – but, of course, truly informed smokers know that smoking has a lot of good and protective effects on health already. What the "authorities" want us to believe is that the "evil" of smoking is far more than the good, and to that effect they suppress and ridicule any finding that is favourable to smoking while advertising and calling "science" the same type of junk science when it shows instead that "smoking is bad for you".
How’s this study when the gangsters of “public health” want us to accept the notion that smoking around children is child abuse? We can explain that to you: this information will get suppressed because it is contrary to the criminal social agenda of the ministries of “health”, fashioned to make us believe that “smoking kills” – a hyperbolic and fanatical statement.
So, don’t expect to encounter this news via newspapers, radio, or TV. Watch instead for the latest trash epidemiology that conforms to the party line. This "smoking is good" study will be deep-sixed because the mass-media cater to social engineering brainwashing, not to real education or information. The media wants you to believe the cons of the ministries of health when they tell you that “smoking is bad for you in all forms” (and that you are a killer if you don’t quit).
One last consideration is in order before you read the piece. The authors did not want to see their 32 years of work wasted. They did not want to suffer the ad hominem attacks experienced by those who dare say that science cannot prove the harms of smoking. In short, they wanted to be published.
Today – and very much like in the USSR that is not dead at all – studies that may exonerate smoking MUST contain at least one ideological statement that shows loyalty to the healthist ideology – or else!
And, in fact, here it comes: “The harmful effects of cigarette smoke are well known, and there are many reasons to avoid it.”
But – very much like Galileo when he signed his recantation following his trial as he mumbled “Eppur si muove (And yet it [the Earth] moves”) – they state: "Our findings suggest that preventing allergic sensitization is not one of them."
That got them published, all right, but – once again – don’t expect this study to make the media, as you must believe.
Happy smoking – with or without the presence of your children.
[*] Atopy: an allergic reaction that becomes apparent in a sensitized person only minutes after contact.