Health Benefits of Tobacco, by Dr. William Douglass

[brian64]

Regarding the book "The Health Benefits of Tobacco" by Dr. William Douglass:
"Product Description

What? That can't be! That's the reaction from most people. But did you know that nicotine acts to stimulate critical neurotransmitters (chemical messengers) in the body and that companies are developing nicotine-based pharmaceuticals that are decidedly good for the brain, blood vessels, bowels and even the immune system? Scientific correctness trumps political correctness when it comes to nicotine. Quit smoking cigarettes, but light up a cigar, and sharpen your mental acuity while you enjoy this fascinating and important read."
Hmm...you don't suppose the pharmaceutical industry would want to make tobacco illegal so they can corner the market on nicotine do you?
Dr. Douglass's sites:
http://douglassreport.com/
Great pic of Dr. Douglass with cigar in hand:
http://www.douglassfamilypublishing.com/douglass-family-publishing/about-dr-william-campbell-douglass-ii-md

 

[ejames]

I will have to checkout this guy. Sounds interesting.

 

[barkar]

Very interesting...bookmarked to read this evening.

 

[jvandy77]

Nice find! I will have to take a look at this book. Thanks
-Jim

 

[cortezattic]

 

[ohin3]

Thanks for the info. Definitely going to check this guy out.

 

[admin]

That's extremely cool. There is a chapter about this in Fred Hanna's book as well.
http://pipesmagazine.com/blog/book-reviews/fred-hannas-new-book-for-pipe-smokers-a-must-have/

 

[carlosviet]

Oh, the correlation between nicotine and prevention of Alzheimer and Parkinson, is well known.
But then, a cautionary note. If this is the same guy who wrote The William Campbell Douglass Letters. Expose of Government Machinations during the Vietnam War under the forewords: "Dr. Douglass wrote these letters in his efforts to help prevent the U.S. republic from becoming a tyrannical 'democracy' which allows the 'have-not' majority to confiscate the 'excess' earnings and assets of the 'have' minority. With the 'political preventive medicine' inherent his letters, maybe an informed electorate (you) can save the day for America"
And he is also the writer of What does your Dog Really want to eat?: The Complete 'COOK' Book for your Dog
Then... I would take his writing with a lot more than a pinch of salt...
Science is argued within science; it is called peer review in specialized publications. Self publishing may be more lucrative, but not the best health guide. Particularly from a guy that seems to be as specialized in oncology and brain health as in dogs digestive system...

 

[brian64]

@carlosviet: I must respectfully disagree with your 3 points as follows:
1) IMO, the scientific establishment is every bit as corrupt as every other part of the establishment, and if you look into it, I believe you will find that the "peer review process" is completely manipulated and controlled by the banking/corporate elites...especially the Rockefeller family when it comes to "medical science".
2) IMO, "democracy" is one of the worst forms of government possible...it is simply mob rule...which is why America's founding fathers set up a Constitutional Republic, in order to protect the rights of the minority. Democracy is best defined as two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
3) I see nothing whatsoever wrong with writing a cookbook for dogs...I'm quite certain that what we typically feed our pets is almost as bad as what most of us normally eat.

 

[brian64]

Just wanted to add the following to my 2nd point above: The type of "government" (if you can call it that) that we've had in the USA for a long time now is NEITHER a Constitutional Republic or a Democracy, imo. It is simply a Cleptocracy run by a satanic Oligarchy. There was a struggle for a long time to destroy the Republic, and then there was a final coup d'etat in 1963 in case anyone missed it.

 

[carlosviet]

@brian64 Everyone can have their own opinion, including Dr. William. And it is wise to listen or read all opinions about a matter. But it is necessary to weight those opinions. When I point out the other books, it is to underline that there doesn't seem to be an authoritative specialization about tobacco or oncology. What there is instead is a political position. If the book was titled or focused about the political and social manipulation of tobacco, there would be little to say against. Just agreeing or disagreeing. But a health issue requires a certain expertise and procedure.
Many public scientific institutions are filtered by their sponsors, but there are thousands of thesis from science students that are very much uncontrolled. As a first example, you can reach many thesis and investigations about some drugs that are a slap in the face of law and society. These kind of rogue investigations were the first ones exposing the association between cigarettes and cancer. There are scientists in every side of the political spectrum and is not possible to tap them all.
Well. In brief, I just advice to see the motivation and authority behind every opinion or report. Both pro and against a position. And I believe that both the motivation and authority of this author are arguable.

 

[brian64]

@carlosviet: Well said, and I appreciate everything you're saying...you make some good points. I have not read Dr. Douglass's book, but I did hear him interviewed at length about it a few years ago. I don't recall all of the details, but I'm sure he's not suggesting that cigarette smoking is beneficial to anyone's health...but he does suggest that cigar and pipe smoking can have beneficial effects to one's health, and I personally believe that to be true. I also believe that nicotine is safer and much more effective as an anti-anxiety treatment than the very dangerous medications pushed by the pharmaceutical industry.
Also just want to correct my spelling on my previous comment...that should be "Kleptocracy", not Cleptocracy.
EDIT:
One further point...and this is just my opinion, I do not know if Dr. Douglass says anything like this or not, but even where cigarettes are concerned, I believe that the primary source of the ill effects are the additives. If someone were to smoke cigarettes of strictly pure tobacco I truly believe their health risks would be far less.

 

[kennerth]

So, if I can find a Vietnamese dog with Parkinsons, smoking a cigar, having him cook me breakfast would be good for me??

 

[carlosviet]

So, if I can find a Vietnamese dog with Parkinsons, smoking a cigar, having him cook me breakfast would be good for me??

Indeed. It could make you rich, just showing that dog around...

 

[kennerth]

You're ok by me, Carlos!

 

[bubblehead33]

lol @ kennerth

 

[unixhelp]

Yes, it also reduces your risk of getting Alzheimer's ...because we'll likely die of lung or heart disease first
Lets face it, anyone who has smoked for a while, especially if you inhale, knows it's harmful...point is we know the risk and should have the personal freedom to make a choice. In 30 years of smoking I've bought roughly 10,000 packs of smokes...the congestive heart failure and blocked arteries (and likely heart transplant within the next 5 years) will cost the Canadian taxpayer $150k. Let me pay my $10-15 a pack tax and enough with the retarded laws, kids in Canada can't tell ya what a pack of camels or captain black looks like because they can't see it so it must not exist...but they can tell you what weed looks like and the difference between a 1/4 ounce and a gram...go figure.
Anyways, any health benefits of tobacco are far outweighed by the risks. It's about personal freedom and accepting personal responsibility for your choices...damn I'm stressed...wheres my pipe !

 

[brian64]

Anyways, any health benefits of tobacco are far outweighed by the risks.

I would have to disagree with that. If you had used the word "cigarettes" rather than "tobacco" I would agree (at least as far as someone who smokes cigs with additives and is a heavy smoker). But I do not believe that the risks outweigh the benefits in regard to pipe and cigar smoking.

 

[lankfordjl]

@brian64
Thanks for the book suggestion; I've not heard of before - and I've now ordered it. I have a big problem with the ignorance spouted with every "Anti" Law. Food doesn't cause obesity; Vehicles do not cause accidents; Guns do not kill; Tobacco does not cause cancer! It's the abuse of all these things by people that lead to problems and NO law is going to stop abuse! "Anti" laws end up only hurting responsible citizens by taking away their freedoms!

 

[markw4mms]

"Anti" laws end up only hurting responsible citizens by taking away their freedoms!

+1! :clap: