I'm with YOU!
Posted on 07/06/2006 4:08:08 AM PDT by SheLion
If President Bush announced that secondhand smoke kills more Americans than the Iraqi insurgency, AIDS, drunken drivers and Katrina put together, would we nod in agreement — or look to Bellevue, if not to impeachment?
Comes now Richard Carmona, the surgeon general of the United States, telling us that secondhand smoke kills 49,000 Americans a year — and there's no outcry, no notion that maybe this is nuts. Instead, the mass media buys it without question, and so apparently do the people.
Does anybody out there know anything about Carmona, or even that he's the surgeon general? In 2003, he appeared before the Congress and came out for prohibition of tobacco. Which doesn't exactly make him a neutral scientific observer of the danger of secondhand smoke.
In fact, his 700-page report is full of junk science, delivered across 20 years by a band of willful anti-smoke zealots who understood that in order to get people to quit the habit, they had to promote the idea that smokers were destroying innocent bystanders, including their own children.
What the surgeon general never tells us is that the whole deal is entirely statistical — there are no autopsies, no direct evidence whatsoever. It is all computer generated: The computer is asked, if secondhand smoke kills, how many people will it kill?
For active smoking, there is plenty of direct evidence. More smokers die than nonsmokers. What the anti-smoke zealots have brilliantly done is to conflate the two: Smoking kills, therefore secondhand smoking kills.
The evidence is decidedly the other way. Every major study tells us this, including those done by the World Health Organization, the Congressional Research Service, the U.S. Department of Energy and a massive 35-year study financed for years by the American Cancer Society.
Against all this, the surgeon general, who never conducted his own study, says that "the debate is over," there is no longer any question about secondhand smoke. Dr. Robert Madden, former president of the New York Cancer Society, and a chest and vascular surgeon, told me it's "baloney," nothing but "junk science."
Dr. Elizabeth Whelan, president of the American Council on Science and Health, is also a longtime opponent of smoking. But to her, the idea that a 30-second exposure to secondhand smoke can kill — as says the surgeon general — is "outrageous." "It violated the basic tenet of toxicology: 'Only the dose makes the poison.'"
But who cares for dosage, when the ends justify the means, and political correctness rules the world.
Plus:
DON'T LET THE HEADLINES FOOL YOU
Court throws out challenge to EPA findings on secondhand smoke - (December 2002) - The ruling was based on the highly technical grounds that since the EPA didn't actually enact any new regulations (it merely declared ETS to be a carcinogen without actually adopting any new rules), the court had no jurisdiction to rule in the matter. This court ruling on the EPA report is NOT a stamp of approval for that report. Judge Osteen's criticisms of the EPA report are still completely valid and is accompanied by other experts.
AND:
Oak Ridge Labs, TN & SECOND HAND SMOKE
Statistics and Data Sciences Group Projects
I think any anti who tries to dismiss the findings of the U.S. Department of Energy labs at Oak Ridge, should be confronted with the question: "Are you saying that DOE researchers committed scientific fraud and that their findings on ETS exposure are untrue?"
Well, not exactly.
That the mass media is the intellectual and psychological scrapings of the societal barrel is no longer in dispute. In addition, it's controversial; it pits one segment of society against another; that is the lifeblood of what is today called "news". If it bleeds it leads, as the saying goes. And there is constant bloodshed both politically and culturally. That seems to be their lifeblood. Other than stringing semi-coherent sentences together, the requirements for "journalism" are very modest.
The most remarkable aspect is that a segment of society has been singled out for abuse, both societal and financial, on the slimmest of excuses, and hundreds of laws passed which in any other venue would be viewed as clearly unconstitutional.
Can you imagine gays and AIDS being similarly treated? The mortality rate for smoking is nowhere as high.
Then there's the subject of the Brave New World definition of public servant. We hire them to do things we cannot or we simply don't want to do ourselves (police, executions), and immediately their 'solution' is to say, "here are the new rules and laws". What's up with that?
Second hand smoke laws are a fraud. At best anectodal ignorance masquerading as science. There is absolutely no peer review of the methodology in this new "report". Until there is, I consider the conclusions and recommendations a fraud.
Let the game continue.
Cigarettes are now named by the leading federal health official as being deadly to innocent bystanders. If this is really true, why are they still legal for sale? Oh, the piggy needs his tax money for food. I guess it is OK to kill the people as long as the revenue keeps pouring in to the piggy. What a fraud.
Of course, CNN reports the news on the hour and 1/2 hour and led with this ALL DAY LONG.
If I heard it once, I heard it 47 times.
Yes, I smoke and realize its a nasty, dirty habit and I make every effort to be considerate of others who don't, as is the case with most smokers.
When my Mom and Sister were alive, I refrained from smoking when they were present and/or in their homes.
Personally, I'm convinced the "intolerance" comes from the anti-smoking zealots (do I dare say "Nazis" considering Hitler was both)and now that they have a "respected?" mouthpiece as Surgeon General, watch out folks. It won't be long before no one will be able to smoke anywhere, but in their homes--providing their are no neighbors within 1000 ft (much like selling drugs today near schools)who object to the odor or carcinogens, wafting thru the air towards their abode.
If the Surgeon General really believes the propaganda he espouses, then he should encourage Congress to pass legislation making the sale, possession or use of any tobacco products illegal.
For you non-smokers, beware, fattening foods are next on the agenda of the nanny-state, do gooder, zealots.
Emphysema?
FMCDH(BITS)
I clearly remember the 40's and 50's and early 60's. The world was fun, exciting, generally courteous, friendly, and kind. Smoking was a part of everyday life. People lived and let live. Now, it seems to me, culture in America has all the freedom and dignity of a gigantic modern airport.
If you want to play junk science like the current SG, you could correlate the decline of smoking with the decline in SAT scores and "prove" that less smoking by our society makes children abysmally dumber.
big tobacco should read the opening statement of this article and use the idea for its next campaign.
lobby bush to be against big tobacco would have 99% of the LSM doing research to prove he was wrong. every one of these junk science claims would be debunked all over the media in 24 hours.
I'm with YOU!
I'm sorry you can't smoke in your own home. I just hate to hear stuff like that. I have been rolling my own for over 4 years now. It takes a nack, but don't give up. Before you know it, you will be rolling like a pro. And the money you will save will blow you away! :)
My bf will be reading this, even if I have to duct tape him to the chair.
Well, tell him you could be doing a lot worse. Tell him you could be spending his money on cocaine! Don't laugh. I knew a gal up here that spent their grocery money on coke all the time. And they even had a child. She was so addicted that her hubby had to finally put her into rehab. It was pitiful.
Oh yes. And the idiots believing this nonsense are no better.
Just more chit to put more private business owners out of business. It's a sin in my eyes what they are doing to hard working private business owners.
OH YES, I remember now: It's the newest thing that HAIR DYE is killing women! Common!
CANCER WARNING
DYED HAIR SCARE
July 5, 2006
BEN WEINBERG and RITA DELFINER
Color it risky - tinting or bleaching your hair may put you at higher risk of getting lymphoma, according to a startling new study.
Researchers who analyzed data from six European countries found a 19 percent increased risk of the cancer among those who said they used hair dye.
Those who dyed 12 or more times a year faced a 26 percent increased risk, the study found.
"The increased risk observed among women was similarly observed for any color or type of dye used, increasing slightly for users of longer periods," the study said.
Those who began altering the color of their hair before 1980 showed a 37 percent increased lymphoma risk, the study found.
From 1978 to 1982, the ingredients of some types of dyes were reformulated to eliminate some that were potentially cancer-causing, the researchers said.
They say that it's still not known whether the newer compounds are free of risk and that more monitoring is needed.
Based on their findings, Dr. Silvia de Sanjose and her colleagues at the Catalan Institute of Oncology in Barcelona, Spain, estimate that about 10 percent of lymphomas in women could be due to the use of hair dye.
Several women in Midtown didn't turn a hair yesterday when told about the findings, saying they wouldn't quit highlighting, hiding their gray or coloring their roots.
"I've been dyeing my hair since I was 14," said Christina, 32, a pharmaceutical rep whose brown hair has blond highlights. "I'll let it grow out and do it all over again!"
"Would I stop dyeing? Are you kidding me?" declared a young blonde who wouldn't give her name. "I would keep going. I can't stop. I need to be blonde."
Shannon Maris, 36, a hairdresser visiting from San Diego, said she colors her own hair black - but some of her clients are worried and have gone organic.
"I have clients who started coloring their hair with vegetable dye," she said.
Angela Walsh, 35, a Manhattan event planner, said she dyed her hair dark brown a couple of times, but went back to her natural shade.
"I decided not to use it anymore because I know it's not a good thing," she said. "It's bad for your health."
Laura Rose, 19, a model, sunbathes and likes being a blonde. "I'm probably going to drop dead by the time I'm 30, but at least I'm tan and pretty," she declared defiantly.
Read http://www.nypost.com/news/worldnews/dyed_hair_scare_worldnews_ben_weinberg_and_rita_delfiner.htm
Got a link for all that? I must have slept through one heck of a movie!
OMG! It was years ago. I would have to do a lot of digging to find that stuff. But trust me, it's true. Ask Gabz or any of the others on the Puff list.
US population grows about 1% per year. There is no "explosion".
Exactly!
Not only with the smoking issue, but I see the lawmakers trying to dumb down America on a regular basis! They want to make sheeple of all of us.
That's not what Fox News have been reporting the past few days. I just didn't dream this up. You ever listen to the news?
You have an issue with it, write to foxnews, ok?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.