The Harpy from Hell — 3 Comments

  1. I don't know if you remember, but before studies proved conclusively that all brands of tobacco cigarettes caused lung cancer…

    No study has proved conclusively that smoking causes lung cancer. They have merely established correlation using epidemiology. In more than fifty years of trying (at the expense of thousands of poor lab animals) they have not yet managed to replicate the mechanism whereby smoking tobacco causes lung cancer. So the connection remains speculative.

    There is an anecdotal account of a lab in the USA which was conducting experiments on lab rats, one of which was trying to cause lung cancer by means of exposure to radiation, and another which was trying to cause LC by means of exposure to tobacco smoke. The two sets of lab rats were kept strictly separate. The cohort subjected to radiation consistently had a 100% mortality rate, every time. Those subjected to tobacco smoke stubbornly refused to develop LC. Then one set of rats given the radiation treatment confounded all expectations by having a 60 – 70% survival rate (I don't remember the exact figures, but it was somewhere in that region, I think). The researchers were flummoxed as to why this group seemed to have survived where all previous groups had had 100% mortality. On further investigation, it transpired that this latest batch ot rats had been used in error – they had been one of the batches which were part of the tobacco smoke experiments, and had already been exposed to large amounts of tobacco smoke, which appeared to have had a protective effect when they were then exposed to the radiation.

    I read this some years ago, and have been unable to find any reference or data on the event; so as I say, it is anecdotal. However, given the way 'science' works in the field of Tobacco Control. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if it was true, but the results had been buried deeply so nobody could ever find them.

    • I have seen that lab report myself.  I have a strong feeling it was in Richard White's book "Smoke Screens".

      • Yes, that may well have been where I read about it. I'm a little hazy on the details, as it was in the days when I was just getting interested in all the anomalies in the anti-smoking crusade, so wasn't at the time bookmarking and (sort of) cataloguing all my finds. 

        I would love to find the original search results, if they indeed exist. It would make for some interesting reading. And, I must admit, handy ammunition. 🙂

        I find that I have become something of a zealot (or perhaps that should be 'anti-zealot') myself these days, which is totally at odds with my normally easy-going, live-and-let-live character. But what really gets my goat is being lied to. And when those lies are repeated ad nauseam with embellishments, and served up by the MSM as facts, I start getting really pissed off. And so I've turned into a bit of a keyboard warrior, refuting the lies (with links to the original research where possible) in comments all over the world.

        It's the only way I can think of that I can fight back.

        I despair sometimes, and despise the mindset of those who want to coerce everyone into following them into their own personal ideological utopias. How dare they? The arrogance is breathtaking! I get quite depressed when I see how comprehensively so many people have swallowed the propaganda, hook, line and sinker. But then, they are never exposed to the truth. We of the awkward squad actively seek out the factual information, so we know about the lies they tell. But your average Joe in the street hasn't a clue. If 'Experts Have Said', then it must be true.

        Well, they wear white coats, don't they?


Hosted by Curratech Blog Hosting