Tobacco Epidemic vs Ebola Epidemic: Spot the Difference.

About 10 days ago, I wondered out loud how a World Health Organisation that believed that there was such a thing as a “tobacco epidemic” could possibly cope with an all too real Ebola epidemic spiralling out of control in Africa. It soon came to my attention that at almost the same time Romano Grieshaber, a retired German professor of medicine (whom I’ve mentioned before) had written an article (in German, of course) on his blog along more or less the same lines. So together with regular German-speaking readers, Brigitte and Reinhold (many thanks to both of them!), for the past few days I’ve been helping to translate his article into English, which I now publish. Please note that many of the links provided in the body of the text are to German webpages.

Tobacco epidemic vs Ebola epidemic: Spot the difference.

By Romano Grieshaber.

First published

It is high time to also pay tribute at this point to Professor Günter Ropohl’s very well written book “Besorgnisgesellschaft” (The Worried Society). It is slim but extremely rich in content, and a masterful analysis of the interaction of influences in a society filled with anxieties, where fomenting fear becomes a lucrative business for so-called “experts” offering an appropriate supply to match the associated demand. At Amazon you can find not only the book itself – which I hereby would like to highly recommend -, but also my review of it. And you also can look forward to an interview of Professor Ropohl in my blog soon.

A recent event reminded me of a quote from my review:

Developments in world politics – Syria, Iraq, Ukraine – have sometimes prompted a glimmer of the idea that it is not a matter of course to persevere with such pseudo-problems as the fight against tobacco use. The persistence of the WHO and its supporting state, semi-state, non-governmental and commercial organizations in the global implementation of the FCTC, the “Framework Convention on Tobacco Control”, is not the consequence of the world having nothing else to worry about any moreBehind this stubbornness are officials from regions of the world where life expectancy is about 80 years, and where for decades a peaceful life without major risks has been taken for granted, and promoted by pharmaceutical companies, which in turn have their own profit-oriented agenda.

In these circles,  spoilt by decades of prosperity, no-one wants to think it normal that human life is finite, and that living in good health and sound mind to an age of between 80 and 90 years will continue to be permitted to only a few people to enjoy. These useless officials who have appointed themselves the guardians of our health often seriously imagine that if they can only stop us enjoying eating, drinking and smoking, then we will be healthy and happy and eternally grateful to them. What will these people do, should they ever be confronted with a real, acute and massive threat?

The development of the Ebola epidemic in West Africa, where the World Health Organization is now trying to cover up their dismal failure – at a stage in the propagation of this viral disease when it would have been manageable – with particularly loud lamentations and accusations against others, may be understood to be an answer to my question.

In the fight against tobacco, the WHO is well known for liking to use dramatic vocabulary.  According to them, if the strongest countermeasures are not taken, a “global tobacco epidemic” will cause the deaths of eight million people by 2030. And eighty percent of those deaths will occur in developing countries. The same applies, by the way, for all the so-called “non-communicable diseases” which the World Health Organization blames primarily on the lifestyle of patients. I have already expressed my doubts elsewhere, particularly with respect to the last point, as follows:

Non-communicable diseases are “a group of disorders associated with diabetes, cardiovascular disease, cancer, chronic respiratory diseases and mental disorders.” Worldwide,”according to the WHO, in 2008 an estimated 36 million of the world’s 57 million deaths [have been] due to non-communicable diseases”, including “9 million people under the age of 60” and with almost “80 percent of these deaths occurring in developing countries.”

These numbers are rather astonishing. For example, in Africa, where about 12.5 million deaths occur annually, the ten leading causes of death are:

• Malaria
• Respiratory diseases
• Diarrheal diseases
• Infant deaths
• Cardiovascular diseases
• Tuberculosis
• Heart disease
• Measles
• Road traffic accidents

Non-communicable diseases in the developing countries thus appear to play only a minor role (at least in Africa) as cause of deaths.

If so far one was shaking one’s head in amazement at a WHO that magnifies supposed epidemics of tobacco, alcohol, and abundant food into ostensibly terrible threats in developing countries, in light of the tragic failure to prevent the spread of Ebola one is now filled with incredulous anger. For in this case there actually is an epidemic in the actually-meant sense, not just a hyped up, advertising-style bogeyman to frighten us with the dramatic choice of words into political and social acceptance of required measures.

The consequences of the Ebola epidemic for the entire population of the affected areas are immediately visible and tangible. It is not only those falling ill from Ebola fever who suffer. Where health workers fall ill themselves (which happens to an alarming extent), or no longer come to work for fear of contagion (which also happens often enough), other patients cannot be treated, and the risk of death from actually-treatable diseases increases. And where not only old and already sick people die, but also many previously healthy adults between the age of 30 and 45, there are orphans left behind, old people left unprovided for, and fields left uncultivated, so that further misery is preprogrammed into a vicious circle that can last for years.

When would you have ever heard of such consequences brought about by, for example, the “diabetes epidemic”?

An epidemic is not, as the World Health Organization has been hammering into us in recent years, about the presence of numerous real or perceived health risks which may, or may not, lead in a few decades to more cases of illnesses of specific disease types that occur amongst the elderly. Although Wikipedia already obediently repeats that “epidemics” only in a “narrow sense” entail outbreaks of infectious diseases, the restriction of the term to infectious diseases makes very good sense, as can be seen from the above side effects. A “temporal and spatial clustering” of disease cases, as Wikipedia soberly states the matter, means that in the case of an infectious disease, a rapid and hardly stoppable spread of the disease occurs once a critical mass of disease cases is exceeded. In the case of Ebola, this means that within the next few weeks thousands of cases of illness are currently predicted, and in the meantime experts no longer rule out an ongoing epidemic, lasting many months, and perhaps even longer than a year, with tens of thousands of cases of illness – because the disease now has reached the Liberian capital, Monrovia, where many people live together in a confined space. It’s coming back to haunt us that a means of containing the epidemic was only half-heartedly looked for, and therefore was not found, while it was limited to rural and less populated areas.

Statistically, at least every second case of the disease will mean a new death. A new death, mind you, usually days after the onset of the disease, and many of these deaths involve adults before or around middle age. That so far Europe is considered at relatively little risk of a spillover of the epidemic – since the transfer occurs only by direct contact with infected people or their body fluids (thus not during the incubation period when the disease has not yet erupted) – is neither comforting nor reassuring. Firstly, a human life in Africa is worth as much as ours. Secondly, there is a risk that should not be underestimated that Ebola variants may form by a process of mutation, whose transmission in Europe may not be readily brought under control.

The World Health Organization has now finally noticed that this time the Ebola outbreak has reached threatening dimensions:

As WHO Director-General Dr Margaret Chan told agencies and officials last week in New York City and Washington, DC, development partners need to prepare for an “exponential increase” in Ebola cases in countries currently experiencing intense virus transmission.

Many thousands of new cases are expected in Liberia over the coming 3 weeks. 

WHO and its Director-General will continue to advocate for more Ebola treatment beds in Liberia and elsewhere, and will hold the world accountable for responding to this dire emergency with its unprecedented dimensions of human suffering.

The World Health Organization thus pre-emptively blames “the world” if ever the situation should worsen. This is a piece of impudence, because in fact, it should have been the task of the WHO to prevent the spread of the disease at a stage when it was still manageable. According to the organization “Médecins Sans Frontières” who were desperately struggling against it during that phase, the WHO not only did not respond to their warnings for months and tried to downplay the extent of the problem, but also withdrew staff in the time before and even during (!) the Ebola outbreak in Africa. It was not until several months after the outbreak of the epidemic that the WHO decided to declare the international medical emergency.

The progress of the epidemic so far: The so-called “patient zero” was ascertained retrospectively for December 2013 in Guinea, West Africa. From February 2014, the first cases of Ebola fever in that country were made public, whose Ministry of Health then, on 23 March 2014, officially informed the WHO of an outbreak of Ebola fever. At this point in time, 49 cases of the disease were known, of which 29 ended in fatalities.

By June 2014, the epidemic had spread to two other countries, Sierra Leone and Liberia. The death toll was estimated by the WHO at that time to be 350. Since then, the virus has been spreading more and more rapidly, and when the WHO on 08/08/2014 finally forced itself to declare the disease as an international emergency, the spread was already too far advanced to still be able to stop the catastrophe. On the 4th of September there were 2,106 confirmed cases of illness and 1,050 deaths. The situation three days later, on 7 September: 2,639 confirmed cases of illness and 1,386 deaths. Neighbouring countries are fighting desperately against a spillover of the epidemic onto their territory by closing the borders to the countries affected. Individual confirmed cases of the disease are already known to exist in some other African countries, such as Nigeria, Senegal and Benin. Whether it is possible to prevent further spread is still uncertain. What is certain is that in the countries affected the worst is yet to come.

When in the summer of 2009 the World Health Organisation declared swine flu to be a pandemic, and the world was in panic mode for months, it was about a disease for which a mostly mild course was well documented, and for which the number of documented deaths were in the low three-figure range. So it is no wonder that it was rumoured that this controversial decision had been influenced by the pharmaceutical industry, and it is said that they didn’t do too badly out of the production of vaccines, which were subsequently hardly needed. As up until now neither vaccines nor drugs against Ebola have been developed, in this case perhaps was there simply no incentive (to convince the WHO to declare a pandemic)? One hardly dares to imagine what billions of dollars have been squandered by the WHO in the fight against the sham epidemics in the areas of nutrition /alcohol / tobacco, with the result that, now that a real epidemic has arrived, they have to pass round the collection plate. .

As I prophesied only a few weeks ago: The WHO, the same organization that cannot brag enough about their alleged “successes” in the fight against tobacco – achievements that are based on pure number crunching, because they lack any real evidence that their efforts have prevented deaths or can prevent them in the future – has failed miserably when it was faced with a real threat. The sufferers of recent weeks are also victims of the incompetence of health officials who have been PR shadow-boxing against pseudo-problems for so long that they no longer know how to fight real problems. This urgently needs to change.

About the archivist

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

61 Responses to Tobacco Epidemic vs Ebola Epidemic: Spot the Difference.

  1. Mike says:

    Well written points. ISIS couldn’t double it’s death toll every 30 days at a sustainable rate that this disease can. Yet the news is persistent at reporting about Ferguson & ISIS.

    I’ve seen war, and you can defend yourself or find cover during a fire fight. You can’t sustain wearing a biological suit for long periods of time, in fear of making contact with any human or door handles.

    How would we protect ourselves in the U.S. if Ebola was to arrive? Call out the National Guard & Healthcare workers. How many Emergency or Internal Medicine staff would stand on the front lines? Probably 50% or less knowing the mortality rate and concerns for their own families. What could black rifles and Hummvee’s do? Maybe the National Guard CST’s (Civil Support Teams) could run a culture for you and tell us what we already know. We could watch the National Guard CERFP (CBRNE Enhanced Response Force Package) scrub down civilians just like the movies for a few weeks. But how effective will they be with no vaccine or possible cure? They too will want to spend the “final days” with their families.

    The truth is, I fear this scenario more than any other scenario. Conspiracy theory or not, we have no means of battling this disease. Even battlefields have lows and find homeostasis. This disease is the human races cancer. We will watch it metastasize into a tumor that is to big to operate on.

    U.S. Army

  2. Lysistrata Eleftheria says:

    Many thanks indeed to you for publishing this, and to Brigitte and Reinhold.

    It needs saying loudly and clearly that the WHO has failed utterly and contemptibly to do its job, and has abused the word epidemic to the point of gross negligence.

    Two things strike me immediately tonight from the above translation. The first shouldn’t need saying: ‘A human life in Africa is worth as much as ours’. The second is the appalling eyewitness commentary from Medicin Sans Frontieres (a charity for which I have unbounded respect) about the WHO’s wilful blindness to the growing ebola epidemic.

    In the meantime the bloated bloodsucking bureaucrats within WHO and their fat pharmaceutical funders continue to peddle their lies and their wares concerning the epidemic of non-contagious lifestyle diseases, and then somehow blame us for not throwing even more money at them? I wouldn’t trust them to stick a plaster on a paper cut. Snake oil sellers and charlatans, the lot of them.

    To be honest, I am too white hot seethingly angry to write more tonight.

  3. harleyrider1978 says:

    In an unusual policy intervention, U.S. scientists say evidence that the world is warming is as conclusive as the link between smoking and lung cancer.

    A “Climate at Your Doorstep” story.

    • nisakiman says:

      In an unusual policy intervention, U.S. scientists say evidence that the world is warming is as conclusive as the link between smoking and lung cancer.

      Well, they’ve got it absolutely right for a change, given that there is no empirical proof of a link between smoking and lung cancer.

      • carol2000 says:

        “Empirical proof” is exactly what they think they have: “In science, empirical evidence is required for a hypothesis to gain acceptance in the scientific community. Normally, this validation is achieved by the scientific method of hypothesis commitment, experimental design, peer review, adversarial review, reproduction of results, conference presentation and journal publication. This requires rigorous communication of hypothesis (usually expressed in mathematics), experimental constraints and controls (expressed necessarily in terms of standard experimental apparatus), and a common understanding of measurement.”
        But their evidence is not complete because they ignore the role of infection – the “adversarial review” part of the story. They act as if the concept of “excluding alternative explanations” means they’re permitted to ignore them altogether!

  4. Pingback: Anger is Good For Your Health | AnjumsList

  5. nisakiman says:

    What you fail to understand, Frank, is that ebola is only killing thousands, whereas smoking kills millions and millions and millions every year.

    According to the WHO, anyway. And they’re ‘experts’, so they must be right.

    So of course the FCTC is much more important than a few thousand Africans dying from ebola.

    It’s a question of priorities.

    And anyway, you can’t organise all-expenses-paid jollies to exotic locations to talk about how you’re going to further demonise ebola victims, because by the time you’ve talked about it, they’ve died already.

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Moses was a Prophet too, I dont the the WHO has Prophet Credentials yet………..They try real hard at Prophethising though!

  6. Frank Davis says:

    The Man Who Discovered Ebola (in 1976)

    Just before his discovery, Piot’s professors told him that he had no future in infectious diseases. Back then, many people believed that science had solved the problems viruses created in humans with new vaccines and antivirals. Then came Ebola — a disease for which we still have no cure — and later HIV/AIDS in the 1980s….

    Early in the second or third week of July, I gave an interview with CNN and I said this crisis requires a state of emergency and a quasi-military operation….

    The first case was in December and then they only diagnosed that it was Ebola in March. But then it took far too long before the international community did anything. That goes from the WHO, to the US, and UK governments. It took 1,000 deaths before a public health emergency was declared by the WHO, and cynically it took two American doctors to become infected. I think that’s where particularly the local office of the WHO was inadequate, that’s for sure. But it’s not just WHO. It’s the member states of the WHO, the ones who decide about the budget at the WHO….

    • beobrigitte says:

      Then came Ebola — a disease for which we still have no cure — and later HIV/AIDS in the 1980s….

      HIV is being managed; there is no cure for it, either. Next stop: previously ‘harmless’ mico-organisms become a new deadly epidemic. In the meantime, the WHO concentrates on tobacco, e-cigarettes, sugar and now salt….
      By now the public is saturated with health warnings; should there be a justified one who will take it serious?

  7. DP says:

    Dear Mr Davis

    Meanwhile in other news:

    “Meanwhile the World Health Organization (WHO) is calling on countries to take action on salt to cut deaths from heart disease. It wants governments to sign up to reducing global salt intake.”

    WHO says they haven’t got their priorities right?


    • harleyrider1978 says:

      May 6, 2014 10:25 AM

      The Questionable Link Between Saturated Fat and Heart Disease

      Are butter, cheese and steak really bad for you? The dubious
      science behind the anti-fat crusade

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      May 6, 2014 10:25 AM

      The Questionable Link Between Saturated Fat and Heart Disease

      Are butter, cheese and steak really bad for you? The dubious
      science behind the anti-fat crusade…………………

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      May 6, 2014 10:25 AM

      The Questionable Link Between Saturated Fat and Heart Disease

      Are butter, cheese and steak really bad for you? The dubious
      science behind the anti-fat crusade

      • harleyrider1978 says:


        • harleyrider1978 says:

          “Saturated fat does not cause heart disease”—or so concluded a big study published in March in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine. How could this be? The very cornerstone of dietary advice for generations has been that the saturated fats in butter, cheese and red meat should be avoided because they clog our arteries. For many diet-conscious Americans, it is simply second nature to opt for chicken over sirloin, canola oil over butter.

          The new study’s conclusion shouldn’t surprise anyone familiar with modern nutritional science, however. The fact is, there has never been solid evidence for the idea that these fats cause disease. We only believe this to be the case because nutrition policy has been derailed over the past half-century by a mixture of personal ambition, bad science, politics and bias
          Our distrust of saturated fat can be traced back to the 1950s, to a man named Ancel Benjamin Keys, a scientist at the University of Minnesota. Dr. Keys was formidably persuasive and, through sheer force of will, rose to the top of the nutrition world—even gracing the cover of Time magazine—for relentlessly championing the idea that saturated fats raise cholesterol and, as a result, cause heart attacks.

          This idea fell on receptive ears because, at the time, Americans faced a fast-growing epidemic. Heart disease, a rarity only three decades earlier, had quickly become the nation’s No. 1 killer. Even President Dwight D. Eisenhower suffered a heart attack in 1955. Researchers were desperate for answers.

          As the director of the largest nutrition study to date, Dr. Keys was in an excellent position to promote his idea. The “Seven Countries” study that he conducted on nearly 13,000 men in the U.S., Japan and Europe ostensibly demonstrated that heart disease wasn’t the inevitable result of aging but could be linked to poor nutrition.

          Critics have pointed out that Dr. Keys violated several basic scientific norms in his study. For one, he didn’t choose countries randomly but instead selected only those likely to prove his beliefs, including Yugoslavia, Finland and Italy. Excluded were France, land of the famously healthy omelet eater, as well as other countries where people consumed a lot of fat yet didn’t suffer from high rates of heart disease, such as Switzerland, Sweden and West Germany. The study’s star subjects—upon whom much of our current understanding of the Mediterranean diet is based—were peasants from Crete, islanders who tilled their fields well into old age and who appeared to eat very little meat or cheese.

          As it turns out, Dr. Keys visited Crete during an unrepresentative period of extreme hardship after World War II. Furthermore, he made the mistake of measuring the islanders’ diet partly during Lent, when they were forgoing meat and cheese. Dr. Keys therefore undercounted their consumption of saturated fat. Also, due to problems with the surveys, he ended up relying on data from just a few dozen men—far from the representative sample of 655 that he had initially selected. These flaws weren’t revealed until much later, in a 2002 paper by scientists investigating the work on Crete—but by then, the misimpression left by his erroneous data had become international dogma.

          In 1961, Dr. Keys sealed saturated fat’s fate by landing a position on the nutrition committee of the American Heart Association, whose dietary guidelines are considered the gold standard. Although the committee had originally been skeptical of his hypothesis, it issued, in that year, the country’s first-ever guidelines targeting saturated fats. The U.S. Department of Agriculture followed in 1980.

          Other studies ensued. A half-dozen large, important trials pitted a diet high in vegetable oil—usually corn or soybean, but not olive oil—against one with more animal fats. But these trials, mainly from the 1970s, also had serious methodological problems. Some didn’t control for smoking, for instance, or allowed men to wander in and out of the research group over the course of the experiment. The results were unreliable at best.

          But there was no turning back: Too much institutional energy and research money had already been spent trying to prove Dr. Keys’s hypothesis. A bias in its favor had grown so strong that the idea just started to seem like common sense. As Harvard nutrition professor Mark Hegsted said in 1977, after successfully persuading the U.S. Senate to recommend Dr. Keys’s diet for the entire nation, the question wasn’t whether Americans should change their diets, but why not? Important benefits could be expected, he argued. And the risks? “None can be identified,” he said.

          In fact, even back then, other scientists were warning about the diet’s potential unintended consequences. Today, we are dealing with the reality that these have come to pass.

          One consequence is that in cutting back on fats, we are now eating a lot more carbohydrates—at least 25% more since the early 1970s. Consumption of saturated fat, meanwhile, has dropped by 11%, according to the best available government data. Translation: Instead of meat, eggs and cheese, we’re eating more pasta, grains, fruit and starchy vegetables such as potatoes. Even seemingly healthy low-fat foods, such as yogurt, are stealth carb-delivery systems, since removing the fat often requires the addition of fillers to make up for lost texture—and these are usually carbohydrate-based.

          The problem is that carbohydrates break down into glucose, which causes the body to release insulin—a hormone that is fantastically efficient at storing fat. Meanwhile, fructose, the main sugar in fruit, causes the liver to generate triglycerides and other lipids in the blood that are altogether bad news. Excessive carbohydrates lead not only to obesity but also, over time, to Type 2 diabetes and, very likely, heart disease.

          The real surprise is that, according to the best science to date, people put themselves at higher risk for these conditions no matter what kind of carbohydrates they eat. Yes, even unrefined carbs. Too much whole-grain oatmeal for breakfast and whole-grain pasta for dinner, with fruit snacks in between, add up to a less healthy diet than one of eggs and bacon, followed by fish. The reality is that fat doesn’t make you fat or diabetic. Scientific investigations going back to the 1950s suggest that actually, carbs do.

          The second big unintended consequence of our shift away from animal fats is that we’re now consuming more vegetable oils. Butter and lard had long been staples of the American pantry until Crisco, introduced in 1911, became the first vegetable-based fat to win wide acceptance in U.S. kitchens. Then came margarines made from vegetable oil and then just plain vegetable oil in bottles.

          All of these got a boost from the American Heart Association—which Procter & Gamble, the maker of Crisco oil, coincidentally helped launch as a national organization. In 1948, P&G made the AHA the beneficiary of the popular “Walking Man” radio contest, which the company sponsored. The show raised $1.7 million for the group and transformed it (according to the AHA’s official history) from a small, underfunded professional society into the powerhouse that it remains today.

          After the AHA advised the public to eat less saturated fat and switch to vegetable oils for a “healthy heart” in 1961, Americans changed their diets. Now these oils represent 7% to 8% of all calories in our diet, up from nearly zero in 1900, the biggest increase in consumption of any type of food over the past century.

          This shift seemed like a good idea at the time, but it brought many potential health problems in its wake. In those early clinical trials, people on diets high in vegetable oil were found to suffer higher rates not only of cancer but also of gallstones. And, strikingly, they were more likely to die from violent accidents and suicides. Alarmed by these findings, the National Institutes of Health convened researchers several times in the early 1980s to try to explain these “side effects,” but they couldn’t. (Experts now speculate that certain psychological problems might be related to changes in brain chemistry caused by diet, such as fatty-acid imbalances or the depletion of cholesterol.)

          We’ve also known since the 1940s that when heated, vegetable oils create oxidation products that, in experiments on animals, lead to cirrhosis of the liver and early death. For these reasons, some midcentury chemists warned against the consumption of these oils, but their concerns were allayed by a chemical fix: Oils could be rendered more stable through a process called hydrogenation, which used a catalyst to turn them from oils into solids.

          From the 1950s on, these hardened oils became the backbone of the entire food industry, used in cakes, cookies, chips, breads, frostings, fillings, and frozen and fried food. Unfortunately, hydrogenation also produced trans fats, which since the 1970s have been suspected of interfering with basic cellular functioning and were recently condemned by the Food and Drug Administration for their ability to raise our levels of “bad” LDL cholesterol.

          Yet paradoxically, the drive to get rid of trans fats has led some restaurants and food manufacturers to return to using regular liquid oils—with the same long-standing oxidation problems. These dangers are especially acute in restaurant fryers, where the oils are heated to high temperatures over long periods.

          The past decade of research on these oxidation products has produced a sizable body of evidence showing their dramatic inflammatory and oxidative effects, which implicates them in heart disease and other illnesses such as Alzheimer’s. Other newly discovered potential toxins in vegetable oils, called monochloropropane diols and glycidol esters, are now causing concern among health authorities in Europe.

          In short, the track record of vegetable oils is highly worrisome—and not remotely what Americans bargained for when they gave up butter and lard.

          Cutting back on saturated fat has had especially harmful consequences for women, who, due to hormonal differences, contract heart disease later in life and in a way that is distinct from men. If anything, high total cholesterol levels in women over 50 were found early on to be associated with longer life. This counterintuitive result was first discovered by the famous Framingham study on heart-disease risk factors in 1971 and has since been confirmed by other research.

          Since women under 50 rarely get heart disease, the implication is that women of all ages have been worrying about their cholesterol levels needlessly. Yet the Framingham study’s findings on women were omitted from the study’s conclusions. And less than a decade later, government health officials pushed their advice about fat and cholesterol on all Americans over age 2—based exclusively on data from middle-aged men.

          Sticking to these guidelines has meant ignoring growing evidence that women on diets low in saturated fat actually increase their risk of having a heart attack. The “good” HDL cholesterol drops precipitously for women on this diet (it drops for men too, but less so). The sad irony is that women have been especially rigorous about ramping up on their fruits, vegetables and grains, but they now suffer from higher obesity rates than men, and their death rates from heart disease have reached parity.

          Seeing the U.S. population grow sicker and fatter while adhering to official dietary guidelines has put nutrition authorities in an awkward position. Recently, the response of many researchers has been to blame “Big Food” for bombarding Americans with sugar-laden products. No doubt these are bad for us, but it is also fair to say that the food industry has simply been responding to the dietary guidelines issued by the AHA and USDA, which have encouraged high-carbohydrate diets and until quite recently said next to nothing about the need to limit sugar.

          Indeed, up until 1999, the AHA was still advising Americans to reach for “soft drinks,” and in 2001, the group was still recommending snacks of “gum-drops” and “hard candies made primarily with sugar” to avoid fatty foods.

          Our half-century effort to cut back on the consumption of meat, eggs and whole-fat dairy has a tragic quality. More than a billion dollars have been spent trying to prove Ancel Keys’s hypothesis, but evidence of its benefits has never been produced. It is time to put the saturated-fat hypothesis to bed and to move on to test other possible culprits for our nation’s health woes.

          Ms. Teicholz has been researching dietary fat and disease for nearly a decade. Her book, “The Big Fat Surprise: Why Butter, Meat and Cheese Belong in a Healthy Diet,” will be published by Simon & Schuster on May 13.

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          What started it all……………simple kinda

          Mummies’ clogged arteries take smoking, fatty foods, lethargy out of the mix

          By Tom Valeo, Times Correspondent

          Tuesday, April 23, 2013 4:30am

          You do everything right: You exercise every day, include lots of fruits and vegetables in your diet, never smoke, minimize the stress in your life and take medication to keep your cholesterol and blood pressure under control. You’re preventing modern life from ruining your heart, right? • Well, maybe modern life isn’t as much of a problem as merely living. CT scans of 137 ancient mummies from three continents show that our ancestors had plaque in their arteries, too, even though they never smoked, never tasted ice cream or pork rinds, and had no choice but to exercise vigorously every day of their lives.

          According to the study, which appeared recently in the Lancet, at least one-third of the mummies, who lived as long as 5,000 years ago, had arteries that had narrowed as a result of atherosclerosis — the buildup of fatty deposits in the arterial wall. Apparently the cardiovascular system has a tendency to clog up over time.

          “Our research shows that we are all at risk for atherosclerosis, the disease that causes heart attacks and strokes,” said Gregory Thomas, medical director of the MemorialCare Heart & Vascular Institute, Long Beach Memorial Medical Center, and one of the authors of the study. “The data we gathered about individuals from the prehistoric cultures of ancient Peru and the Native Americans living along the Colorado River and the Unangan of the Aleutian Islands is forcing us to look for other factors that may cause heart disease.”


        • harleyrider1978 says:

          New studies discover smoking may be healthy

          Smoking has health benefits

          After years of ad campaigns and laws designed to decrease smoking, new studies have found that smoking actually has health benefits. Smoking not only improves athletic performance, but also can relieve symptoms of anxiety associated with college coursework.

          Smoking anything from hookah to cigarettes has been shown to increase lung capacity and allows for faster muscle gain. Furthermore, nicotine aids in stress relief and treats anxiety.

          One study took place last year by a group of researchers at Halard University. Dr. Lemon Racheter, the leader of the team, said that, “We just felt as if there was not enough research to really prove that smoking was detrimental. It turned out we were right.”

          The researchers first looked into smoking’s effect on cardiovascular performance. Participants were told to smoke a pack of cigarettes every two days while they were training for a half marathon.

          During the actual race, runners took smoking breaks instead of stopping at the water stops. Their performance was compared to results from their previous races.

          The researchers discovered surprising results – almost all of the participants ran their personal record after the strict smoking regimen. Many reported that it was easier to breathe, especially at the end of the race.

          The team then decided to delve further. Participants were first put on a strict weight lifting routine, where they recorded how fast they were able to gain muscle and increase the amount of weight.

          These participants were then put on a smoking regimen similar to that of the runners. They were told to smoke a pack of cigarettes a day for four weeks. Again, they experienced surprising results. The participants were able to gain muscle faster than they ever had before.

          During the same time as this study, research in Sweden explored the benefits of smoking hookah on a weekly basis. Dr. Reggie Hathaway said, “We as a team, felt that hookah could be essential to living a healthy and long life.”

          First, a group of students was asked to smoke hookah three times a week and during any times of high stress. Students reported that it helped lower stress levels and anxiety related to classes or jobs.

          After several months, students found that their grades rose and they were able to manage their time and plan ahead. Professors reported that many of these students were more attentive and involved in their classes.

          The researchers recommend that university students around the world begin incorporating hookah into their regular care routine. The same team has begun to explore hookah’s effects on physical activity and athleticism and they predict that they will find similar results.

          Dr. Hathaway says, “Scientifically, smoking hookah should increase lung capacity and make breathing easier. We hope that as the benefits of hookah become more well known, more people will consider incorporating it into their lifestyles.”

          This renewed interest in smoking research will change everything previously thought to be true about its impact on health. Soon, medical professionals may begin to encourage the use of cigarettes, hookah and other such products

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          Eating fat is good for you: Doctors change their minds after 40 years

          “Other experts have added their voices to his controversial call to end 40 years of advice to cut saturated fat – which has been described as “the greatest medical error of our time”.
          They claim the guidance has left millions of people at risk of developing cardiovascular ­disease and “led to the over-medication of millions of people with statins”.

          The public could just as effectively protect themselves by eating “real” food such as butter, milk and cheese and adopting the Mediterranean diet.”

          “According to DiNicolantonio, this advice is based on misleading data from the 1950s, when pioneering researcher Ancel Keys theorized that saturated fats caused heart disease.
          Keys had access to data on fat consumption and heart disease rates from 22 countries, but excluded data from 16 countries that did not fit his hypothesis, DiNicolantonio said.

          A subsequent analysis of all 22 countries’ data disproved Keys’s theory. Nevertheless, the notion that saturated fats cause heart disease has persisted, DiNicolantonio said.

          He cautioned that guidelines urging people to replace saturated fats with polyunsaturated fats do more harm than good.

          “We need a public health campaign as strong as the one we had in the seventies and eighties demonizing saturated fats, to say that we got it wrong,” he said in a related podcast.”

          That reminds me.

          “The modern salt saga started in 1904 with a paper by Ambard and Brochard who showed an association between salt intake and blood pressure in six patients. On the basis of these observations they created a salt–blood pressure hypothesis.

          Subsequently in 1907 the results were opposed by Lôwenstein,and from then on the salt–blood pressure hypothesis has been the basis for a dispute between supporters of the hypothesis and sceptics.

          What we can learn from this is that the salt–blood pressure hypothesis and the controversy dates back to the first decade of the previous century, initially based on a few case histories”
          “In the following years Allan’s positive results were both confirmed and disproved by several authors, but during the late 1930s the use of salt restriction faded.”

          “In the introduction of his 1960 paper Dahl defines his position, namely that salt is deleterious. Salt is compared with fall-out, carcinogens and atherogenic factors, and later in the paper with tobacco, alcohol, and fat”
          http: //…

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          According to DiNicolantonio, this advice is based on misleading data from the 1950s, when pioneering researcher Richard Doll theorized that smoking caused Lung disease.

          Just a few simple changes and we get the grandiose scheme altogether ehh!

          According to DiNicolantonio, this advice is based on misleading data from the 1950s, when pioneering researcher Ancel Keys theorized that saturated fats caused heart disease.

  8. carol2000 says:

    The anti-smokers running the tobacco companies are making a big show of plastering hysterical warnings on their e-cigs. See the outsider anti-smokers scratching their heads.

    • Rose says:

      It certainly made me smile this morning, Carol.

      Big tobacco’s sudden rush to e-cigarette health warnings

      They seem to have covered the symptoms of Green Tobacco Sickness.

      Raw nicotine, same as in all the sprays and patches.

      Green Tobacco Sickness in Tobacco Harvesters — Kentucky, 1992

      “most frequently reported symptoms included weakness (100%), nausea (98%), vomiting (91%), dizziness (91%), abdominal cramps (70%), headache (60%), and difficulty breathing (60%).”

      “The fact these companies are voluntarily warning about e-cigarettes is “totally Orwellian,” said Robert N. Proctor, a Stanford history professor who studies the tobacco industry.”

      I’ll say and very amusing it is too.

      As far as I can see, the only thing to do with nicotine is to oxidize it and none of these products do.

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        There isn’t a single soul in Kentucky who doesn’t know about green baccy sickness………….wear gloves unless your finally immune to it.

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          The first thing is a fast heart rate………most that’s about it.

        • Rose says:

          Well, you would think so, Harley, but the difference between fresh, cured and burned nicotine seems to be completely lost on TC.

          And nicotine patches were invented by someone researching Green Tobacco Sickness.

          “We put the tobacco on our skin and waited to see what would happen,” Jarvik recalled. “Our heart rates increased, adrenaline began pumping, all the things that happen to smokers.”

          Oh no it doesn’t.

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          Im talking green tobacco fresh cut in the field……….stalk sap soaking into the skin especially pourous skin open due to sweating in the heat and humidity its very fast acting.

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          But hell my families been doing it well since anyone can ever remember way beforethe founding even…………all the way back to Jamestown most likely where we originated and south Carolina under kings land grants for the soul purpose of raising tobacco for the English markets.

        • Rose says:

          Im talking green tobacco fresh cut in the field…

          I know you are, but I’m sure you’ll agree “Our heart rates increased, adrenaline began pumping,” is NOT the effect experienced while enjoying a restful cigarette.

          Jarvik was wrong.

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          Quite Miss Rose quite right he flat out lied

        • Rose says:

          Being a neversmoker, he wrongly believed that the effects of Green Tobacco Sickness he was feeling after he’d plastered his arms with tobacco leaves must be the same as smoking.

          ““We put the tobacco on our skin and waited to see what would happen,” Jarvik recalled. “Our heart rates increased, adrenaline began pumping, all the things that happen to smokers.”

          And they’ve been trying to poison us ever since.

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          I sure would liked to have given him a raw green twist of Plug baccy from my granpas barn…………..Watched that twerp toss his guts up for a week.

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Something I ran up on awhile back:

      matt black says:
      April 3, 2014 at 3:27 pm
      You mean.. the nicotine that has only been found in absolute trace levels in exhaled vapor? Such low trace levels, in fact, that it pales in comparison to your exposure to nicotine from eggplants, soybeans, and various other vegetables? That nicotine?

      Yeah, I didn’t mention it because it would be idiotic to do so since it’s virtually not present in the exhaled vapor. But, if you insist that I mention it, here you go:

      Side note – it might be wise not to call people idiots when you don’t know what you’re talking about. It kind of makes you look like, well, an idiot.

  9. carol2000 says:
    See how the privileged elites get away with using taxpayer-funded institutions as weapons in their war of cultural genocide against the working class. Banning tobacco is just another way for them to create a hostile environment against us, of telling us that these places are only for the benefit of a certain class of people with certain beliefs. And this is the predictable consequence of the culture of absolute impunity they’ve created for themselves, thanks to controlling the media. It explains how they’ve not only gotten away with decades of scientific fraud, but imposed it as truth, while their sycophants praise them and abuse their victims.

  10. harleyrider1978 says:

    New Global Crisis Imminent Due To “Poisonous Combination Of Record Debt And Slowing Growth”, CEPR Report Warns

    Tyler Durden’s picture
    Submitted by Tyler Durden on 09/29/2014 07:52 -0400
    Deleveraging? What Deleveraging?”

    No, that’s not the title of a Zero Hedge article from 2011, 2012, 2013 and so on (because we have written on the concept of global “deleveraging” simply because there has been none). It is, however, the title of the 16th Geneva Report on the world economy, released this morning by the Center for Economic Policy Research, which merely confirms, once again, everything we have said, namely that while the Fed’s liquidity injections have boosted the stock market, everyone else has been levering up as much as possible, with corporations once again in debt to record levels using easy debt proceeds to buyback their own stock (and push their equity-linked exec comp into the stratosphere), while consumers have loaded up on term debt, mostly in the form of student loans, to pay for their increasingly unaffordable lifestyle (and certainly not for tuition or textbooks), while defaulting, not deleveraging, on mortgages.

    That’s what we call it. The Geneva Report has far harsher words. Here is an excerpt via the FT:

    A “poisonous combination” of record debt and slowing growth suggest the global economy could be heading for another crisis, a hard-hitting report will warn on Monday.

    The 16th annual Geneva Report, commissioned by the International Centre for Monetary and Banking Studies and written by a panel of senior economists including three former senior central bankers, predicts interest rates across the world will have to stay low for a “very, very long” time to enable households, companies and governments to service their debts and avoid another crash.

    The warning, before the International Monetary Fund’s annual meeting in Washington next week, comes amid growing concern that a weakening global recovery is coinciding with the possibility that the US Federal Reserve will begin to raise interest rates within a year.

    So here is lie #1, debunked: “One of the Geneva Report’s main contributions is to document the continued rise of debt at a time when most talk is about how the global economy is deleveraging, reducing the burden of debts.”

    It got so bad in recent years, we thought everyone is so stupid they no longer grasp the concept of debt fungibility in an intimately interconnected, globalized world. Thankfully, the Geneva guys get it: “Although the burden of financial sector debt has fallen, particularly in the US, and household debts have stopped rising as a share of income in advanced economies, the report documents the continued rapid rise of public sector debt in rich countries and private debt in emerging markets, especially China.

    And this is where the report tells us what it really thinks:

    It warns of a “poisonous combination of high and rising global debt and slowing nominal GDP [gross domestic product], driven by both slowing real growth and falling inflation”.

    The total burden of world debt, private and public, has risen from 160 per cent of national income in 2001 to almost 200 per cent after the crisis struck in 2009 and 215 per cent in 2013.

    “Contrary to widely held beliefs, the world has not yet begun to delever and the global debt to GDP ratio is still growing, breaking new highs,” the report said.

    What widely held beliefs? We have been saying this since 2010! In fact, we have also been saying what one of the report’s main authors says next, namely that the “solution” to every growth crash in the past has been… drumroll… more debt!

    Luigi Buttiglione, one of the report’s authors and head of global strategy at hedge fund Brevan Howard, said: “Over my career I have seen many so-called miracle economies – Italy in the 1960s, Japan, the Asian tigers, Ireland, Spain and now perhaps China – and they all ended after a build-up of debt.”

    Mr Buttiglione explained how, initially, solid reasoning for faster growth encourages borrowing, which helps maintain growth even after the underlying story sours.

    The report’s authors expect interest rates to stay lower than market expectations because the rise in debt means that borrowers would be unable to withstand faster rate rises. To prevent an even more rapid build-up in debt if borrowing costs are low, the authors further expect authorities around the world to use more direct measures to curb borrowing.

    Oh come on: even the IMF figured it out. Recall: “Global debt markets have grown to an estimated $100 trillion (in amounts outstanding) in mid-2013 (Graph C, left-hand panel), up from $70 trillion in mid-2007.” Is everyone else really that dumb they can’t do simple math?

    Anyway, about debt rates: lower for longer. Got it. Can we now stop all that BS about the Fed hiking rates already?

    Oh, and yes, there is a bubble:

    Although the authors note that the value of assets has tended to rise alongside the growth of debt, so balance sheets do not look particularly stretched, they worry that asset prices might be subject to a vicious circle in “the next leg of the global leverage crisis” where a reversal of asset prices forces a credit squeeze, putting downward pressure on asset prices.

    At this point we hope ZH regulars are yawning, because none of the above, which apparently goes according to conventional wisdom, is new, especially for those who recall: Deutsche Bank: “We’ve Created A Global Debt Monster”, to wit:

    We’ve created a global debt monster that’s now so big and so crucial to the workings of the financial system and economy that defaults have been increasingly minimised by uber aggressive policy responses. It’s arguably too late to change course now without huge consequences. This cycle perhaps started with very easy policy after the 97/98 EM crises thus kick starting the exponential rise in leverage across the globe. Since then we saw big corporates saved in the early 00s, financials towards the end of the decade and most recently Sovereigns bailed out. It’s been many, many years since free markets decided the fate of debt markets and bail-outs have generally had to get bigger and bigger.

    This sounds negative but the reality is that for us it means that central banks have little option but to keep high levels of support for markets for as far as the eye can see and defaults will stay artificially low. As such we remain bullish for 2014. However it’s largely because we think the authorities are trapped for now rather than because the global financial system is healing rapidly. So as well as EM being very important for 2014, we continue to think the Fed taper pace is also very important. If the US economy was the only one in the world then maybe they could slowly taper without major consequences. However the world is fixated with US monetary policy and huge flows have traded off the back of QE and ZIRP so it does matter. We have suspicions that the Fed may have to be appreciative of the global beast they’ve helped create as the year progresses.

    In other words: all of this is super bullish because the system will continue to collapse and need more bailouts. The Bizarro world Bernanke created truly is a fascinating place.

  11. harleyrider1978 says:

    It warns of a “poisonous combination of high and rising global debt and slowing nominal GDP [gross domestic product], driven by both slowing real growth and falling inflation”.

    SO here ya goes with the GDP Bullshit all countries did 2 years ago to keep the bull shit wagon rolling…………….

    Look Out for a Big Change in GDP Calculations |…/look-out-for-a-big-change-in-gdp-calculations.html

    Jul 31, 2013 · New standards require adding R&D and intellectual property spending to GDP calculations. Here’s how the change will affect strategic planning.

  12. harleyrider1978 says:

    WebMD, Obama Shill site.

    Unfiltered Patriot » Hidden Propaganda – WebMD Got $14 Million to Promote Obamacare

    In an apparent attempt to have at least a few legitimate websites pointing out the “benefits” of…

    Hidden Propaganda – WebMD Got $14 Million to Promote Obamacare – See more at:

  13. harleyrider1978 says:

    May 6, 2014 10:25 AM……………….for the third time if it shows up for DP above

    The Questionable Link Between Saturated Fat and Heart Disease

    Are butter, cheese and steak really bad for you? The dubious
    science behind the anti-fat crusade

  14. smokingscot says:


    At long last the Front National has hit the jackpot. First ever seat in the Senate!

    Wonder if the decision to really screw down on smokers had anything to do with it?

    YES IT DID! (But Mum’s the word).

    And in a few days time we may have our first elected UKIP MP in Westminster.

    Wonder if their position on the smoking ban had anything to do with it?

  15. harleyrider1978 says:

    Ontario politician says it is time for a cigarette smokers registry


    Albert Einstein,Albert Ball Canadian who shot down the RED BARON, Winstin Churchill,Franklin Roosevelt, John F Kennedy,Joseph Stalin.

    List of non-smokers


  16. harleyrider1978 says:

    I asked a Chinese girl for her number.
    She replied, “Sex! Sex! Sex! Free sex tonight!”
    I said, “Wow!”

    Then her friend said, “She means 6663629.”

  17. harleyrider1978 says:

    Florida Woman Arrested for Possession of… SpaghettiOs?

    A Florida woman has been released after she was arrested for possession – of SpaghettiOs.

    According to the Gainesville Times, police arrested Ashley Huff, 23, when they found a “suspicious residue” they believed to be meth on a spoon inside the car she was riding in.

    Huff was subsequently charged with possession of methamphetamine.

    Huff repeatedly told police that there was “no way in hell” that the substance was drug residue, according to Hall County assistant public defender Chris van Rossem.

    >>> The Extent of America’s Overcriminalization Problem

    Huff was unable to afford her bail and spent more than a month in jail while her attorney attempted to arrange a plea bargain.

    She was released only after the crime lab finally came back with the results of its substance analysis.

    It was spaghetti sauce.

    “I think she said it had been SpaghettiOs,” said van Rossem.

    Jordan Richardson, a visiting legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation, said police are within their rights to make an arrest when there is probable cause and that this case is no exception.

    Richardson did raise concerns about the plea deal Huff was considering before the results came back from the crime lab.

    “The scary thing is that when she was confronted with jail and a fine, even though she turned out to be innocent, it was easier to take the punishment,” said Richardson.

    According to KRON 4, Huff is considering legal action.

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Somebodys gonna get a big payday and some cop is gonna lose his job,this is why cops should be trained in simple chemical testing on a roadside before residuals can be used as a reason for arrest. Of course I saw our security chief use up a roach left in this black guys car in testing it. In other words he had no evidence left and after they tried to rail road the guy and then write out on a chalk board what to write in out Incident complan=int reports……………I went str8 to legal on base and told em what wet down and was made a witness for the defense but it went to federal court under wrongful arrest and illegal procedures. The Black guy got 1.5 million on my testimony and I got screwed by security forces until the day I got medically discharged for doing the right thing to start with and helping to bust up a good ole boys network of planting evidence and falsifying testimony.

      Theres right and wrong and that greyline area……………I never was a player………….I just was for being right or at least helping things be right.

      Some claims can be $250,000, some could result in millions of $’s being paid. But It’s almost impossible to predict what a wrongful arrest compensation claim will payout, it does depend on the incident at hand.

  18. beobrigitte says:

    Just heard on BBC news: Sugar is the cause of the chiiiiiildren’s tooth decay. Then, The WHO announced the Ebola outbreak in West Africa as the most deadly…..

    Bill Gates has pledged money in order to help fight the disease.

    This does remind me of Prof. Griehaber’s words: (See above)
    One hardly dares to imagine what billions of dollars have been squandered by the WHO in the fight against the sham epidemics in the areas of nutrition /alcohol / tobacco, with the result that, now that a real epidemic has arrived, they have to pass round the collection plate.

  19. Frank Davis says:

    Report: CDC has confirmed an Ebola case in Texas

    UPDATE: The Dallas-Fort Worth CBS affiliate is reporting that a patient who was being evaluated for Ebola has tested positive for the virus. According to Reuters, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention confirmed the case — the first time Ebola has been diagnosed in the United States.

    The CDC will host a press conference at its Atlanta headquarters at 5:30 p.m. Tuesday, Reuters reported. A CDC spokesperson declined to comment to The Washington Post.


    The first case of Ebola has been diagnosed in a patient in the United States.

    Experts said they were trying to contact people who had contact with the unnamed patient in Texas over a period of several days when he could have been infectious.

    The man, who was not a healthcare worker, arrived in Texas on a plane from Liberia on Sept 20 to visit members of his family.

    According to one report he may have contracted the disease from an infected fruit bat.

    He showed no symptoms when he arrived and only started to become sick four days later. Two days after that, he sought medical care.

    On Sept 28 he was placed in isolation at the Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital in Dallas, tests were carried out and Ebola was diagnosed.

    I’m amazed that they’re letting people fly in from Liberia, step off the plane, and effectively vanish.

  20. Pingback: Tobacco Control Must Be Destroyed | Frank Davis

  21. Frank Davis says:


    Aid workers ask where was WHO in Ebola outbreak?

    DAKAR/GENEVA – In the first days of the Ebola outbreak in West Africa, as aid workers and health authorities battled to contain the deadly virus, Mariano Lugli asked himself a simple question: where was the World Health Organization?

    Lugli, an Italian nurse, was among the first responders from medical charity Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) to reach the remote forests of Guinea in March where the hemorrhagic fever – one of the most lethal diseases known to man – was detected.

    When the epidemic spread to the capital Conakry, Lugli set up a second Ebola clinic there. He encountered a foreign medic and a logistician sent by the U.N. health agency but saw no sign of a WHO official in charge of handling the escalating outbreak.

    “In all the meetings I attended, even in Conakry, I never saw a representative of the WHO,” said Lugli, deputy director of operations for MSF Switzerland. “The coordination role that WHO should be playing, we just didn’t see it. I didn’t see it the first three weeks and we didn’t see it afterwards.”

  22. Pingback: Tobacco Control Flies Out | Frank Davis

  23. I will bookmark this blog for future reference. Many thanks!

  24. Pingback: Paranoid Meltdown | Frank Davis

  25. Pingback: The Ever-Widening Smoke-Free Zones | Frank Davis

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.