I’m fed up with the discrimination being levelled against me by the anti-smoking fraternity. I have stopped inviting non-smokers into my house. I simply won’t let them in. I’m pretty fed up with all the blatant and absolute lies that we hear about the fantastic overblown statistics on second hand smoke, third hand smoke and soon, I’m sure, the fourth, fifth and sixth hand as well. If smoking is as deadly as I’m told it is, then I already died twenty odd years ago. So did a lot of others I know. As with the global warming eejits, so the anti-smoking eejits. I’m fed up to here with both the lies and the liars.
It is nice then, to find someone else who shares my disgust at those lying to us, and my irritation with those that are stupid enough to believe them. My hat is off to Andrew Alexander at the Mailonline. (http://www.dailymail.co.uk)
My thanks to him for this pearl. A truly great article. I bring it here in its entirety.
A lie, by definition, is something you say which you know is untrue. (The Iraq Inquiry may provide the right label for Tony Blair’s misleading statements.)
The vaguer category of ‘dishonest’ applies to all sorts of official statistics, as presented by the Government, in policing, immigration etc.
But how do you classify claims that are obviously false but are being provided by those who are apparently too stupid to understand them?
Smoking is an interesting area because the figures – intended to make your flesh creep – must be, by definition, false.
We are told that smoking ‘costs’ the National Health Service £1.7bn, or maybe £5bn. They are not just guesswork, they are patently contrary to common sense.
We are told that smoking is a cause of lung cancer and heart disease and other potentially lethal disorders.
That may well be so.
But if smoking leads to premature deaths, it obviously saves the NHS money, since it is in old age that the cost of medical attention soars.
If we could all arrange to die at retirement age, the NHS would save an awful lot of money.
Moreover, smoking is an appetite suppressant and may therefore reduce obesity, which is certainly a cause of heart disease, and other disorders, costing the health service an awful lot of money.
An outright lie is also included in the anti-smoking campaign.
Tobacco manufacturers have to warn purchasers that, among other things, ‘smoking kills’.
If one said that prussic acid kills, it would be true. A more honest statement would be that tobacco can kill. Only the illiterate or mentally idle will fail to see the difference.
Alas, there is something about smoking which damages the mind – of anti-smokers. Normal as they may be in other respects, they rave and rant about tobacco.
Entrepreneur Duncan Bannatyne recently declared that he looked forward to the day when, if a mother lit up in a car, her children would call the police! Russia and Germany at one time also favoured the denunciation of unsound parents.
Bannatyne apparently had great trouble giving up many years ago. So he wants others to suffer, too.
Poor chap! I am sorry he found it so hard.
I gave up smoking once, for about 12 years – more a test of will than a health worry. The toughest moment was facing my typewriter to start writing.
I would watch a fellow pipe smoker as he sat down to do the same, slowly and thoughtfully filling his pipe (an art you have to master), finally lighting up and allowing that slow upward drift of the curling smoke.
Sensibly, I returned to the habit. Pipe-smoking is a very ruminative process. It creates the right spaces and pauses for a writer.
But we have not finished with the statistics yet. Second-hand smoke is claimed to cause many deaths and is the basis for tyrannical curbs on offices and pubs.
This figure is arrived at by guesswork, inspired by hysteria, and masquerades as scientific ‘proof’ – a process which characterises our age.