Why Anti-Smoking Groups Providing Inaccurate Health Information is Unethical

United Pro Smoker's Newsletter ^ | March 17, 2006 | Michael Siegel

[SheLion]

CSA in your future!

CSA???
.

[mugs99]

CSA???
Controlled Substances Act.

Joe Scarborough, on MSNBC, ridiculed the Calabasas anti smoking ordinance tonight...One little step in the right direction. Hopefully it will catch on with the rest of the talking heads.
.

[freepatriot32]

I'm in trouble ... I read history books all the time!

Your DOOMED!!!!!(in another 40 or 50 years)

[SheLion]

Joe Scarborough, on MSNBC, ridiculed the Calabasas anti smoking ordinance tonight...One little step in the right direction. Hopefully it will catch on with the rest of the talking heads.

One gentleman was on Fox News yesterday talking about this.  And he said that Calabasas is taking away people's liberties.

[mugs99]

Calabasas is taking away people's liberties.
Back in 1969, many warned that the drug war was taking us down the proverbial slippery slope. We have seen one liberty after the other fall to those who want to dictate for the public good. Drugs, helmets, seat belts, the right to self determination, property rights and now tobacco. Government has become our greatest threat to liberty.

“You can't give the government the power to do good without also giving it the power to do bad - in fact, to do anything it wants.”...Harry Browne
.

[SouthTexas]

I don't have a problem with the theoretical in certain circles, but what this has transpired into is a total lack of accountability.

Wisps of second hand smoke are considered lethal while millions of automobiles spew untold amounts of pollutants into the atmosphere. The lack of testing has brought us global cooling, suddenly and inexplicably transformed into global warming. Now to the point that we are all doomed to live in caves if we want to survive.

It is what got DDT banned to the detriment of hundreds of thousands of Africans that have died of Malaria.

It has brought us the deadly black mold, that has been here for milenia, through the Cleveland study where the CDC blasted their own researchers for lack of controls, no family backgrounds, improper testing methods, etc.

You can speak on the theoretical all you wish, I have noted only a snapshot of the results. Who draws the lines between what is an ethical "estimation" and what is not? There has to be research and testing to prove or disprove a theory. What we have is far to much wild speculation. Too many "researchers" have now even bypassed the theory and gone straight to fact, regardless of whether it's even true.

[HiTech RedNeck]

It's Cheroot Madness, I say.

Seriously, if you asked John Q. Public which is more of a nuisance, tobacco smoke or barbecue smoke, guess what you'd get as an answer 90% of the time.

[SouthTexas]

And I showed you plain examples of bogus research. Sure, there are brilliant scientist out there, probably the majority, and those are not the ones that publish there findings on the evening news first before there is ever any peer review.

As far as me publishing, don't hold your breath, it's not what I do for a living, I just have to live with the idiotic laws that result from the knee jerk reactions to junk science.