Why is no one interested in preventing it?
There can be little doubt with ample evidence to establish this as fact:
Health protection movements and propaganda campaigns protect products of the industries that finance them, to the detriment of the victims who are now unfairly forced to shoulder the blame.
The World Health Organization in league with NGO partners in industry and the stakeholders it advises are responsible directly for unnecessary and substantial increases in mortality and human suffrage especially among smokers.
The HIA health intervention process abdicated by the WHO is in fact a domination strategy similar to strategies, which convicted the Rockefellers and Bill Gates more recently for unfairly dominating industries. Laws of Informed consent being ignored allowed the last large Fascist regime to kill millions. This regime has the potential to dwarf the last by creating hate and fear for nothing other than huge financial gains of a growing industry power base. A power base currently shedding the few remaining restrictions of any state authority. How many have and will die before common sense and sensibility is once more brought to the forefront in science and discovery. Consensus views directing our decisions are only as valid as those who are allowed to speak. Democracy is strengthened by the debate; if opponents are silenced, we no longer have democracy but something else much less desirable. George Bush claims to protect democracy yet his own father was responsible for starting the ball rolling in a process, which will eventually if left unchecked lead to the end of democracy and freedom world wide. Huge charity foundations with trillions in assets are the tools to subvert the state through financing powerful lobby groups propaganda and international agencies not designed to protect themselves from within. Is this really charity and why do we pay a disproportionate share of the tax base to make it possible for the largest profiting corporations to pay little or no taxes while using the funds promised to charity to subvert the authority of the people?
Health protection has to be about limiting the effects of unsafe products not punishing the victims. If chlorine and pesticides were removed from cigarettes decades ago, as they should have been, the resulting mortality would have dropped tremendously. Anti smoker advocates, describe environmental smoke to be as dangerous as Dioxins however never mention the fact Dioxins do exist in cigarettes. With proof, in hand they promote the idea smoking “can cause Cancer” why have they been so silent with absolute proof it does. We could counter of course does it have to? The answer lies in where the realization would lead next. How many informed mothers would avoid public transit if they knew how many millions of cigarettes it would take to equate the dioxin levels on every bus platform? The lobby calls itself anti tobacco yet they are all well aware of the fact Tobacco has limited if any significant danger compared to the other ingredients, which could be included in a cigarette. They always seem to avoid talking about the other ingredients for good reasons. Many reasons would affect potential future funding sources. The official carefully worded statements of Government offices and close inspection of what they actually say will bear this out. The constructing of the “no safe cigarette” myth so all smoking can be expressed as an equal risk. Constructions while avoiding the protection of those who have no idea what each cigarette may contain.
The life cycle of a tobacco, plant is less than one year whereas a pine tree can live for more than a hundred through the transformation of CO2 gases to oxygen a tree collects many other pollutants. The toxic abilities of that tree when burned include much more concentrated dangerous toxins than we would find in most other forms of organic life.
Add some chlorine to the mix and burn it. Can the results be seen as anything less than predictable? When you include the bark from that tree in fake tobacco, you understandably increase the health risk to the smokers who will consume the product mixture. When anyone walks into a grocery store, they can compare the ingredients of a bag of potato chips to make conscious decisions as to what brand suits their level of protection. What smoker can make equivalent assessments when even the same brand they smoke from day to day could contain vastly different ingredients. This is what is missing in autonomy rights the full disclosure allows for informed consent without which we cannot make judgments affecting our health and what is allowed to be administered to our own bodies. Every person is entitled to full disclosure, this is the right of an individual and that right is being consciously subverted by all anti smoker stakeholders for personal and corporate gain. The fact potato chips are considered dangerous enough to regulate and carry ingredients lists and cigarettes are virtually unregulated should be seen as a hypocrisy which exists in the many stakeholders currently protecting the Tobacco industries.
The heart and lung foundations, Cancer societies and numerous anti smoker advocates protect the wisdom in punishing the victim while increasing profits of the industries who’s vast array of ingredients are included in every package of cigarettes. Completely free of state or lobby intervention. If the industry can create safer cigarettes, the consumers have a right to benefit by those creations. Lobby groups are currently abdicating to not allow those improvements this is substantial proof of what they truly support and the health of community has little to do with it. How easily can the politically correctness whip be utilized to silence all opposition. It is unprecedented how many respect that whip until the realization occurs in who wields that whip. Then of course the whip becomes a symbol for opposition to this folly. That opposition always existed however each imposition grows the ability of us all to say enough. After that day who will we trust to protect the value of science and discovery with so many involved in this campaign and so many more refusing to speak against it, there will be few left who can be trusted to carry forward with any degree of trust or free pass to opinion based in what we now accept as integrity. The future of science will not be able to move without severe regulation and proof of every statement made.
The mistake we are making is in seeing this as the work of Nannies in fact unnecessary deaths are being used as fuel for profit centers. Contrasting of extremes makes for convincing propaganda campaigns, the campaigns would not be possible without those deaths. Political correctness will stop anyone from actually preventing the “preventable deaths”. The new anti fat campaigns are driven in similar profit margin mentalities. “Height to weight” replaced with “waist to hip” establishing larger contrasts. Increased taxes to consumers will be accompanied by 300% tax rebates to healthy food advertisers who created these lobbies to begin with. The media will play along with the new cash for tax exclusion schemes, once in place the media, groups and ad agencies become a necessary component in the plan and increased profits are assured. Political branding to protect the process will assure domination of the state is sustained in a symbiotic profit for power relationship one cannot exist without the other. WIN-WIN, while the working population again is dominated more severely in a no win situation.
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/02-23-2004/0002115008&EDATE=
Hippocritic Oath -- Classical Version
”I swear by Apollo Physician and Asclepius and Hygieia and Panaceia and all the gods and goddesses, making them my witnesses, that I will fulfil according to my ability and judgment this oath and this covenant:To hold him who has taught me this art as equal to my parents and to live my life in partnership with him, and if he is in need of money to give him a share of mine, and to regard his offspring as equal to my brothers in male lineage and to teach them this art - if they desire to learn it - without fee and covenant; to give a share of precepts and oral instruction and all the other learning to my sons and to the sons of him who has instructed me and to pupils who have signed the covenant and have taken an oath according to the medical law, but no one else.
I will apply dietetic measures for the benefit of the sick according to my ability and judgment; I will keep them from harm and injustice.
I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect. Similarly I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy. In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art.I will not use the knife, not even on sufferers from stone, but will withdraw in favor of such men as are engaged in this work.Whatever houses I may visit, I will come for the benefit of the sick, remaining free of all intentional injustice, of all mischief and in particular of sexual relations with both female and male persons, be they free or slaves.What I may see or hear in the course of the treatment or even outside of the treatment in regard to the life of men, which on no account one must spread abroad, I will keep to myself, holding such things shameful to be spoken about.If I fulfil this oath and do not violate it, may it be granted to me to enjoy life and art, being honored with fame among all men for all time to come; if I transgress it and swear falsely, may the opposite of all this be my lot.”
Translation from the Greek by Ludwig Edelstein. From The Hippocratic Oath: Text, Translation, and Interpretation, by Ludwig Edelstein. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1943.
Now thats entertainment....
No comments:
Post a Comment