From the forum of the British Medical Journal, writer/researcher/activist Michael J. McFadden highlights the crackpot logic of anti-smoking and the preposterous “passive smoke-related” deaths, showing us the logical conclusions of the claims being made.

He then proceeds by applying the same logic used for passive smoking to passive drinking and – of course – he comes up with a coherent conclusion: “…one would have to accept the necessity of banning alcoholic drinks in restaurants and perhaps even in bars… and the removal of drug use from the visual environment of children and teenagers will make them less likely to become addicted themselves.” Why is that not happening yet? “… There’s no massively funded Antialcohol lobby to run huge epidemiological studies on passive drinking” – right on — “and such studies would be very difficult to design.”
We disagree only on the last point: epidemiological studies on passive drinking are extremely easy to design: all it takes is questionnaires on vague memories of exposure, exactly as happens for passive smoke studies – and, of course, heavy pharmaceutical funding and political lobbying. No worries, Mr. McFadden: Big Pharma and “public health” are working on that … just give them time, not even Nazi Germany was built in a day! When it comes to what “public health” has become, the golden rule applies: what’s used to express an absurdity today will be the law tomorrow. Until we start taking positive, direct action against this ideology, that is.



Leave a Reply

Avatar placeholder