[ Return to Discussion Board ]
    This'll make your eyes pop out on stalks and your brain go into meltdown!!!!!
    Posted by BrianC on October 13, 2003, 7:36 pm

    I believe the statistics on smoking related deaths are way out out of synch with truth. Many people are actually saved from an early death by nicotine. The argument is complex but not too complex. It comes down to an analysis that nicotine (or whatever the active ingredient in cigarettes is that causes this effect) is, or was until they have been taxed to oblivion to fill the coffers of the medical profession, a cheap and perhaps the single cheapest way to control emotional highs and lows for some people. It actually helps them maintain some kind of balance in their lives. If they do not have access to that they become moody, suffer depression and other kinds of stress-related illnesses, some of them even taking people to earlier deaths than they might otherwise have had. Now these facts and there have now been some studies done on it, some of them as a result of a series of features articles I got published in The West Australian over here a few years ago are hardly ever mentioned in any studies as a counter to the statistics that do show, and I acknowledge they show, that in other ways cigarettes also kill.

    What I am saying here is that to get the true picture one has to (a) count up the number of people who die through lung cancer and all the similar "tobacco-related" diseases. Then (b) you also have to take into the account all those others who might be saved from a more premature death because the nicotine has helped prolong their lives. (b) has to be subtracted from (a). Then (c) one has to calculate the cost to the community of all the health expenses incurred through "tobacco-related diseases" like lung cancer and (d) subtract from that the costs of the savings for people who have been able to self-manage their own mental health and stress levels through nicotine and do not require as intensive mental health care. When you have done all that we might have a far more accurate understanding of what the real cost to the community of smoking is. I suspect when the research is finally done we might find that the benefits probably about equal the costs and risks. I don't know. I do know the existing statistics we are being fed are lies on an enormous scale of global deceit.

    It is my contention that the whole "anti-tobacco lobby" is an enormous and monstrous scam of the most outrageous proportions and a zillion times more morally corrupt than the worst allegations that have been directed against the "big tobacco giants". This is "the big medical giant", which has inveigeled in an enormous government-sponsored bureaucracy that has a very high self-interest in promoting QUIT campaigns and the like, and whole communities in the Western world have swallowed the whole lot not just hook, line and sinker but "hook, line, sinker, jetty and half the bloody coastline of the Australian continent!" It is now HOLY WRIT that smoking kills and woe betide any person who would dare not just to say but to think otherwise. George Orwell warned us about Big Brother. He is here and has been with us for decades. And I am not talking about the reality TV show.

    Similarly, I think the same applies to the Billings Method basically along the lines your argue. In that case though the "Holy Roman Catholic Church" stands in the equivalent place that the "Multinational Tobacco Satanic Monsters" stand in the anti-tobacco campaign.

    What we cannot claim though is that the Holy Roman Catholic Church is unfairly singled out in these matters compared to other institutions in society. That does not solve our communication problem. Pointing out the truth does not necessarily solve our communication problem either. Sometimes, as in the tobacco example I gave above, the whole world is deaf and simply does not want to know the truth. Everybody hates the smell of tobacco on clothes and in their hair. The anti-smoking lobby can call on some deeply emotional stuff to press their advantage home.

    I do want to comment in a particular way on this paragraph you wrote though:

    "I know a little about the man and I doubt very much if he would make such a statement without serious thought and advice. What I DO know is that while I remain in doubt I WILL be trusting the word of a dedicated and holy man who has nothing to gain from such a statement except persecution to have his facts straight, rather than (im)moral crusaders, those who make money from the trade (along with other worse crimes) and huge international financial consortiums with interests in the various immoral trades causing and flowing from this crisis."

    What really upsets me about this is that you are investing faith in this man simply because of the clothes he wears or because of the title someone has given him. This is what happened to the thousands of people who had been abused when they first went to the Church two, three and four decades ago. Some in the Church and I can remember the Holy Joes in my own family carrying on like this used to say "but he couldn't have possibly done that. He's a priest a very holy man!" Holy, be buggered. They were screwing little boys. Pete, wakey, wakey mate. This man cannot just rely on his title or the uniform he wears. His behaviour is judged by his actions and his words. If he does have the scientific proof to back up his claims he will produce it and I will start the clean up of the damage that my words have caused. If he doesn't he should start to clean up a few things including those not highly educated thousands, possibly millions who have acted on this advice and infected their wives, husbands and children when they needn't have been infected if this advice wasn't coming from one in so powerful a position as this cardinal. If this cardinal is found to be wrong, will you acknowledge that you have been wrong or will you still be wanting to carry on with this pathetic stuff about "he wouldn't do that he's a holy and humble man" ( or similar words to that).

    I would also dispute your statement that this man "has nothing to gain". Pete, there is nothing quite so intoxicating in life as power and prestige. Poor journalists sleep with this whore all the time. And so do Cardinals and even humble priests!


[ Return to Discussion Board ]