Perhaps we are blaming the wrong people

[WVOldFart]

I am not one for conspiracy theories but let us consider this. Not too long ago nobody cared if you smoked. The government was happy collecting the taxes on it and the medical profession was content on the occasional lung cancer patient. The medical profession never told us that 80 to 90% of people that smoke cigarettes never got lung cancer. Then all of a sudden it was discovered that nicotine had a positive effect on stopping or hindering the onset of Parkinson's Disease, Alzheimer's, MS and a host of other ailments. Nicotine patches are prescribed to some of those patients in many areas. So now nicotine in its purist state became a money-making agent for the medical profession. If they can eliminate smoking, then they would have complete control on how nicotine is dispersed. So maybe we should be blaming the medical profession for their greed and power-hungry ideas. Just something to think about.

 

[JoeW]

 

[Deano]

Money. "Big Tobacco" was making money so the political machine saw $$ in tax revenue and, knowing whats best for us, they taxed the heck out of it. "Big Oil" same thing. Once they destroy the oil and tobacco industries they will find some other "big" industry to demonize and tax it into oblivion.

 

[JOHN72]

The food industry ensures that the pharmaceutical industry is one of the most profitable businesses on the planet. The former poisons us and makes us chronically ill, while the latter condemns us to survive as drug addicts. If a politician tells you the truth, then he's not a politician, at least here in Spain.

 

[cosmicfolklore]

In my expert Google research, I find that no one is prescribing nicotine patches for treatment of those diseases. And, the idea that nicotine is beneficial to those diseases was only found in one pipesmoking researcher that was made very public to us on the radioshow here. And, even he said that it was only beneficial in very microscopic amounts.

All other research is inconsistent or inconclusive.

That said, sure 80-90% of smokers never get lung cancer, but there are a lot more negative health affects other than cancer. COPD, which is what I am dealing with, diabetes, heart disease, high blood pressure (another one I had to deal with) and various other immune issues.

But, I agree in principle that we should have the choice to live and chose what we want our own quality of life to be. This is the essence of freedom.
But, on the other hand, in my experience I have never had any strong arm of the government tell me that I can’t smoke, except to prevent my smoke from infringing on non-smoker’s rights (when I visit more liberal states). Here in Alabama, I can smoke pretty much anywhere.

 

[WVOldFart]

I

That said, sure 80-90% of smokers never get lung cancer, but there are a lot more negative health affects other than cancer. COPD, which is what I am dealing with, diabetes, heart disease, high blood pressure (another one I had to deal with) and various other immune issues.

I agree. It is also noted that a cigarette smoker is 16 times more likely to have health problems than a non-smoker. It is not beyond imagination to think that the medical profession would like to eliminate nicotine in smoking so that they can produce it is it purist form (a liquid or patch) so they can make more money.

 

[Servant King]

 

[georged]

Geese can hurt people.

Therefore, geese should be eliminated.







I will be contacting Washington as soon as I finish typing, to demand that The US Protection From Geese Agency be formed. It will only cost 100 billion dollars per year, but we're talking SAFETY, here... how can anyone put a price on THAT?

Furthermore, if you disagree, it means you are evil. A sadistic monster who enjoys seeing old people be injured by giant birds, and YOU need to be eliminated.

 

[anotherbob]

It's too not top down on this one. It's a lot more organic and human nature.
And if there is any conspiracy it's that the perfume industry buys a lot of tobacco. It's in a lot of perfumes like an insanely high amount of them. So if anyone sneaky bastard is trying to get all the good leaf for themselves it would be them.
Where as medical nicotine doesn't have to come from quality leaf since it's just the nicotine they're after. So for them it's probably better if someone else is buying the higher quality stuff anyways. Rejects are fine for medical use.
And it doesn't benefit them more the way the op speculates at all. Kind of like the same way the they've cured cancer (which is inane considering it's not a single thing, but a class of disease [you know as a start]), so they can make more money. Dude if they cured cancer they'd make more money. Diagnostic medicine is such a big money maker with the least overhead (once you pay for the damn machines) and you could get more people in mris if there was an easy cure for cancer.
Edited in: Fun cancer fact. When going through the icd 9 code books I found in the section for chemo therapy a code for coffee. Then found out there is a super aggressive intestinal cancer that's incredible rare but the treat for it is drinking coffee. I immediately thought it's not that rare is it. And no one has looked into why that is or what in coffee does the trick. For one it's rare enough. But weird.

 

[anotherbob]

Geese can hurt people.

Therefore, geese should be eliminated.



View attachment 435826



I will be contacting Washington as soon as I finish typing, to demand that The US Protection From Geese Agency be formed. It will only cost 100 billion dollars per year, but we're talking SAFETY, here... how can anyone put a price on THAT?

Furthermore, if you disagree, it means you are evil. A sadistic monster who enjoys seeing old people be injured by giant birds, and YOU need to be eliminated.

That's just silly. Don't you know what happens when people war with birds. The birds win. You're suggesting kicking a hornets nest. And then if the swans find out what we're doing, you don't even want to know how that will go.
Seriously dude.
Ask our friends at the bottom of the world. The guys that live with all the dangerous animals lost to some emus. Look up the Emu war.

 

[BingBong]

Broken pelvis, internal bleeding? Violent gas attack, more likely. But blame the wildlife.

The bogus health warnings we get on every tobacco product are the result of some pretty bent, C-19 standard "science". Where did all the fallout go from atmospheric nuke tests? All the lead from 60 years of leaded petroleum? Lots of factors ignored.

 

[MisterBadger]

Geese, now... they must have attacked under provocation. I bet the old lady wasn't a vegetarian.I wonder how they managed to break her pelvis? They must have given her one hell of a kicking once she was down.

As it happens, we have some Buff Brecons arriving at the farm tomorrow, and I am supposed to be demonstrating to the public the finer points of selecting a goose for Christmas dinner. I am aware of the health risks of consuming geese: it's a matter of balancing longevity with quality of life.

Medical nicotine... many years ago, in an attempt to give up tobacco, I tried one of those nicotine patches. Wouldn't stay alight, tasted terrible, and gunged up the pipe really badly. So it nearly worked.

 

[Homer]

I am not one for conspiracy theories but let us consider this. Not too long ago nobody cared if you smoked. The government was happy collecting the taxes on it and the medical profession was content on the occasional lung cancer patient. The medical profession never told us that 80 to 90% of people that smoke cigarettes never got lung cancer. Then all of a sudden it was discovered that nicotine had a positive effect on stopping or hindering the onset of Parkinson's Disease, Alzheimer's, MS and a host of other ailments. Nicotine patches are prescribed to some of those patients in many areas. So now nicotine in its purist state became a money-making agent for the medical profession. If they can eliminate smoking, then they would have complete control on how nicotine is dispersed. So maybe we should be blaming the medical profession for their greed and power-hungry ideas. Just something to think about.

Why should we always need to blame someone?
If you get larynx cancer just be happy that you belong to the 10-20% of smokers who won in the lottery.

 

[AirOne]

I agree. It is also noted that a cigarette smoker is 16 times more likely to have health problems than a non-smoker. It is not beyond imagination to think that the medical profession would like to eliminate nicotine in smoking so that they can produce it is it purist form (a liquid or patch) so they can make more money.

Nicotine is not what's really harmful in smoking. And it's not good either, all the effects you mentioned where on cell cultures. And we are not made of a single line of cells. At all. Smoking kills, it's a fact. As many other things do (food additives, pollutants, ...) But we choose to smoke, so let us smoke (as long as we don't intoxicate others).

 

[warren]

It's all rather simple. Putting flame to various items, tobacco be but one, produces the carcinogens. And, society in general doesn't want their space impacted by smokers and stale smoke smell. Nicotine simply makes the brain a wee bit euphoric and is addictive.

There is a percentage of the membership prefer to hang onto their conspiracy thoughts, it's comforting for many.

 

[WVOldFart]

I am not writing concerning the health of smoking and who should we blame. The post was about how tobacco is being restricted or stopped from being sold in many areas of the world. Was it because they are worried about our health? I doubt that seriously. They are looking at possibly how they could maximize their profits from nicotine. As some have quoted, nicotine has not been found to cause any health problems other than addiction, but the benefits could outweigh any negatives as far as the medical profession may think.

 

[wyfbane]

My boy Pete (RIP) was a geese-people relations activist. He never attacked anyone but my Jackhuahua.

 

[anotherbob]

Broken pelvis, internal bleeding? Violent gas attack, more likely. But blame the wildlife.

Trapped wind is far worse then it sounds. I've got a few stories about it that aren't for public forums.

The bogus health warnings we get on every tobacco product are the result of some pretty bent, C-19 standard "science". Where did all the fallout go from atmospheric nuke tests? All the lead from 60 years of leaded petroleum? Lots of factors ignored.

Biggest problem with them is that they act like all forms of ingestion have the same effects. Which is stupid because they do know that's not true, but literally think we're too stupid to understand smoke in lungs pulled to breathing depth is worse then smoke touching the mucosal membranes in the mouth.

 

[woodsroad]

If the medical-industrial complex is as nefarious as you claim, they’d be promoting smoking to ensure a steady supply of sick and dying patients.

None of what you wrote makes any sense.

 

[mingc]

In my expert Google research, I find that no one is prescribing nicotine patches for treatment of those diseases. And, the idea that nicotine is beneficial to those diseases was only found in one pipesmoking researcher that was made very public to us on the radioshow here. And, even he said that it was only beneficial in very microscopic amounts.

All other research is inconsistent or inconclusive.

That said, sure 80-90% of smokers never get lung cancer, but there are a lot more negative health affects other than cancer. COPD, which is what I am dealing with, diabetes, heart disease, high blood pressure (another one I had to deal with) and various other immune issues.

But, I agree in principle that we should have the choice to live and chose what we want our own quality of life to be. This is the essence of freedom.
But, on the other hand, in my experience I have never had any strong arm of the government tell me that I can’t smoke, except to prevent my smoke from infringing on non-smoker’s rights (when I visit more liberal states). Here in Alabama, I can smoke pretty much anywhere.

Alabama's restrictions on smoking in public seem not much different that the other 49 states: Frequently Asked Questions - Clean Indoor Air Act | Alabama Department of Public Health (ADPH) - https://www.alabamapublichealth.gov/tpts/faq.html. Or are they ignored such that you can smoke anywhere in offices, restaurants, bars, or near entryways, so that every place is a smoking area? Or have your expectations just changed?

I don't know about Europe, but compared to Asia, the US is damn near smoke free.

The longest lived human being, verified, smoked cigarettes until she was 117. She died at 122. Jeanne Calment - Wikipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeanne_Calment