Our third Round Table with Dr. Michael Siegel, this time focusing of the absurd propaganda that even a few seconds of exposure to passive smoking is sufficient to induce a heart attack. This kind of junk science is attacked even by this Tobacco Control advocate.
As our regular readers know, Siegel was “cast out” from the antismoking Olympus when he dared criticizing some of the policies, attitudes, and statements of Tobacco Control.
It is clear that the junk science is political and anti-scientific. As Siegel points out, the benefits of “smoke-free” environments (assuming that they bring any benefit at all) would manifest themselves after an extended period of time — many years — before than any kind of measurement can be attempted. The prohibitionists’ “studies” can’t wait that long — political results must be immediate, to stimulate the next ban in line! — so, meaningless measurements are concocted after a month or two.
This novel type of junk science, such as the Helena "study" and its copycats which have ensued all over the world, is meant to “demonstrate” the “immediate benefits” of forbidding public smoking. To that end, it is necessary to show that passive smoking is an instant killer — so thoroughly and immediately toxic, in fact, that even a few seconds of exposure are sufficient to induce a heart attack. In effect, the claim is that ETS is literally more lethal than mustard gas, which requires about a minute to finish you off.
How come cigarette smoking — even according to Tobacco Control’s own statements — requires several decades to "kill" an active smoker (even one with a weak heart) remains unspoken by the prohibitionists. Siegel explains how fallacious — we will add egregious and vicious — the reasoning and the methodology behind this is. In effect, though not in these words, he tells of the substitution of ideology for science in modern policy-making.
As pointed out in this Round Table discussion, the sheer absurdity of these claims is clear to all: including those who "hate smoking." Escalating absurdity can only drive another nail in the coffin of "Public Health" credibility. What’s most appalling is that — except, perhaps, for cases of actual mental disorders — those who "hate smoking" consciously choose to use such fraud.
Sanity and decency be damned, anything goes to create a completely smokeless environment, even in places where the fanatics themselves never have and never will never set foot. This is the level of moral and intellectual dishonesty we have plunged to, today, largely due to what "Public Health" institutions have become.
For this latest Round Table, click:
For previous Round Table discussions with Doctor Siegel, click: