Institutionalised Lying

Chris Snowdon:

Not a day goes by without some outrageous lie being told about e-cigarettes in the USA.

What’s been remarkable about the e-cig saga, as it has unfolded over the past few years, is that it has been possible to witness in real time blatant lies being hurriedly assembled to counter this unforeseen technological innovation.

It’s all been happening in public. Tobacco Control was left in disarray by the arrival of the new e-cigarettes. Their discomfiture was painfully obvious. Some of them approved the new smokeless device, and some disapproved. But the emerging consensus seems now to be that e-cigarettes are the exact same thing as cigarettes, and just as dangerous.

There isn’t a shred of evidence for this. But truth doesn’t matter. The only thing that matters is the continuation the antismoking denormalisation programme, which cannot be allowed to be derailed. So ‘research’ was instantly commissioned to find the danger of vaping, and ‘research’ results were instantly produced with the approved conclusions.

That’s how ‘research’ is done these days. The conclusions – that e-cigarettes are as dangerous as cigarettes – were foregone. The task of the ‘researcher’ was simply to find plausible (or even implausible) reasons for supposing that e-cigarettes were dangerous. We’ve seen this sort of thing  before, when “intelligence and facts are fitted around the policy,”

What’s breath-taking about the lies being told about e-cigarettes is that they are so patently obviously lies.

But I’d like to suggest that lying is actually the normal modus operandi of Tobacco Control, and indeed of all social engineering programmes. After all, if you are engaged in a social engineering programme intended to change people’s behaviour in respect of smoking, drinking, eating, or anything else, does it really matter whether or not lies are employed to achieve these aims? What if it’s lies that work best in changing behaviour? And if you primarily want to change people’s behaviour, you want to override their personal autonomy in any way you can. Personal autonomy is something you want to destroy in people. You don’t want any truths or facts or debates to hinder the process of gaining control over them, and making them do as you desire.

The e-cig  saga now sees Tobacco Control blatantly lying. But it’s not the first time that they’ve told lies. The earlier secondhand smoke scare was another lie. But, unlike the current rush job on e-cigarettes, it was one that was carefully concocted over a decade or more, in order to establish a body of ‘research’ that showed the danger of passive smoking.

And 20 years before that there there was the firsthand smoke scare, backed by the research of Doll and Hill, Wynder and Graham, and others, all published in reputable journals, with statistical analyses attached.

And 20 years before that, there was all the antismoking research (now largely forgotten) carried out in Nazi Germany by the likes of Fritz Lickint and Franz Müller and others, some of it personally financed  by Hitler.

And the entire process has always been fixed around the policy, which is an eugenic programme to eradicate smoking. The facts and research have always been fixed around this policy. It was always the primary task of the ‘researchers’ to find dirt on tobacco and smoking. And of course they always did find it. It was what they were paid to do, after all.

The Tobacco Control programme has always been about constructing elaborate (but plausible) lies about tobacco. The eugenic programme has always required lying. And so it has always used lies. If anything has changed, it’s that the early lies were the most elaborate, carefully constructed, and plausible lies. The quality of the lies has gradually deteriorated since. If the case made against firsthand smoking was mathematically statistically significant, the case against secondhand smoking never was, and there are no statistical studies whatsoever in the case of e-cigarettes.

This shouldn’t be at all surprising. Once any great lie is told, it will always need subsidiary lies to be appended, often at very short notice. And in the case of e-cigarettes, we can see the latest lies being cooked up before our eyes.

But the success to date of the tobacco Big Lie has encouraged the use of the same method in other social engineering projects. For example, the global warming/climate changc lie is another piece of scaremongering aimed at changing people’s behaviour. Much like with tobacco, it started life with impressive ‘research’ in the form of computer simulation models showing the dangers of  increasing levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. That the Earth has failed to warm as these computer models predicted has resulted in subsidiary lies being appended to the first big lie, such as that the missing heat is to be found deep in the oceans. The failure of the predicted global warming to manifest itself has even resulted in the ‘global warming’ scare being renamed as the ‘climate change’ scare (itself another rather remarkable kind of lie, a bit like first name a ship the Unsinkable, and then renaming it the All-Too-Sinkable after it fails to live up to its name).

It might even be suggested that the Lie has now become the principal instrument for advancing any sort of policy whatsoever, including political programmes like the EU project.  Such projects cannot be allowed to fail, and so any lie whatsoever can be used (nay, must be used) to prop them up. And if most politicians are now widely perceived as serial liars, it’ very probably because it’s exactly what they are. Lying has become second nature.

Lying can often be successful in the short term. But in the long run, lies are unsustainable. The process of lying always requires subsidiary lies to be appended, in exponentially multiplying numbers, at shorter and shorter notice. Inevitably, some of the new lies contradict each other, and the entire edifice of lies becomes increasingly unstable and implausible, and the entire bubble bursts.

About the archivist

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

27 Responses to Institutionalised Lying

  1. AndriaD says:

    One of my foremost heroes is Galileo; he was nearly burnt at the stake for daring to suggest that the Earth was not the center of “creation” — so he hastily recanted, because he knew that the truth will always remain the truth, no matter what anyone says about it, and that the facts he helped bring to light would day be known for the truth that it is, and catholic church be damned.

    Someday very soon — thanks to the internet — the real truth about e-cigarettes will be so inescapable that those who suggest that e-cigs are dangerous (and there are plenty of idiots who will continue their religious crusade against them) — will be laughed at as hysterically as anyone who suggested the Earth is flat would be laughed at.

    I’m looking forward quite eagerly to seeing all those Tobacco Control fascist control-freak boobs get their comeuppance.

  2. mikef317 says:

    F. Davis quote: “…the case made against firsthand smoking was…statistically significant…”

    It was for cigarette smokers who die of lung cancer 10 times more frequently than non-smokers.

    It was NOT, however, for cigar and pipe smokers. See page 112 of the 1964 Surgeon General’s report. Cigar / pipe smokers live about as long as non-smokers. They are no more likely to die of lung cancer than non-smokers.

    Another interesting fact is that people who stop smoking cigars and pipes die EARLIER than people who keep smoking – the opposite of cigarette data.

    This was known in the 1950’s. Cigarettes are associated with just about every disease you’ve ever heard of. Illnesses linked to cigar / pipe smoking are few and far between.

    Zealots always bash tobacco and smoking, implying that their statistics (which do apply to cigarettes) also apply to cigars and pipes (which the statistics do not). This was one of the earliest (and biggest) lies (or willful disregard of the data on cigars and pipes).

    P. S.: While the 10 times figure is not exactly a lie, it is highly misleading.

    Look at the 1964 SG report, page 109 for summary statistics on seven studies that the SG uses as primary “proof” that smoking causes lung cancer. Again, the data ONLY pertains to cigarettes.

    On a yes / no basis, all studies say that smokers die more frequently from lung cancer. One study says 5 times more. Four others say 10 times. One study says 15 times, and one 20 times. If the 5x study had not been done, smoking would be more deadly; it would be less lethal if the 20x study had not been done.

    Seven studies give four different answers, Other studies estimate the non-smoker / smoker LC ratio; some are under 5x and others over 20x.

    5x, 10x, 15x, 20x – less than 5, or more than 20. What is the truth?

    The SG took the easy route and averaged seven studies to conclude 10 times more frequently. This is a commonly cited value. But it can’t be true. What causes this wild swing in the numbers? (Confounding variables, sampling errors, something else?) Don’t look to the SG for an answer. Zealots have their factoid (smokers die 10 times more frequently…) and all zealots have ever wanted is factoids to condemn smoking.

    • Edgar says:

      ” … cigarette smokers who die of lung cancer 10 times more frequently than non-smokers.” This is a meaningless statistic without ages at death. If those non-smokers die of lung cancer at an earlier age than the smokers, then smoking would seem to be providing some protection, in the form of delayed onset, to people who smoke and are destined to die from lung cancer. A lot of what I see in the form of ‘statistics’ related to smoking seem to be the result of someone saying ‘Let’s keep that bit and throw the rest, then it will seem like smoking is very bad for you.’ (Which approach is not entirely unrelated to Frank’s topic.)

      • beobrigitte says:

        This is a meaningless statistic without ages at death.

        According to tobacco control there is a 20 – 30 – 40 and in some cases to 50 year “lag-phase” before you die of tobacco use RELATED diseases.
        Of course you do not age during this time and encounter no other cancer CAUSING agents?

  3. Rose says:

    Previously –

    Remember this?

    Nicotine Reduces Parasite Infection In Bees Up To 81 Percent

    “Chemicals in floral nectar, including the alkaloids anabasine and nicotine, the iridoid glycoside catalpol and the terpenoid thymol, significantly reduce parasite infection in bees, which may mean that that growing plants high in these compounds around farm fields could improve survival of diseased bees and therefore maintain more consistent pollination of crops.

    The researchers studied parasite infections in bumble bees, which like honey bees are important pollinators that are in decline around the world, a trend that threatens fruits, vegetables and other crops that make up much of the food supply for people.”

    http: //

    Bees thrive on nicotine in nectar
    February 18 2015

    “People should plant flowers rich in nicotine, scientists have advised after a study found that the chemical helps to stave off disease in bees.

    Nicotine is one of a number of compounds that occur in a natural “medicine cabinet” in the nectar of some flowers. It cut the intensity of infections in bumblebees by as much as 81 per cent, biologists at Dartmouth College, New Hampshire, report in Proceedings of the Royal Society B.”
    http: //

    So that was fairly clear wasn’t it?

    Now the hijack.

    Are bees addicted to pesticides? Insects are hooked in the same way humans can’t resist cigarettes, study claims

    “Bumblebees and honeybees seem to prefer nectar laced with neonicotinoid chemicals – a type of pesticide commonly used to protect crops from insects.

    Scientists at Newcastle University and Trinity College Dublin demonstrated in a series of experiments that the bees could not taste the pesticides, but would actively return to samples of pesticide-treated nectar over untreated samples.”

    Rather than enjoying the taste, the scientists believe they react to a pleasurable ‘high’ as the chemicals activate reward centres in their tiny brains, the scientists believe.

    The bees repeatedly returned the spiked sugar again and again – an action researchers compared to smokers reaching for another cigarette.”

    “The findings, published in the journal Nature last night, comes as EU officials are reviewing whether neonicotinoids should be permanently banned as a pesticide.”


    “Scientists suggested the chemicals, which have a similar molecular structure to nicotine, may be affecting the reward centres in bee’s brain in the same way humans are affected by cigarettes.

    Professor Geraldine Wright, who led the study, said that the addictive effect was not something they had tested for and was only a hypothesis.

    “Like nicotine they are essentially amplifying the rewarding properties of the sucrose solution that they are located in and the bees think its more rewarding so they go back to that food tube to drink more of it,”

    So cutting out the speculative anti-tobacco style nonsense –

    In the absence of the natural parasite killer, bees will mistakenly go for a close chemical substitute.

    The nicotine addiction theory has a lot to answer for.

    • I thought the neonicotinoids were implicated in the Colony Collapse disaster? Is that not true? It wouldn’t surprise me at all if this is another complete fabrication by the ANTZ, but I’m curious.

      • Rose says:

        Yes they are, that’s the trouble.

        I can’t help thinking that this new study is trying to blame the bees for mistaking neonicotinoids for nicotine without admitting that nicotine is in anyway beneficial to them.
        This new study follows suspiciously quickly after the one recommending farmers grow nicotine containing plants around field edges to help the bees get rid of their parasites.

        It’s also suspicious that this study has come out as the ban is ending.

        “Three types of neonicotinoids are currently under a temporary and partial ban in Europe – but the moratorium expires at the end of the year.
        Farmers argue that without the pesticides, they are seeing a huge decline of yields of crops such as oilseed rape, because they are unable to protect them against pests like cabbage stem fleas.
        The farmers’ stance was backed by the Coalition Government. Although they had to enforce the moratorium, ministers publicly stated they did not support it.”

        Of course when nicotine itself was used as a pesticide we didn’t have this problem, it wasn’t a systemic poison like the neonicotinoids and only lasted a short time.

        nicotine (Black Leaf 40) Chemical Profile 4/85

        TRADE NAME(S): Black Leaf 40

        “PRINCIPAL USES: Sucking insects on plants but now largely replaced by organophosphate insecticides. Formerly used in greenhouses as a fumigant and as a paint roost for chicken lice and mites.”

        “Little hazard to birds, fish and beneficial insects.”

        “Approximate Residual Period: Very short, 1 day on plants; same in soil and water”

        • I guess the neonicotinoids are just further proof that no matter how beneficial the natural product may be, mankind’s lab-created version is sure to be poisonous! Mankind just isn’t as smart as Mother Nature, no matter how we like to pretend otherwise.

  4. Rose says:

    I seem to have found the original bee study press release.

    Dartmouth-Led Study: ‘Medicine Cabinet’ Reduces Bee Disease

    “Plants produce chemicals called “secondary metabolites” to defend leaves against herbivores. These chemicals are also found in nectar for pollinators, but little is known about the impact of nectar chemistry on pollinators, including bees. The researchers hypothesized that some nectar compounds could reduce parasite infections in bees, so they inoculated individual bumble bees with an intestinal parasite and tested the effect of eight naturally occurring nectar chemicals on parasite population growth. The results showed that consumption of these chemicals lessened the intensity of infection by up to 81 percent, which could significantly reduce the spread of parasites within and between bee colonies.”

    American Chemical Society

    Killer Spices’ Provide Eco-friendly Pesticides For Organic Fruits And Veggies

    August 2009

    “Researchers are reporting that well-known spices such as rosemary, thyme, clove and mint are becoming organic agriculture’s key weapons against insect pests as the industry tries to satisfy demands for fruits and veggies among the growing portion of consumers who want food produced in more natural ways.”

    “n a study presented at the American Chemical Society’s 238th National Meeting, scientists in Canada are reporting exciting new research on these so-called “essential oil pesticides” or “killer spices.” These substances represent a relatively new class of natural insecticides that show promise as an environmentally-friendly alternative to conventional pesticides while also posing less risk to human and animal health, the researcher says.”

    “The natural pesticides have several advantages. Unlike conventional pesticides, these killer spices do not require extensive regulatory approval and are readily available.

    An additional advantage is that insects are less likely to evolve resistance, the ability to shrug off once-effective toxins Isman says. They’re also safer for farm workers, who are at high risk for pesticide exposure, he notes.

    But the new pesticides also have shortcomings. Since essential oils tend to evaporate quickly and degrade rapidly in sunlight, farmers need to apply the spice-based pesticides to crops more frequently than conventional pesticides.

    [Like the old nicotine based pesticides]
    Some last only a few hours, compared to days or even months for conventional pesticides. As these natural pesticides are generally less potent than conventional pesticides, they also must be applied in higher concentrations to achieve acceptable levels of pest control, Isman says. Researchers are now seeking ways of making the natural pesticides longer-lasting and more potent, he notes.”

    Forgive me for being cynical, but unless they are patentable the Agricultural Chemical Companies are unlikely to be interested and the tobacco control template be brought into use against them to crush the idea.

    If it can kill a microscopic parasite in a bee, then it might be killing you !

  5. Frank its the whole story…………..thanks

  6. Reblogged this on artbylisabelle and commented:
    #Truth #notblowingsmoke #vapingsavedmylife #NoSinNoTax
    Thank you C Frank Davis.

  7. This may be interestingly a common and harmonious chord, involving the same unscrupulous scoundrels as Frank Davis so artfully and articulately has pointed out. From the blog “The Disrupted Physician” Organizational Purpose and Public Trust in Drug and Alcohol Testing He also has been in agreement with our struggles fighting for our lives from Public Health Tobacco Control. Michael Lawrence Langan, M.D.

  8. Hans Schmidt says:

    All you need to understand 9/11 is a basic knowledge of physics. And … how many people have a basic knowledge of physics?
    Institutionalised Lying can always rely on unschooled people.

    • Edgar says:

      I have a basic knowledge of physics. That hasn’t helped me in the tiniest to come to a conclusion on 9/11. Rather, it is the basic knowledge of probability that makes me think that events were pretty much the way they were described by the American authorities.

      • It took me less than 2 minutes after the first aircraft to deduce a terrorist attack. The second confirmed it. I had just been telling my buddies the only thing going to get scrap metal prices up would be a war…………funny ehh!

    • beobrigitte says:

      Institutionalised Lying can always rely on unschooled people.
      By the looks of it they are the target of the tobacco control infested mass media. Not surprised, though, considering that PR used to be Deborah Arnott’s job before she somehow got promoted as someone who studied science…..

  9. Brian truscott says:

    “Oh what a terrible web we weave when first we practice to decieve. “

  10. smokingscot says:


    I see that Kim Jong Un has accepted Mr. Putin’s invitation to celebrate the 70th anniversary of the end of WW2. This’ll be young Kim’s first official trip outside of North Korea since he took over from Daddy Kim.

    (He’s on a whole series of wanted lists out on our Kim, however I’m reasonably certain the Russians will make sure he gets back in one piece. Vlad’s sort of light on mates anyway, so he won’t want to upset one who has the potential to be around for several decades.)

    It’s going to be held on the 9th May. I suspect Edward may be rather tied up in meetings with Unite and such, so he’ll probably send his new buddy – a certain Mr. Salmond. He’s known to enjoy the good life, especially if it involves whiskey.

  11. Smoking Lamp says:

    Tobacco control lies at all levels. They lie )or manipulate) the data on smoking risk and disease causation. (They overstate risk.) They lie about the risk of second hand smoke.(There is none.) They lie about support for smoking bans, the economic impact of smoking bans, and the health effects of smoking bans. (They overstate support; underplay detrimental economic effects, and fabricate positive health benefits.) They same lies apply to smokeless tobacco and suns, e-cigarettes and vaping). In short they lie about all things tobacco! These lies are broadcast as powerful propaganda and all dissent is suppressed. It is beyond time to expose these lies and derail tobacco control.

    • L. says:

      Let’s face it. If there was money to be made in the form of grants, anti-tobacco zealots would march against indoor plumbing.

  12. Rose says:

    All anyone might need to know about the use of nicotine as a pesticide.

    Production and Use of Nicotine from Crops in Peace and War- The Yearbook of Agriculture 1950-1951

    “By 1884 tobacco was described as one of the three most valuable insecticides in general use, the other two being white hellebore and soap. Tobacco was then used as a dust or water extract, or the leaves and stems were burned as a smudge for fumigating greenhouses.”;jsessionid=DD2B8B9601D91B71075A6829AEFE05B8.tobacco03

    I may only be an amateur gardener but I haven’t half done a lot of reading since 2007.

  13. beobrigitte says:

    It’s all been happening in public. Tobacco Control was left in disarray by the arrival of the new e-cigarettes. Their discomfiture was painfully obvious.

    Here a wonderful piece of utter nonsense using the key words cigarette, health scare, scientists:
    “The e-cigarette exposure inhibited the ability of mice to clear the bacteria from their lungs, and the viral infection led to increased weight loss and death,” said co-researcher Dr Thomas Sussan.
    Isn’t ‘weight loss’ a good thing since we are supposed to ‘suffer’ from an ‘obesity epidemic’ – and aren’t we constantly bombarded with some weirdo’s… erm…. Expert’s latest money making adventure disguised as research?
    Also, what happened to the anti-bacterial properties of nicotine? Hang on, futher up we read:
    He spent two weeks bombarding mice with e-cigarette vapour before exposing them to pneumonia or flu viruses.
    I do worry about the quality of the contributions of people who can’t tell the difference between virae and bacteriae!!

    Free radicals are destructive molecules known to inflict serious damage on cells and DNA. They are proven to contribute to the development of cancer.
    Free radicals are ACTUALLY REQUIRED by our bodies – the ‘science’ declaring free radicals as cancer causing/aiding has long been disputed.

    Tobacco Control sure has lost all control – mostly over it’s members. Perhaps they are too busy meddling in politics and lying to gullible billionaires?
    Austria is the only country in which the sneaky little gits of the tobacco control club have managed to ban vape shops – and make only cig-alikes available in PHARMACIES!
    And now they are going for the smoking ban there, blurting out ‘science’ similar to the above.

    Off topic – just disturbing:
    The BBC ran this morning a story on Britain’s youngest organ donor – a little boy, born with anencephaly.
    I thought it rather odd that the BBC did not explain what anencephaly is.
    The presenter was full of praise to the parents, who learned during their pregnancy that one of their twin will not survive. The parents did state that they wished to give meaning to their son’s short life and decided to donate his organs. Sounds very enouraging to other parents who are in the same boat – even though anencephaly is quite rare.
    Why do I think this morning’s report is somewhat dark to sinister? Are there still too many smokers donating their “dirty” blood and organs – and now VAPERS, who are treated as we smokers when tobacco control wants to kick us both off the organ/blood donor register with all their nonsense publications??

  14. Homeless Granney says:

    While I believe that you have made some valid points about the effects of lying. And while I Do Vape, I watched the 3 most important people I loved die due to lung cancer due to cigarettes . The facts are there. There are quite a few doctors and nurses in my family. One of which is a leading cancer researcher. He was in tears on my Mother’s deathbed saying (26years ago!) that They had a Cure for this! I have Seen the effects of second hand smoke and smoking. It is not the tobacco that is the problem but the additives. My problem is that the Cures are out there. If we Stopped giving money to these institutes ( who already have finished research) who rack in Billions then they might be willing to finally release the treatments. Take Breast Cancer, we all wear the pink ribbons and throw money at the Foundation. All the suffering that goes on with these poor breast cancer women over the years that could have been cured if only certain people were not so greedy. I have urged my relative to blow the whistle on this outrage but he lacks the courage and fears for his life. I cannot blame him. In the 70s I knew a person who developed a hydrogen car. Even got to test drive it. He disappeared, after a frantic phone call to me. His co worker had just been murdered . Seems they were given an offer by Big Oil to sell out to them. They were idealists and refused. It’s all about the money.

    • beobrigitte says:

      While I believe that you have made some valid points about the effects of lying. And while I Do Vape, I watched the 3 most important people I loved die due to lung cancer due to cigarettes . The facts are there.

      May I respectfully ask the ages of the three people when they died?
      According to tobacco control there is a 20 – 30 – 40 and in some cases to 50 year “lag-phase” before you die of tobacco use RELATED cancer. (Ambiguous term, isn’t it?)

      Of course you do not age during this time and encounter no other cancer CAUSING agents?

      Sadly, in the last 14 months I had to go to 4 funerals of youngsters (age range 19 – 26). None of them was ill; three committed sucide and one caved in to the constant bombardement about ‘obesity-epidemic’. Sadly, what was ‘to-be-investigated’ was not gastritis, it was a stomach ulcer which ruptured.
      I must admit, when I was their age, I ‘had a LIFE’ – and thoroughly enjoyed it!!! ‘Health fears’ did not enter into our lives – and I still don’t allow to be manipulated by this health fear.

      No disrespect to your relatives – surely the cancer researcher has told you about the cost of studies and who funds which kind of study.

      It is not the tobacco that is the problem but the additives.
      There is wonderful tobacco available ADDITIVE FREE. Where I buy this tobacco it is much cheaper than buying cheap tobacco in England. Visiting friends from this country know to bring me this additive free tobacco, too.
      To stretch my supply I vape. (itaste MVP battery + iclear tank)

      Take Breast Cancer, we all wear the pink ribbons and throw money at the Foundation. All the suffering that goes on with these poor breast cancer women over the years that could have been cured if only certain people were not so greedy.

      These certain people have conned the rich into throwing their money out the window.

      Take prostate cancer. No ribbons, not much in the news about it, either. Yet it is a cancer which kills many elderly men.

      Then there is testicular cancer – this one kills many YOUNG men.

      Then there is cervical cancer. Ironically, youngsters <30 years of age are NOT routinely screened for this cancer. (?cost)
      However, there is an interesting development: youngsters (teenagers) are in some countries (e.g. Australia) routinely VACCINATED against HPV.

      Sadly, if anyone suggests to look into viral involvement of the genesis of cancer, he/she is at best only ignored.

      • Smoking Lamp says:

        Now there is a true smoking gun! See: “Cuba has had a lung cancer vaccine for years,”

        This challenges the antismoking cults claims that smoking is the cause of lung cancer. It also raises serious ethical questions about the antismoking crusade. If they knew that there was a virus but kept silent in order to sustain their puritan assault on smoking and protect the ideology they are responsible for the deaths of smokers, ex-smokers and never smokers who could have benefited from the vaccine.


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.