Has anti-smoking movement gone too far?

[Vocalek]

The name of the meeting is telling "...tobacco or Health" ...couldn't possibly expect both!

It started out as "World Conference on Smoking & Health", morphed into "...tobacco & Health" in 1990, and then into "...tobacco OR Health" in 1992.

1967 - World Conference on Smoking & Health, New York, NY, USA
1971 - 2nd World Conference on Smoking & Health, London, UK
1975 - 3rd World Conference on Smoking & Health, New York, NY, USA
1979 - 4th World Conference on Smoking & Health, Stockholm, Sweden
1983 - 5th World Conference on Smoking & Health, Winnipeg, MB, Canada
1987 - 6th World Conference on Smoking & Health, Tokyo, Japan
1990 - 7th World Conference on Tobacco & Health, Perth, WA, Australia
1992 - 8th World Conference on Tobacco OR Health, Buenos Aires, Argentina
1994 - 9th World Conference on Tobacco OR Health, Paris, France
1997 - 10th World Conference on Tobacco OR Health, Beijing, China
2000 - 11th World Conference on Tobacco OR Health, Chicago, Ill, USA
2003 - 12th World Conference on Tobacco OR Health, Helsinki, Finland
2006 - 13th World Conference on Tobacco OR Health, Washington D.C., USA
2009 - 14th World Conference on Tobacco OR Health, Mumbai, India
2012 - 15th World Conference on Tobacco OR Health, Singapore

Rampant Antismoking Signifies Grave Danger

 

[Drewps5co0tt]

It most definitely has gone to far! Years ago...

 

[Petrodus]

Has the Nanny State gone too far?
Has Political Correctness gone too far?

 

[Vocalek]

Yikes! I am reading a novel right now that is describing what life was like in Holland when the Nazis were getting ready to implement the "Final Solution."

At first a benign-sounding order forbade Jews from serving as air-raid wardens. The Jews were ordered to leave the Hague, Holland's capital, and to move from sensitive coastal areas. In September, all Jewish newspapers were banned. In November, all Jews employed by the Dutch civil service, including those who worked in the educational and telephone systems, were summarily dismissed. Then in January, 1941 came the most ominous Nazi decree to date. All Jews residing in Holland were given four weeks to register with the Dutch census office. Those who refused were threatened with prison and faced confiscation of their property. The census provided the Germans with a map showing the name, address, age, and sex of nearly every Jew in Holland. We foolishly gave them the keys to our destruction.

--Daniel Silva. The Rembrandt Affair.

I see parallels here. It starts with little, reasonable-sounding changes. "No-smoking in the conference rooms and hallways. You can only smoke at your desk". Then more changes follow. "No smoking in public office buildings. We set a side a special room for smoking." Then it became, "We are closing the smoking room. You will need to stand outside to smoke." And now it is becoming "No smoking inside or outside".

That wouldn't be so bad if they stopped with smoking. At least they had the excuse that they were trying to protect the health of bystanders. But it has morphed into "no tobacco zones" and even into "no nicotine at all if you want to work here." Maybe someday it will be mandatory daily blood tests, followed by execution for those who show any trace of nicotine in their blood stream.

 

[Petrodus]

If history repeats itself, and the unexpected always happens,
how incapable must Man be of learning from experience.
George Bernard Shaw

 

[Hummingbird]

if history repeats itself, and the unexpected always happens,
how incapable must man be of learning from experience.
george bernard shaw

amen!!!!!!!!!!

Oh, and by the way. The corrupt, greedy, unaccountable and disrespectful powers that rule know and count on this!!!!!

 

[DC2]

If history repeats itself, and the unexpected always happens,
how incapable must Man be of learning from experience.
George Bernard Shaw

You have some awesome quotes up your sleeve.
Seriously.

 

[t9c]

Saw this on the news today: Federal anti-smoking campaign set to launch | abc7chicago.com
They're gonna spend $54million of our tax money, "hoping" that as many as 5,000 smokers will quit. IOW, should it succeed 100%, it will have cost you & I $10,800 per ex-smoker. Not only is the movement gone too far, the federal govmint is marching right in step with them.

 

[BoiseMike]

"We're going to steal your money to spend it on a propaganda campaign to tell you how to live. You obviously aren't smart enough to make these decisions for yourself without some coercion. And if we can save just 1 life with this campaign it will be worthwhile."
To paraphrase Reagan, our government isn't the solution, it's the problem.

 

[TennDave]

Saw this on the news today: Federal anti-smoking campaign set to launch | abc7chicago.com
They're gonna spend $54million of our tax money, "hoping" that as many as 5,000 smokers will quit. IOW, should it succeed 100%, it will have cost you & I $10,800 per ex-smoker. Not only is the movement gone too far, the federal govmint is marching right in step with them.

Just imagine how many free e-cigs, or mods, juice and attys that can be bought and given away to smokers instead- it would be money well spent and I would say you would save a ton more lives!!

 

[TennDave]

I propose a "trade your cigarettes in for an e-cig" program!!!
Sort of like guns for....oh heck, what was it?

 

[subversive]

And that frightens the tobacco control movement. In fact one of the Poster presentations scheduled for next week's Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco (SRNT) conference is titled:

THE REACH OF E-CIGARETTES ON THE INTERNET HAS BEEN UNDERSTUDIED AND POTENTIALLY THREATENS GLOBAL HEALTH
John W. Ayers, Ph.D., M.A.*1,2,3, Benjamin M. Althouse Sc.M.4, 1Children’s Hospital Informatics Program at the Harvard-MIT Division of Health Sciences and Technology, Boston, MA, USA; 2Children’s Hospital Boston, Boston MA, USA; 3Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; 4Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA

Wow. L..o...l. How can they be so blind?

 

[sherid]

Until people realize that this is not a trade your cigarette for an e cigarette issue, there is no hope for either smokers or vapers. This is a war against choice, nothing more. The more you allow these people to medicalize society, the more hope is lost. Until people stand up for themselves and stop being shoved to the gutters and gallows simply because of lifestyle choices, the less hope there is for anyone.

 

[TennDave]

My friend just saw a commercial on TV about the Stop Smoking Campaign...I believe it's the same one mentioned here- it's national...they are spending over $10K on each of the 5000 people they hope will stop...

She said the slogan is "Just Say No." Can you believe it? Who was that? Betty Ford or Nancy Reagan? Anyway, it didn't work then- it won't work now- If it was as easy as just saying No to cigs, I would have quit 20 years ago. Oh, and it's our tax payer money hard at work- Give me a Break. :Roll Eyes:

 

[Luisa]

Has the Nanny State gone too far?
Has Political Correctness gone too far?

Pandora let it out of the box a long time ago. There is no way to put it back in the box.

 

[VapApe]

Saw this on the news today: Federal anti-smoking campaign set to launch | abc7chicago.com
They're gonna spend $54million of our tax money, "hoping" that as many as 5,000 smokers will quit. IOW, should it succeed 100%, it will have cost you & I $10,800 per ex-smoker. Not only is the movement gone too far, the federal govmint is marching right in step with them.

After seeing some of these adds ,Not only have they step over the line I believe they have shot them self's in the foot.

It looks like 54 million of tax payers money got flush down the toilet.
I can just see the complaints rolling in to the TV stations when the adds air at meal times.

 

[Bill Godshall]

t9c wrote

Saw this on the news today: Federal anti-smoking campaign set to launch | abc7chicago.com
They're gonna spend $54million of our tax money, "hoping" that as many as 5,000 smokers will quit. IOW, should it succeed 100%, it will have cost you & I $10,800 per ex-smoker. Not only is the movement gone too far, the federal govmint is marching right in step with them.

We should all be thankful that these new CDC ads only focus on cigarette smoking (although the website's title uses the term "tobacco" instead of "cigarettes" or "smoking").

Had it not been for our advocacy of tobacco harm reduction products and policies, the CDC would have likely ran ads condemning e-cigarettes and smokeless tobacco.

 

[Semiretired]

To bad they could not dedicate that money to researching ecigs and get what the world would consider non bias results determining what is the facts behind the benefits / disabling factors of ecigs.

 

[VapApe]

In regards to the adds, I believe it was to be a two prong attack.
Their plan was first to force BT to put graphic pics on cigaret packs then the TV add campaign.

But they lost in court, So now it could be seen as sour grapes on there part, Spending tax money to do a end run around the courts.

I know this is not the case, They have had to have the adds ready for some time.
But releasing the adds so close after there lose would make you wonder.

This could turn into a nightmare for them. I hope it does as it couldn't happen to a more deserving group.

 

[rothenbj]

I think their goal is 50k less smokers rather than 5k, but it's still ridiculous.