Tobacco prohibitionists coalesce to promote their "End Game"

[Bill Godshall]

The tobacco Endgame
Tob Control


Anyone who doubts that a coalition of tobacco prohibitionists have hijacked our five decade public health campaign to reduce cigarette diseases and deaths should read some/all of the many "Endgame" articles and editorials in this new edition of the Journal of tobacco Control.

The most cogent article about their endgame is:
Can tobacco control endgame analysis learn anything from the US experience with illegal drugs?
http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/22/suppl_1/i49.full


Mitch Zeller (the new director of FDA's Center for Tobacco Products) also wrote an article (when he was still a lobbyist for GlaxoSmithKline via Pinney Associates), which I'll post on another thread.

 

[Jman8]

From article, "Why Ban the Sale of Cigarettes? The Case for Abolition."

The cigarette is the deadliest artefact in the history of human civilisation.

Makes me shutter that such an assertion is out there floating around, deceiving the masses.

What country needs weapons when the deadliest substance ever is still available on the planet?

 

[xsphat]

Here I thought it was Walkers.

 

[rolygate]

Carl Phillips pointed out that the 'endgame' in tobacco control is further away now than it ever was.

In addition, there is the minor point that tobacco control's funders, the pharmaceutical industry, only fund these people at all because they are incompetent and ineffective. If there was even the slightest chance that smoking could be radically reduced, never mind eliminated, pharma certainly wouldn't fund them. It would be the same as funding Snus and e-cigarette advocates: a guaranteed way to halve pharma's giant income from smoking.

 

[Fiamma]

Carl Phillips pointed out that the 'endgame' in tobacco control is further away now than it ever was.

In addition, there is the minor point that tobacco control's funders, the pharmaceutical industry, only fund these people at all because they are incompetent and ineffective. If there was even the slightest chance that smoking could be radically reduced, never mind eliminated, pharma certainly wouldn't fund them. It would be the same as funding Snus and e-cigarette advocates: a guaranteed way to halve pharma's giant income from smoking.

BINGO !! They need the smoke, NRT, relapse cycle to continue in perpetuity. NRT revenue overall to them is small but the HUGE payoff is in the heavy duty meds associated with smokers diseases, COPD, Cancer, et al. Billions and billions stand to be lost if everyone quit smoking tobacco cigarettes.