Smoke, Lies, And The Nanny State
Sept 5, 2022 6:45:11 GMT -5
Ronv69, roadsdiverged, and 1 more like this
Post by trailboss on Sept 5, 2022 6:45:11 GMT -5
I just ran across some writings of the musician Joe Jackson on the subject of smoking. Although these were written several years ago, it is still as relevant as ever. It is a 21 page essay, the first page:
His op-ed pieces on the same page are also pretty good.
joejackson.com/writings
For thousands of years in the Americas, and about 500 years pretty much everywhere else, tobacco has been a friend to mankind. It has been used to relax, to stimulate, and to treat various ailments. It has been a vital part of rituals both social and spiritual. It has been used as currency. Whole communities have been founded on it - including, arguably, the United States of America. Wait a minute.
Scratch that! Smoking is a vile, filthy habit that will almost inevitably kill you. No one smokes willingly; they are simply pathetic addicts, duped by evil tobacco companies. Tobacco is a plague which must be wiped out.
Like most people these days, I was more inclined, up until a few years ago, to believe the second paragraph than the first. I was a very moderate smoker and almost gave up. But something about the sheer hysteria of the antismoking movement, and the various holes and contradictions in their arguments, made me suspicious. Some time in the late 1990s I arrived in Los Angeles and, as my taxi pulled out of the airport, I was confronted by a huge red billboard: SECONDHAND SMOKE KILLS. I thought: even heavy smokers take several decades to develop lung cancer. Surely a nonsmoker, even regularly exposed to smoke in the air, would have to live to be about 300 to catch up? And how exactly would you know it was smoke that killed them, as opposed to, say, the appalling LA smog?
Since then I’ve researched the smoking issue in depth. I’ve unravelled reams of statistics, met with doctors and academics, and networked with scores of other researchers and activists who are trying to get at the truth. I’m now convinced that the dangers of smoking - and particularly ‘passive’ smoking - are greatly exaggerated, for reasons which have more to do with politics, power and profit than objective science. I believe the antismoking movement - especially lobby groups like ASH (Action on Smoking and Health) - has far too much money and influence, and that their dishonesty and bullying tactics should be worrying even to those who hate tobacco.
This essay is in four parts. The first examines the risks of smoking; the second, ‘secondhand smoke’; the third, smoking bans; and the fourth (and perhaps most important) some broader social and political contexts. There is also a list at the end of further sources, resources and ways to get involved. Since my intention is to offer an introduction to some of these issues, rather than a textbook, I’ve refrained from footnotes or lists of sources, but I can promise the reader that they can all be found - and backed up over and over again - through that list.
Scratch that! Smoking is a vile, filthy habit that will almost inevitably kill you. No one smokes willingly; they are simply pathetic addicts, duped by evil tobacco companies. Tobacco is a plague which must be wiped out.
Like most people these days, I was more inclined, up until a few years ago, to believe the second paragraph than the first. I was a very moderate smoker and almost gave up. But something about the sheer hysteria of the antismoking movement, and the various holes and contradictions in their arguments, made me suspicious. Some time in the late 1990s I arrived in Los Angeles and, as my taxi pulled out of the airport, I was confronted by a huge red billboard: SECONDHAND SMOKE KILLS. I thought: even heavy smokers take several decades to develop lung cancer. Surely a nonsmoker, even regularly exposed to smoke in the air, would have to live to be about 300 to catch up? And how exactly would you know it was smoke that killed them, as opposed to, say, the appalling LA smog?
Since then I’ve researched the smoking issue in depth. I’ve unravelled reams of statistics, met with doctors and academics, and networked with scores of other researchers and activists who are trying to get at the truth. I’m now convinced that the dangers of smoking - and particularly ‘passive’ smoking - are greatly exaggerated, for reasons which have more to do with politics, power and profit than objective science. I believe the antismoking movement - especially lobby groups like ASH (Action on Smoking and Health) - has far too much money and influence, and that their dishonesty and bullying tactics should be worrying even to those who hate tobacco.
This essay is in four parts. The first examines the risks of smoking; the second, ‘secondhand smoke’; the third, smoking bans; and the fourth (and perhaps most important) some broader social and political contexts. There is also a list at the end of further sources, resources and ways to get involved. Since my intention is to offer an introduction to some of these issues, rather than a textbook, I’ve refrained from footnotes or lists of sources, but I can promise the reader that they can all be found - and backed up over and over again - through that list.
joejackson.com/writings
