Jefferson Review

"Your Liberty is Our Interest"

Home /  Archives / Links / Quotes / Book Reviews / Advertise /Contact us / Subscribe / Calendar

This is a European Poster.  In the U.S. it is celebrated on October 11.

Anti-smokers’ Garbage Brains

By Terry Gray

 “The Hunter Medical Research Institute says the study aims to identify the causes of inflammation in the airways of children with asthma and the results will be compared to the lung functions of healthy children.

Dr Bruce Whitehead says by establishing a link between passive smoking and asthma in children, it is hoped their exposure to tobacco smoke, particularly in the home, will be reduced.

"So-called passive smoking plays a major role in asthma, certainly clinically we know it does and it would be good to get some scientific basis for why it has the effect on asthma," he said.  (ABC News Online, 9-13-05).

The point of the research is to find a correlation between secondary smoke and asthma.  It is completely subjective.  The second paragraph foreshadows the true purpose of the study’s goal:  to ban smoking in private homes.  The third paragraph trivializes the phrase “passive smoke”, a nomenclature that was first uttered by anti-smoking fanatics.  More importantly is the association that the writer is trying to make concerning “passive smoke” and asthma.  These researchers apparently don’t read about what is going on in the world around them.  Smoking rates are going down while asthma in children is on the rise.  Maybe that is what they should be researching. 

          The third paragraph also establishes the fact that these researchers have no valid scientific basis for their Nazi agendas.
          Another group, “Ohio Tobacco use Prevention and Control Foundation” says that second hand smoke in a bar is more dangerous than exhaust fumes during rush hour.  In a new television ad they use a particular bar as an example to illustrate their point.  The bar they picked sits on the shoulder of a congested freeway.  The exact quote used is, “The air in a smoky bar is 50X more toxic than a rush-hour freeway”.  The group has a $10 million annual advertising budget and is being investigated.

          As I mentioned, asthma in children is on the rise.  In the U.S. in 1970 the childhood asthma rate was 5.8% and the smoking rate was 40% of the population.  In 1997 the U.S. asthma in children was 35.8 % and the smoking rate was 24%.  The only relationship that I can see is that smoking and asthma have little to do with each other.

          Antis are not stupid, just obtuse.  They know that they are in trouble with the asthma and smoking relationship.  So they invent stuff.  A recent study suggests that smoking and “metabolic syndrome” are connected.  “Metabolic Syndrome” sounds bad doesn’t it?  Doctor, how long do I have?  “Metabolic Syndrome” is a prediction tool.  It predicts who may be at risk for coronary heart disease and diabetes.  With the secondhand smoke/asthma connection in jeopardy, Antis immediately seek something else on which to blame secondhand smoke.  The “study” is published by the American Heart Association, the same group that lobbies for smoking bans.  This, folks, is what Antis refer to as an independent study.

Antis also like to use the bandwagon approach to smoking bans. They tell us that there are hundreds of cities in America with smoking bans but what they don’t tell us is that the vast majority of those cities have bans because they are sub-cities that fell to the Antis, within the jurisdiction of bigger cities.  Louisville Kentucky has dozens of smaller cities that would be affected by a Louisville smoking ban.  So when Antis say that there are 1700 cities with smoking bans, there really aren’t.  There are only a handful of metropolitan areas that have smoking bans and those areas happen to have sub-cities like Louisville’s Shively, Fairdale, and etc.  The bandwagon doesn’t exist except in the minds of the little Nazis who want their way.

          Along those lines, Champaign Illinois voted down a smoking ban while the little cities around Champaign eagerly awaited the vote in order to decide what they were going to do.  The mentality of nanny city leaders around the country can be seen in the response given to Champaign’s veto of a ban by 1^st Ward Alderman Charlie Smyth (D) of Urbana when he said, “I thought we made it clear to Champaign we were looking to them to provide leadership on this issue so we could have a level playing field.”  Hey moron, they did provide leadership.  They said that they didn’t want a smoking ban.  Is leadership only leadership when it goes your way?  If you think they are wrong then go ahead and lead by enacting your own ban.

          You see, the problem with this is that Urbana can’t afford to run their smokers out of town.  If they enact a ban solo, smokers will take their business elsewhere.  Once again, so much for NO NEGATIVE ECONOMIC IMPACTS from smoking bans.

          Louisville is going to experience the same problem.  Be forewarned that the little ban that the city council enacted is just a taste of what is to come.  Antis are notorious for getting any kind of smoking ban they can on the books and then, once they’ve set a precedent, pushing for more and more oppression.  I predict their next step is to gather together the restaurants that will be impacted by the ban, those serving less than 25% alcohol, and inciting them to protest to the city council that they are being hurt economically because the ban restricts them but not other restaurants.  However, instead of requesting or demanding that the ban be revoked, they’ll call for a stricter ban, ala an Antismoker catchphrase, “level the playing the field.”

Weather (Louisville) / Mapquest /  White Pages / Business Search / CNN / Dictionary / E-card / MSN