tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3585028625507474093.post4092343785296418759..comments2023-10-17T15:56:22.827+01:00Comments on Velvet Glove, Iron Fist: Steer clear of Big Pharma, says... the WHO!Christopher Snowdonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15963753745009712865noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3585028625507474093.post-21550875851559669372011-04-19T21:58:51.280+01:002011-04-19T21:58:51.280+01:00Here's another intersting link to check how si...Here's another intersting link to check how sinful is Big Pharma<br /><br />http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110310/13141713432/is-fda-helping-hindering-medical-innovation.shtmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3585028625507474093.post-11401704084751916192011-04-19T12:24:31.706+01:002011-04-19T12:24:31.706+01:00Steer clear of Jackie Baillie as well, I would rat...Steer clear of Jackie Baillie as well, I would rather vote for a cabbage in the Scottish Election.<br /><br /><br />http://f2cscotland.blogspot.com/2011/03/scottish-labour-endorses-smoking-ban.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3585028625507474093.post-18600907289421713782011-04-18T12:07:31.148+01:002011-04-18T12:07:31.148+01:00Dave A, Pfizer manufactures Nicotrol and Nicorette...Dave A, Pfizer manufactures Nicotrol and Nicorette.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3585028625507474093.post-11308271345598099202011-04-18T01:50:14.919+01:002011-04-18T01:50:14.919+01:00“not to become too closely involved”
What does th...<i>“not to become too closely involved”</i><br /><br />What does that mean? I don’t think it means “steer clear of”.<br />It sounds more like a PR stunt.Anonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3585028625507474093.post-8082027398464731082011-04-17T21:15:16.404+01:002011-04-17T21:15:16.404+01:00in several instances the influence of pharmaceutic...in several instances the influence of pharmaceutical companies results not just in damage to liberty but in damage to public health<br /><br />I'd be very wary of the pharmaceuticals - sounds like another bandwagon.James Highamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14525082702330365464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3585028625507474093.post-90970419274807980212011-04-16T03:50:16.270+01:002011-04-16T03:50:16.270+01:00If I can bring people's minds back to reality,...If I can bring people's minds back to reality, I have just returned from a holiday in Mallorca.<br /><br />The bars there have all fallen in line - smoking inside is banned. But what really, really upset me was the fact that the 'smoking area' in terminal A has been closed. This smoking area was a self-contained, glass enclosed, sliding doors controlled area with ventilation. It has been closed. PETS (People who Enjoy Tobacco) are trapped inside this building with no means of exercising their perfectly reasonable right to enjoy themselves reasonably as they wish without harming others. Also, there was a bar with an external terrace - that has also been closed.<br /><br />It is clear from the above that there is a vicious and malignant intent in Mallorca to exterminate the enjoyment of tobacco at all costs.<br /><br /> (By the way, apart from two flights - one to Newcastle and one to Manchester - terminal A was deserted.)<br /><br />The tourist industry in Mallorca has been in free-fall for some time, and yet the authorities there seem to be more and more inclined to damage that industry. <br /><br />It seems to me that they would not be doing this unless there were actual bribes or promises of riches to come (unless they are crazy).<br /><br />OR (and this is the important point, I suppose), it may be that the eugenicist healthists are totally in control, just as they are in the UK.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3585028625507474093.post-56262683075568407022011-04-15T21:34:28.275+01:002011-04-15T21:34:28.275+01:00(part 2b)
So we could then ask that if this has be...(part 2b)<br />So we could then ask that if this has been the reaction to the tobacco “death toll”, then there must be an even greater industry addressing/correcting institution-wide iatrogenesis? In fact, there’s not. Compared with the many thousands of antismoking studies, there are but a handful (less than 20) concerning institution-wide iatrogenesis, damning as they are. There are no conferences on iatrogenesis. There are no specifically-created institutes addressing the issue. In fact, it attracts almost zero attention within the medical establishment itself. The medical administration doesn’t like talking about it or the public knowing about it. This is the same medical establishment that now wants to “fix-up” the world. Scrutinizing the medical establishment would reveal how unstable its framework is. It would mean a loss of profits and trust. It avoids scrutiny like the plague. The medical establishment was out of control 30 years ago. It has since entered a sinister phase. And smokers are one of the first to notice the ugly side of the medical establishment in its world-fixing (eugenics) crusade.Anonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3585028625507474093.post-7462702468805272352011-04-15T21:32:30.682+01:002011-04-15T21:32:30.682+01:00(part 2a)
Concerning smoking, there have been thou...(part 2a)<br />Concerning smoking, there have been thousands upon thousands of antismoking “studies” conducted/funded. Many do not break new ground but simply reinforce the agenda. World Conferences on Smoking and Health have been occurring since the 1960s. In the last few decades there are National Conferences on Smoking and Health. There are now even Conferences for Nonsmokers. Then there are Smoking Cessation Conferences run by the Pharma cartel peddling their useless/dangerous wares. Additionally there are numerous antismoking lectures and colloquia and speeches and committees and campaigns. Specific institutes for the study of tobacco have been created as sub-centres of university Public Health Departments. There has been a frenzy of antismoking activity over the last three decades. A formidable, lucrative industry has been created that did not exist 30 years ago. And the bulk of it is all under medical direction. The medical establishment has wreaked havoc, again, to tackle the tobacco “death toll”, and peddled essentially on the basis of the far smaller tobacco “toll” in nonsmokers.Anonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3585028625507474093.post-74663889621751195962011-04-15T21:07:59.860+01:002011-04-15T21:07:59.860+01:00I should point out my scibblings on Pfizer were in...I should point out my scibblings on Pfizer were in a letter to the BMJ.<br /><br />Dave AthertonDaveAhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07249090980650806030noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3585028625507474093.post-24950819850538793622011-04-15T20:41:21.873+01:002011-04-15T20:41:21.873+01:00(part 3)
Most are not aware that the Hippocratic O...(part 3)<br />Most are not aware that the Hippocratic Oath has all but been done away with in the contemporary medical establishment. It is not a requirement of medical graduation. A key tenet of the Hippocratic Oath is “first do no harm”. When the Hippocratic Oath is dispensed with, it opens the medical establishment to deranged ideology (eugenics) and greed: With the “first do no harm” precept done away with and open to deranged ideology, the medical establishment can then rationalize doing harm for the greater “good”, and where it defines all the factors. The same assault on the Hippocratic Oath occurred in the German medical establishment in the decade preceding the Nazi regime. Medically-pushed antismoking also began to appear in German society around this time.<br /><br />The contemporary medical establishment has become a dangerous self-serving entity. While it incites arguments that particular social groups are “costly” to the system, they never ask what cost they pose to the system. Taxpayer-funding of the health system has become a black hole, sucking more and more funding into it. This is constantly blamed on everyone except the medical establishment. The medical industrial complex is wealthy, second only to the military industrial complex. Where is taxpayer funding going? Are medical services/products overpriced? Are there useless, costly products? Are there useless, costly procedures? Is there useless, costly equipment? Is there useless, costly screening and testing? Is there a useless, costly bureaucracy? etc, etc.<br /><br />The argument can well be made that it is when the medical establishment is not properly looking after its affairs is also when it becomes additionally dangerous by venturing into havoc-producing social-engineering crusades.Anonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3585028625507474093.post-990805714733474212011-04-15T20:20:04.091+01:002011-04-15T20:20:04.091+01:00Nice one Chris. I almost choked on my breakfast wh...Nice one Chris. I almost choked on my breakfast when I came across the title of this latest piece..lol.<br /><br />Dave- In thinking about clause 11 of the FCTC, I've come to wonder just what their intentions are when it comes to silencing individuals and organizations. Just how are they planning to do that without completely trashing the rights that we as individuals hold in democratic societies around the globe. I mean, I can see how they can achieve this objective when working in tandem with rogue and despotic regimes (which, is totally detestable, and says a lot about the WHO), but in the U.S., U.K., and other "free" nations?jredheadgirlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11078082563556309444noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3585028625507474093.post-10522661454365431562011-04-15T15:39:18.382+01:002011-04-15T15:39:18.382+01:00As I always thought if tobacco control want to scr...As I always thought if tobacco control want to screech out their message they should pay for it themselves.<br />I find as a smoking taxpayer having to fund these cockroaches from my taxes tottaly unpalletable.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3585028625507474093.post-3752785318224243882011-04-15T14:08:25.173+01:002011-04-15T14:08:25.173+01:00Nice one Chris: I wonder where this annual jambore...Nice one Chris: I wonder where this annual jamboree would get its funding from http://www.uknscc.org/uknscc2011_programme.php<br /><br />Currently supported by http://www.uknscc.org/uknscc2011_exhibition_sponsors.phpBelindahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16284836559314332001noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3585028625507474093.post-45878662708007320722011-04-15T14:03:34.799+01:002011-04-15T14:03:34.799+01:00If you are not aware of the work of Freedom2Choose...If you are not aware of the work of Freedom2Choose and The International Coalition Against Prohibition, you do now. As pro choice organisations on tobacco and alcohol we find the banning of smoking in bars and restaurants an abomination in a democracy. They are private property. The state and anti tobacco advocates have no rights to restrict consenting adults the freedom of assembly to consume a legal substance on private property.<br /><br />The supposed "harm" of second hand smoke (SHS) I believe is one of the worst abuses in the history of science developed in the late 20th and early 21st Centuries (1) apart from if proven, man made global warming. <br /><br />I was a speaker at the BMJ sponsored "..is smoking a disease or a habit" as you see above and was fully expensed by Pfizer. No doubt you can see from my style of writing and content I do not take prisoners. Believing that smoking is a habit I had to forward a copy of my speech and of course all the relevant papers and URLs to confirm my hypothesis. I would add apart from Dr. Reuben Dar's papers most of my evidence came from anti smoking advocates such as Dr. Martin Jarvis and Professor Simon Chapman. <br /><br />It was as you might expect hard hitting. I compared the misinformation disseminated about SHS and compared it to misinformation about to be invented to portray smokers as pathetic addicts who need even more state and medical intervention. I even went on to accuse by implication that the heart attack "miracles" papers from Professors Jill Pell and Stanton Glantz and Dr. Anna Gilmore of publication bias.<br /><br />You mentioned evidence based and that is a gold standard. At no time did Pfizer try to censor me, or persuade me to change my approach. In fact they felt most uncomfortable me criticising nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) such as patches and gum, who have "success" rates of 0.8%-11% after a year.(2) Pfizer of course do not produce NRT and could of seen of being biased against their competitors.<br /><br />In conclusion, from my experience Pfizer seem to be playing a straight bat.<br /><br />However I will say that I think it very wrong that tobacco companies are excluded from the process. It is very unfair and the WHO FCTC 5.3 is a disgrace, especially clause 11 "The measures recommended in these guidelines aim at protecting against interference not only by the tobacco industry but also, as appropriate, by organizations and individuals that work to further the interests of the tobacco industry."<br /><br />So any dissent is to be silenced. Disgraceful. (3)<br /><br />With tobacco control we are on a very slippery slope of misinformation, authoritarianism and misinformation, but with some honourable exceptions. Perhaps all parties need to get round the table and create our own framework of ethics.<br /><br />1. http://www.bmj.com/content/326/7398/1057.full<br /><br />2. http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/12/1/21.abstract<br /><br />3. http://www.who.int/fctc/guidelines/article_5_3.pdfDaveAhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07249090980650806030noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3585028625507474093.post-13296891426706426082011-04-15T12:56:03.549+01:002011-04-15T12:56:03.549+01:00Sorry for posting here. Would not publish in previ...Sorry for posting here. Would not publish in previous thread, but still very relevant.<br /><br /><i>As I've said before, a public health movement that bans smoking in all 'public' places <b>on the basis of 3,000 hypothetical deaths from secondhand smoke</b>—based on much weaker epidemiological evidence that the study discussed here—is not going to think twice about hammering drinkers who are allegedly responsible for tens of thousands of deaths.</i><br /><br />Sorry for O/T, but it’s a circumstance worth highlighting because your point can be made another way that points back to the medical establishment instead. (in 3 parts)<br /><br />Consider <i>iatrogenesis</i> which refers to any detrimental outcome produced by medical conduct (e.g., adverse drug reactions, medical errors, poor care of the bed-ridden resulting in infected bed sores). In America, from the very few studies that have been done, iatrogenic deaths are estimated at 750,000-1,000,000 per annum. It dwarfs the so-called tobacco “death toll” (400,000) and is approaching half of the total annual death toll in America (2,500,000). The medical establishment is by far the leading cause of preventable death and disability and associated costs. The translation for Australia is that iatrogenic deaths are estimated at 55,000-74,000 per annum compared with the tobacco “death-toll” of 15,000. The translation for the UK would be 150,000-200,000 iatrogenic deaths per annum.<br /><br />Further, the iatrogenic toll is far more plausible, causally, than the tobacco “toll”. The tobacco “toll” is based on lifetime use that also brings into play a veritable plethora of other factors over a lifetime. It is also argued from the population level that has very poor extrapolation to the individual level. Conversely, the iatrogenic toll is argued from the individual level and then estimated for the population level. For iatrogenesis, causation is typically demonstrable at the individual level. For example, with adverse drug reactions (these are properly prescribed, FDA approved drugs), it may take just one or a few pills to produce cardiac arrest in some patients that can be fatal or leave permanent injury. The patient is stable and within an hour of taking a pill goes into atypical catastrophic failure. The temporality of many of these associations is not over a lifetime, but involves hours or days. Of the two – the iatrogenic or tobacco tolls – it is the former that should attract very serious scrutiny. But, as will be seen, it has been the other way around, or upside-down.Anonnoreply@blogger.com