Giving the child a fag for breakfast

Try as I may, I still fail to understand this current obsession with tobacco.

We are living in a world where we are surrounded by dangers.  Most of those dangers have been around since the dawn of man when fire was discovered.  Fire equals smoke equals carcinogenic particles in the air.  However the quantities of these particles is so minute that they can safely be ignored.

How many people will complain about cigarette smoke yet buy a breakfast cereal for their children because it contains Niacin? [Niacin and Nicotine are essentially the same thing.  Niacin = Nicotinic Acid, also known as Vitamin B3]. 

How many anti-smoker parents will drive their children to school through a blanket of exhaust fumes?

How many Tobacco Control fanatics will hold a barbecue in their garden with children present?

How many people attended the opening and closing ceremonies of the Olympics when the stadium was fill with smoke from fireworks?  How many carcinogens or heavy metals were floating about there?

How many people will expose their families to all of the above without any hesitation, yet will scream hysterically at the mere sight of a cigarette?

The Tobacco Control Industry constantly tells us that half of all smokers die early.  Presumably they mean before the average age?  If so, by default the other half must live longer. Average out the two and by their own admission smoking has little effect on lifespan.  If it has little effect on the smoker it must have zero effect on non-smokers, and certainly zero effect compared to all the “dangers” I have mentioned.

Before the Tobacco Control Industry was even thought of, we lived in a world of tobacco smoke and no one batted an eyelid.  It was the norm, and everyone was happy.

For the life of me I just cannot understand this obsession with a small tube of smouldering leaves.

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on StumbleUponDigg thisPin on PinterestShare on RedditShare on Tumblr

Comments

Giving the child a fag for breakfast — 26 Comments

  1. You are missing one vital point though Grandad. What you so rightly refer to as the, “Tobacco Control Industry”, is just that, a profitable Industry for the busybodies it employs. They are having taxpayers money shoveled at them by our Government, to spend as they please and these amounts are running into millions right now. It has been a scam from the start full of hypocracy and cant and the only unfortunate aspect of the whole thing, is how easily the Irish people have been fooled by propaganda. Mind you, this is the same Irish people who cheered the Celtic Tiger also, another famous scam.

  2. Thanks Nigly!  ;)

    Cat – I’m sure just about everyone in the world has a habit that would annoy others.  Those we cant ignore, we tolerate.  Those we can’t tolerate we avoid.  Simple Unless of course you are a self-righteous control freak whereby you promptly demand laws to ban those little annoyances.

    John – Is it the chicken and egg principle here?  The Tobacco Control Industry wouldn’t have sprung into existence without an anti-smoke movement.  I can’t see them forming a movement and then deciding on a target.  Of course there is the distinct possibility that Big Pharma just decided to create a movement to promote their “nicotine cessation” crap, but then why aren’t there similar movements funded by other vested interests?  How come Tobacco Control has reached the point where health has patently nothing whatsoever to do with it?  It is a movement whose aim is purely to torment smokers with no other reason than sheer spite.

  3. I couldn’t agree with you more, GD. As for the Tobacco Control Industry; yes, it’s just like every other “charity” doing the rounds these days – A PROFIT MAKING SCAM WHOSE SO CALLED FUNDING GOES INTO THE POCKETS OF THE DIRECTORS. A perfect example of this is our very own patron saint of twats, Bono.
    Right, that’s my rant finished. Time for a ciggie methinks…

  4. I think you’re trying to justify a terrible, digusting habit and failing miserably GD. :)
    Does the smiley get me off the hook?

    Time to quit. You can do it!   Ever try the patches?

    Just teasing.. You stay puffing if you want. 

    Shur what’s a little emphysema, and heart disease anyways. They’re probably not as bad as they make out.

    And shur what’a s little reaking of a stink.. you don’t smell it yourself when your sense of smell is kaput.  

  5. How rude Anne. 

     Smell is subjective. There is no law yet that says everyone has to agree with you that the aromatic scent of fresh tobacco burning is a “stink.”

     I wonder what you stink of. Self righteousness perhaps or maybe something else just as ghastly.

    And sorry to have to inform you but non smokers die too and also get illnesses like copd, lung cancer and  heart disease. 

     If you weren’t so bigoted then you’d know there are many things that harm people but the only thing that really harms smokers more than the product they willingly choose to buy is smokerphobia.  

  6. InisEanna – I can actually understand what the Tobacco Control Industry are about – the two abbitions of the mindless – power and money.  But it still doesn’t explain this pathological hatred for tobacco in the first place.

    Anne – If I didn’t know you better I’d take you to task for that! 

    Pat – I have a feeling there is a little leg-pulling going on here.  She makes some interesting points though?  In her defence she calls it a habit rather than an addiction [the usual anti-smoker line?]  Time to quit….  why?  I enjoy puffing the pipe.  It relaxes me and those around me.  No intentions of quitting.  Emphysema, and heart disease?  Nothing to say they won’t get me anyway whether I smoke or not.  Actually I am probably at a lower risk of heart disease as the pipe relaxes me.  And as for the smell… I have lost count of the people who have approached me to say how they love pipe-smoke and how it reminds them of their father or more usually, their grandfather.

  7. I was right behind Pat in calling Anne a rude person. Those who are negatively infatuated with tobacco smoke wear rudeness like a badge of honor.

    Just last night I read through a marathon comment session (300+ at last count) wherein some young whippersnapper had the unmitigated gall to tell a tavern owner, who was losing his livelihood and customer base due to a new smoking ban, how the hospitality business worked. The owner had been in operation at the location since 1902!

    I swear had there been some way to detect from whence this little troll was holed up I would have taught him a lesson he’d never forget in civility and humility. He would have spent the rest of his days saying ‘Yes sir’, ‘No sir’, and ‘That’s none of my business, sir’ when I was done with him.

  8. Okay, the business had been in operation at the location since 1902. The owner had run it for ‘only’ the last 35 years if I remember right. No, the owner was not 110 years old. But you get the idea, Grandad I’m sure.

  9. Welcome Smokervoter!  I fully agree that the smugness of some of the anti-smokers can be more than a little irritating.  The excuse I make for them is that really they must have a very poor intellect to be sucked into the anti-smoker propaganda so easily.  They have been fed complete and utter rubbish and have lapped it up, and are more to be pitied than blamed.

    However I still have a strong suspicion that Anne above was just doing a bit of leg pulling.  But only she can answer that.

  10. “If you weren’t so bigoted then you’d know there are many things that harm people ”  Yes, Pat the nurse.. name calling hurts people. I am not a bigot.  That hurt.

    “I swear had there been some way to detect from whence this little troll was holed up I would have taught him a lesson he’d never forget in civility and humility. He would have spent the rest of his days saying ‘Yes sir’, ‘No sir’..” 
    Yeah, awesome Smokervoter.. violence solves every difference of opinion.

    I’m yanking your chains a little GD.. :)
    You’re onto me.. damn it.

    I don’t really think smokers should be burnt at the stake or anything, but at the same time I’m glad there’s no smoking in pubs and restaurants anymore to be honest –   I repeat, I am not a bigot.

  11. Anne – When a quarter of the population are picked on and subjected to a hate campaign for doing something that is perfectly legal, then no one should be surprised when we show resentment.  We have been subjected to a series of petty spiteful laws which have done nothing other than to close many pubs and put thousands out of work.

    Incidentally, I have nothing against smoke-free pubs.  I think they are an excellent idea.  HOWEVER, there should also be pubs for smokers.  Running a pub is a private business, and the publicans should be allowed run it as such.  They, and not the government should have the right to decide whether their premises is smoke free or not.  Let the market decide.

  12. I don’t know about letting the market decide GD. How many pubs opted to be smoke free pubs when smoking wasn’t banned?     And whatever about patrons going to the pub for a few hours of an evening, what about the workers breathing in the shite for 40 + hours a week.
    They are private owned businesses alright, but the law and regulations still apply to them.. that we don’t agree with some of them is another thing.

    The  pubs I go to have smoking areas set up that are just as warm, and bigger than the indoor areas.. the workers are protected and customers are happy. 

    By the way, I’ve often have a sneaky one or two  (or five)  after a few on a Saturday night.. I’m no smoker hater at all.

  13. As a daytime drinker, (I rarely go out after 5.00pm, and also as one who does NOT go to the pub as often now since the ban, I have visited many pubs over the last nine years between noon and mid afternoon. On several of these occasions, I have been the only customer there and yet I have to leave to smoke. On many occasions also, the owner or barman in these quiet pubs, have come out for a smoke with me. It’s a joke Anne.

    For myself and many smokers like me, a smoke with your pint is the same as butter on your bread. The smoking ban logic applied to that, would say to you, “We are not trying to spoil your enjoyment of your bread and may of course, continue to take butter too. But, you must have your bread indoors on it’s own, and then go out to consume your butter neat and you may not bring your bread with you, as it’s unlawful to eat bread on the street. Technically, alcohol is a carcinogen and the ban logic applied to that would dictate that your tipple bought in the pub should be sealed. You could leave it on the bar and chat away, but you would have to out in the rain to sip, and re-seal it again before you came back in to your interrupted chat. 

    And the fumes from your car have also been designated as a Class-A Carcinogen. Applying again the tobacco logic, you should be forced by law, to have the images from the proposed graphic cigarette pack, festooned all over your car, or even screen painted onto every inch of bare metal. Failure to do so, would carry a €3,000 euro fine for a first offence.

    Are you beginning to understand our resentment at the unfairness of it all, because I could continue !!

  14. I’m not fat, don’t smoke and I don’t imbibe alcohol in any significant way (Except I do try to drink 2 pints of beer each week which works a treat in keeping my kidney stone attacks at bay). However I have always been a “picky eater”. I’m not partial to many vegetables and I will generally avoid most meat unless it is of very high quality without any trace of rubbery fat on it. I enjoy most dairy products and prefer large amounts of butter and salt in and on my food. I am not like this because of any idealogical preference, it is just simply the way I am. Many people find my dietary preferences to be oddly amusing. I currently hold deep feelings of resentment mostly directed towards the anti-sugar, anti-salt and obesity crusaders whose current efforts represent attacks against my eating preferences. When I visited the UK earlier this year I was struck by how these scoundrels were hell bent on ruining my favourite foods through incessant government lobbying aimed at pressuring companies to adopt salt, sugar and fat reduction strategies in the manufacture of their products. Even Marks & Spencer has started ruining their many wonderful food products, their bread tasted awful and my favourite cheese & onion pies now sported a crust made out of what appeared to be low grade cardboard.
    Some of my best friends smoke cigarettes and I know very well how they feel about the villification of smokers. I am also well aware of the fabricated case against secondhand smoke and also understand the ecosystem which fosters and breeds the leeches which infest that swamp of thieving liars. Yes, I actually looked under the rug on this one quite some time ago and noticed the emperor had no clothes. As a result, I would like nothing more than to see most of these fake charities burned in a large fire. As a non-smoker I am certainly not taken in by their lies and deceptions. I should also mention that I have never thought of cigarette smoke as anything unpleasant and I certainly miss the pleasurable aromas I have always associated with cigar and pipe smokers. I heartily agree with the mysterious grandad on smoking/non-smoking pubs, this choice should be up to the owner of the establishment and is nobody else’s business.
    I have no idea how long the latest war on smoking, alcohol and tasty food can continue as the general masses seem all too easily taken in by these tax sucking con-artists. Perhaps their fabrications and propaganda have to reach such stupendously ridiculous levels before the meaningful revolt occurs. Oh, and don’t get me started on the European Union……….
    By the way old fella, I often check out your excellent blog and might show up as a visitor statistic under Canada.
     

  15. You couldn’t be wronger if you tried.

    Which is odd, because on most subjects you’re on the mark, but once fags are involved, all reason and logic goes out the window. 

  16. Nigel – Welcome to our happy [?] little band, and thanks for a lot of effort!  Indeed more and more non-smokers are beginning to see through the crap the antis pour out.  For example the latest is that somehow plain packs behind steel shutters are somehow better than coloured packs behind steel shutters.  And as you rightly point out [and as the smokers have been saying for a long time] the new list of targets – alcohol, sugar, salt, fat and so on] is going to affect everyone sooner or later.  Those who now sneer at the smokers and say “it’s for our own good” or whatever are soon going to find out just what it’s like to be on the receiving end of The Righteous Crusade.  [Oh, and thanks for the kind words!]

    Fuck it – Could you please tell me where exactly I am wrong?

    tt – Not Global Warming any more?  Just Climate Change?  That’s a bit of a climb down?

     

  17. Nicotine and Niacin are barely similar in structure (nicotine is a third heavier) and biochemically, behave very differently in the body. 

    As a comparison, wood alcohol (like you find in bad poitin) is barely different from regular alcohol but will instead cause blindness and death instead of a buzz.  Sometimes compounds that differ by being mirror images of each other behave very differently e.g. thalidomide.

    You’re right about smoke though. More here http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/the-fireplace-delusion/

    SH applies the argument to religion but the same argument applies to tobacco smoke… 

  18. Fuck it – I am well aware that Niacin and Nicotine are not the same thing, but if the dumbfucks in Tobacco Control seriously believe that the mere colour of a cigarette pack will get a child addicted for life, then the comparison should be enough to give them all heart attacks! Oh, and did I mention that nicotine is to be found in tomatoes and potatoes?  :twisted:

  19. As you know, people are generally thick. Wait, hear me out.

    They don’t just buy a cigarette, in their heads they buy a life experience and more importantly a BRAND.

    If you take away the branding, then you take this ridiculous reason to smoke away.

    Who’s your tomacco supplier?  

  20. Fuck it – I always hear people out.  In a situation where all advertising of any nature is banned, and where tobacco can’t even be displayed behind the counter, how can packet design possibly entice kids to start? There is no proof whatsoever to support the theory that it does.  The vast majority [if not all] start off “behind the bicycle shed” as an experiment or from peer pressure.  Branding is purely a means of brand identification for existing smokers.  My supplier?  Gallagher’s, I think, but I’m not sure.  They have probably been bought out by someone by now.  The brand is Condor, if you want to buy me some?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>