Waiting For Dobbo

While updating my blogroll links, I got reading some stuff on Smokingscot’s webpage:

‘Internet vermin’ target health advocates

Medical Observer Wednesday 08 April 2015, 9:35AM

Prominent health activist Professor Mike Daube suspects commercial interests may be behind some of the anonymous forces using social media to abuse and intimidate public health advocates.

The Curtin University professor, who chaired the committee that recommended plain packaging of tobacco in Australia, says the vitriol dished out by nameless attackers could have a chilling effect on individuals’ readiness to speak out about the health impacts of alcohol, tobacco and other social ills.

“I do think it’s getting to the stage where people in public health are at risk of being intimidated out of it,” Professor Daube told Medical Observer.

“I have certainly been the target of very unpleasant blogs, tweets and direct emails, replete with [obscene language]. It’s no fun having those coming into your in box.”

He cited the example of a young Australian researcher who stopped commenting publicly about electronic cigarettes after being lashed by “internet vermin2.

“We want to encourage more young people into public health, but if they are going to hit this kind of intimidation I really do worry,” he said.

Isn’t that terrible? Health activists being attacked by “internet vermin”! And they’re at risk of being intimidated!

Actually I’m delighted. If nothing else, it goes to show that at least some of what’s being thrown at them is hitting home. And that’s worth knowing.

In fact, I’m almost certainly one of those “internet vermin” myself, having previously devoted a post or two to the likes of Dobbo and co. After all, I do have a page on Tobacco Tactics entirely devoted to me. I’ve got previous on this.

“I find it hard to believe that at least some of this is not planned and orchestrated.”

Well, he would, wouldn’t he? People like him spend their days planning and orchestrating the global persecution and demonisation and exclusion of smokers, so they’re bound to suppose that counter-attacks must be planned and orchestrated in the exact same way, most likely by Big Tobacco. But, precisely because what he does is planned and orchestrated (and financed), he almost certainly doesn’t understand how social media work in a completely unplanned and un-orchestrated (and un-financed) fashion. The social media response to news comes as a widening ripple spreading around a dropped stone – sometimes as a tidal wave as stories ‘go viral’. There’s no planning involved.

The simple truth of the matter is that there are a lot of very angry smokers who don’t like what’s being done to them one bit, and who are speaking out about it. And as their numbers mount, they’ve become a swarm that acts just like a swarm of angry wasps. And since those smokers generally get angry about the same things, they’ll all get angry at the same time when they read another piece of bad news. No planning required. No orchestration. It all  just happens spontaneously.

And the bad news for Dobbo is that it’s most likely only going to get worse. Because there’s about 1.5 billion angry smokers in the world, slowly getting angrier and angrier. Relatively few of them are kicking up a stink at the moment, but the numbers are always mounting. If he’s already troubled about the trickle of hate mail flowing into his inbox, what will happen when it becomes a torrent?

And I myself am not one of the authors of the nasty emails he receives. Because I can’t be bothered to write to Dobbo. I instead devote 99.99% of my attention to the persecuted smokers themselves, trying to make them even angrier than they already are, and supplying them with copious numbers of reasons why they should be angrier. Because I think that if just 1% of the world’s smokers can be made angry enough, it’ll create a tsunami that will sweep Dobbo and all his chums to kingdom come. With no planning. And no orchestration. And no financing.

“Good and decent people are being targeted by trolls as well as all the different groups… industry [and] so-called think tanks with undisclosed funding sources.

Well, I’m sure that Dobbo and Deborah and Stan and all the rest of them like to think of themselves as “good and decent people.” But I don’t. I think they’re all bastards. I think that people who have devoted much of their lives to persecuting smokers (and who now extend their persecution to vapers, drinkers, fat people, etc.) are very, very nasty people indeed. Which is why I regularly call for the complete destruction of Tobacco Control, and why I actually believe that Tobacco Control will be closed down one day, and many of its practitioners put on trial for Crimes Against Humanity. For we will hunt them to the ends of the earth.

We already know quite a lot about how they justify their actions to themselves. They have managed to persuade themselves that they are “helping” smokers, as if “exiling them to the outdoors” (Deborah’s phrase) could ever be anything but grievously harmful. And we know that they like to think of themselves as “saving lives”, despite being unable to produce a single example of a “saved life”, and while disregarding the slowly mounting number of real lives lost as a direct consequence of their predations and hate-mongering.

I think it’s going to become harder and harder for these people to keep on telling themselves that they’re doing “good” (or like Dobbo, telling themselves that they’re actually some sort of “superhero”) as their justifications get repeatedly ripped to shreds. At the moment there seem to be enough of them to not only tell themselves the same string of lies and falsehoods every day, but to also tell each other at their regular conferences. But I wouldn’t be surprised if morale in Tobacco Control is already dwindling. In fact, this complaining essay is evidence of exactly that.

About Frank Davis

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

44 Responses to Waiting For Dobbo

  1. harleyrider1978 says:

    “I do think it’s getting to the stage where people in public health are at risk of being intimidated out of it,” Professor Daube told Medical Observer.

    Intimidated………..hell GET A ROPE

  2. harleyrider1978 says:

    Quite possibly the last hoorah for the Nazis in Canada

    Cities call for Quebec to toughen anti-tobacco bill

    A coalition of 174 cities and towns has called on the Couillard government to go even further in cracking down on tobacco than it proposes in Bill 44


    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Iro CyZane ·

      If anyone couldn’t see how indoor smoking bans never had anything to do with other people’s health and everything to do with coercing people to give up their highly taxed legal habit, outdoor bans should convince even the biggest of skeptics. It is absolutely ridiculous to attempt to pretend that second hand smoke hurts bystanders when 1000’s of vehicles pass right under one’s nose at the same time. When it takes a minimum of 20 years (if ever) for a heavy smoker to develop a multi-factorial disease only suspected (not proven) to have been caused by smoking and let’s not forget that smokers also breathe in their own second hand smoke and everybody else’s since they don’t avoid smoke laden places, tell me again how occasional whiffs of thousands of times diluted second hand smoke in the outdoors will ever hurt anyone unless of course they expect to live as long as a few thousand years.

      Hope the intolerant whiners enjoy paying even more for their drinks and food to make up for the losses of those businesses which will have survived yet another blow. After all, having the privilege to demand not to be annoyed by the whiffs of smoke, comes with a price. Prices sky rocketed since the indoor smoking bans, expect them to increase even more with the outdoor ones. Enjoy.

  3. Smoking Lamp says:

    Frank, Another great essay. You are right they are only seeing the leading edge of the coming swarm. It’s easy to believe you are right when you sit in smokeless rooms with fellow fanatics orchestrating an astroturf revolution against tobacco. It’s harder to be so smug when the real grassroots rebel…

  4. Nightlight says:

    It’s only vapers that are fighting them back. Smokers, still living under the spell “smoking kills” are as passive as ever. Vapers, despite their comparatively small numbers (perhaps 5-10% of smokers), who don’t see their habit as sin are already better organized and more active than smokers.

    The lesson from observing vapers — until smokers groups focus exclusively on smokers, on breaking the paralyzing spell “smoking kills”, there won’t be any smokers movements or resistance. Seeking to debate antismokers on TV or suing bureaucrats, as present smokers groups do, is like a general riding on white horse toward enemy with sword drawn and no one behind him.

    • Frank Davis says:

      It’s only vapers that are fighting them back.

      I’m a smoker, and I fight back. And there are plenty of others (yourself, for example).

      It’s true that a lot of smokers believe the “smoking kills” crap. But that shouldn’t be too surprising since they’ve been being told that for 60 years or more. It’s much easier to disbelieve when you’ve only been told that “vaping kills” for about 6 months.

      • Nightlight says:

        There are unfortunately only a handful of us truly outside of the matrix. None of the leaders of pro-smoker groups are, though. I have argued with them since 2005 (starting with FORCES folks, later with Smoking Gun, Speakeasy, CLASH etc, as well) to no avail. Hence all such groups arguing about ETS/SHS or smoking bans, but largely accepting the “settled science” of the ‘first hand smoke’, are doomed to failure.

        The example of vapers vindicates my diagnosis as to why the pro-smoker groups could never get any traction and are doomed to end up as lone generals leading the charge with no army behind. They are stuck in the matrix where the game is rigged so that they always lose.

        • waltc says:

          What’s your beef with Clash? Audrey, single-hanedly, has done more real world stuff than any thousand people you can name. So, seriously (and genuinely) , what’s your beef?

          Re: Daube. It’s not in my iPad, where I am now, but I think on my computer there’s something juicy about Daube and some precedent-setting court decision against him regarding shoddy science. Can’t swear I’ll remember to look it up tomorrow but I bet it’s somewhere out there on the net

        • roobeedoo2 says:

          All the lies about smoking are based on the solid foundation of the one big Nazi-accredited lie that ‘Smoking Kills’.

          If you accept that, it doesn’t matter how hard you work at knocking down the little lies built up on that. It’s like an inverted pyramid… or a Weeble… until you accept the basis of their lies is utterly false, the TC weebles will wobble but they won’t fall down ;)

  5. Nightlight says:

    @waltc: “What’s your beef with Clash? Audrey, single-hanedly, has done more real world stuff than any thousand people you can name. So, seriously (and genuinely) , what’s your beef?”

    You answered it in your question — “single-handedly” i.e. the general on a horse charging the enemy with no army behind. It’s the same problem with all pro-smoker groups/activists I encountered since 2005/6 when I discovered, among other heretical writings, Dr. W.T. Whitbey’s book “Smoking Is good for you” and realized that none of the pro-smoker groups has any chance of gaining traction as long long as smokers themselves believe smoking is sin (“smoking kills” or at least harmful, hence a “sin”, hence guilt, fear, passivity, sin taxes, etc).

    Just as there are no rapists or thieves organizing and marching on the streets to demand their right to rape or steal, there won’t be smokers organizing to demand right to their sin. Until smokers en masse understand that “smoking is good for you” (as Dr. Whitbey realized decades ago, or as people intuitively sensed for thousands of years seeing tobacco as a potent medicinal plant), they will remain passive.

    Vapers who are mostly not under the spell “vaping kills” (hence it is not a “sin”) are already organizing and fighting far more effectively than much more numerous smokers. Just look for example at FB groups membership numbers, e.g. Audrey’s has 1268 members, while one of the vapers groups I follow, “Vapers Network”, has already 5406 members, even though when I joined few years ago it started well below Audrey’s. They are not just growing explosively, but are also meeting, contributing, organizing actions, etc.

    Despite the facts that vapers are (so far) not nearly as oppressed or taxed or abused as smokers, that their numbers are 1/10th or less of smokers, that they have been around for much shorter time than smokers groups, they are already a substantial and rapidly growing cohesive force on a mission, fueled by the fire of righteous who are unjustly attacked and are fighting back.

    The only real difference is that smokers see their habit as sin (“smoking kills” or it’s harmful) while vapers see theirs as essentially harmless (like coffee). I knew that and argued with pro-smoker activists long before there were vapers (for nearly a decade) — if one would free smokers from the spell “smoking kills” (or that it’s harmful at all) they could wipe out antismoking tyranny overnight. Much smaller minorities, e.g. gays who are 1% or 2% of population that feel righteous/proud about their alleged “sin”, have become sacred and untouchable. Smokers who are 10 or 20 times larger minority could achieve the same protected/untouchable status much more quickly.

    If only they knew what the real hard science has discovered about the actual effects of tobacco smoke — it is not just harmless but it is a medicinal panacea without equal, therapeutic, protective, life extending substance. I have carried out long debates on this subject in health forums (posting as “nightlight”), e.g. see TOC to highlights of a long thread on Longecity (life-extension & nootropic forum) titled “Smoking is good for you” (SIGFY). Some of those health super-conscious members started smoking as result of discussion, that’s how unequal the “debate” was — all the hard science (experiments, randomized trials) was on the SIGFY side, while the antismoking faction had only junk science that falls apart after first few questions.

    The problem I have with Audrey (she knows this, we eventually had to agree to disagree) and other pro-smoker activists/groups is that they themselves live under the same spell, maybe not the extreme form “smoking kills” but just that it is harmful to smoker (hence a sin, at the bottom of it). They support THR (tobacco harm reduction, e.g. C.V. Phillips) activism, which tacitly accepts harm from tobacco (hence sinfulness of smoking at psychological level). In other words, Audrey and others are tacitly accepting the antismoking position from 1970s (pre-SHS hysteria), but that’s already too late — smokers were already doomed to their present status way back then when they were brainwashed into it the first time. They never fought back against the series of escalations of antismoking abuses that followed. ( Tobacco companies fought back until they were legally neutered and completely silenced by late 1990s.) Hence smokers will not fight back by accepting that perspective today either. It’s empirically established as a perspective doomed to fail.

    Despite decades of valiant efforts by handful of folks at FORCES (as well as Audrey’s CLASH, FOREST and few others), it was all along just a few generals charging the enemy without any army behind them, losing battle after battle. They’re losing because they themselves are locked in the antismoking propaganda matrix of 1970s (accepting it as a “settled science”), where the game was already rigged to reach its present day outcome (since sinners don’t organize and fight back).

    • Rose says:

      Nightlight, I think you are being way too harsh.

      I don’t think anyone over here believed the ban would ever happen. As we used to say collectively, such things could only ever happen in America.
      I don’t think anyone had a clue that this was a global agreement rather than government meddling until it was much too late. We used to believe that our governments would protect us from the nutcases, not deliver us into their hands.

      So as a whole we did start late, especially me. I have been very pleased to see the vapers using the plant chemistry that we have laboured to drag out of dark and obscure corners for the past 8 years, too late for us, but it isn’t it wonderful to see it hit the mainstream media and be admitted to by even members of antitobacco itself.
      What I knew in the 70’s from reading books on vegetable growing, they only discovered in 1993 when it was pointed out to them.

      Nicotine is a common plant chemical eaten by everyone every day.


      I took up smoking to discover what they were hiding, and why they had to lie about things like road tar, many years later I find that they didn’t know anything to hide, except for that nicotinic acid thing in 1942, which must have come as nasty shock to the religious prohibitionists.

      Nicotinic Acid vs. Nicotine – 1942
      International Journal for Pastors


      “A poor name is a handicap to the promotion of a meritorious product. The name “nicotinic acid” for the vitamin so important in the prevention of pellagra has been doubly unfortunate.”

      I must admit that when I took up smoking, knowing the plant chemistry, I didn’t expect it to do me any good but I certainly didn’t expect it to do me any harm.
      Personal experience backed up with recent research on the medical benefits of inhaled gases, not to mention the properties and pharmaceutical uses of the solanesol in tobacco lead me to conclude that Smoking is indeed Good for me.

      • Nightlight says:

        Hi Rose, thanks for chiming in. I have been enjoying your quite informative (and novel to me) posts way back from early Dr. Siegel’s blog (maybe starting in 2007-8?).

        Regarding “you are being way too harsh” — sorry if it sounded that way. I do actually appreciate great deal what Gian Turci and the rest of FORCES folks achieved, as well as what many others did that followed. My main objection is that the strategy all of them adopted is doomed to fail because it can’t ever gain traction with smokers themselves. Along that path they will remain the few lone generals charging at the enemy lines all by themselves.

        The history of decades of their valiant, but ultimately futile, attempts to spawn the smokers movement and rebellion, shows that the assessment of wrong strategy was correct. As luck would have it, the subsequent emergence of vapers and their ability to achieve in much shorter time and with much smaller numbers far greater level of social activity and resistance, proves that my prescription for what needs to be done was correct, too: focus on fellow smokers exclusively in order to break the paralyzing spell “smoking kills” before turning against the external enemy.

        If smokers had the attitude about smoking that vapers have about vaping, they would have crushed antismoking mafia decades ago. There are many more of us and we have been oppressed and abused far more viciously than vapers (so far), hence the righteous rage of smokers would have been unstoppable.

        What was (and still is) missing throughout was the sense of righteousness about smoking. Without it smokers will remain the fearful, guilt ridden mass of passive individuals stoically taking ever escalating series of abuses. Hence, that is the faulty cog smokers groups need to fix. But you can’t do that if their leadership is nearly as brainwashed as the rest of the smokers (tacitly accepting the 1970s antismoking propaganda as “settled science” i.e. that smoking harms smokers at least a little, hence it’s a sin at least a little).

        Hence fighting SHS or supporting THR (folks like C.V. Phillips or Dr. Siegel, as Audrey and others do these days) while tacitly accepting harm of primary smoking, is merely firming up the fallback positions of the antismoking enemy of 1970s. While the front ranks of antismoking mafia are way ahead by now, it is precisely these old starting positions (like a bad move in chess opening) that have paralyzed us into fear and guilt, bringing us to where we’re now.

        The oldest post I could still find online where I suggested and debated this position with FORCES folks and other pro-smoker activists, was from Forces Tavern (April 2007), explained in more detail in the subsequent thread there. Unfortunately, the links I left there to earlier posts in speakeasy and other forums are all dead now (web archive failed to capture correctly any speakeasyforum.com discussions). Just few days ago I made the same point in a short post on FB, since smokers groups haven’t changed their strategy at all.

        • Rose says:

          Nightlight, thank you for the reply, I’ve found your posts helpful ever since I started trying to unravel what had happened to me. I come at this from the view point of a gardener and I was surprised to find that things I thought everyone knew just weren’t being discussed.

          What I really don’t understand is why people who have been repeatedly told that “Smoking Kills” in some way or another since at least 1962, ever took up smoking in the first place, if they truly believe it.

          I didn’t believe it then and I don’t believe it now especially since I started researching the matter in earnest.

          If smokers had the attitude about smoking that vapers have about vaping, they would have crushed antismoking mafia decades ago

          Vapers have the advantage of the research that smokers have already done and the smokers only did it when they felt they had to.

          For instance, since the shock of the smoking ban in England, I have carefully researched the medical benefits of things I enjoy eating or drinking, to be ready with some kind of reasoned defence when the next round of prohibitionists start.

          It seems that I have been taking an almost daily dose of vitamin B17 since I was a child, who knew? I’m particularly pleased with the results for coffee, human instinct is indeed a wonderful thing.

          What was (and still is) missing throughout was the sense of righteousness about smoking

          I couldn’t agree more, but I do think it’s building, however belatedly, it’s seeing through the trick that matters.
          Unlike some I have never thought of this as battle about rights as such more as a battle against shoddy science and deliberate misinformation.

          tacitly accepting harm of primary smoking, is merely firming up the fallback positions of the antismoking enemy of 1970s

          Yes, anyone who would take such an attitude is doomed from the start.

          The first time I ever saw the protective effect that I’d always half suspected recorded officially –

          From a court case

          From the Deposition of Wilhelm C. Hueper 1957

          “The hands of tar workers develop skin cancer, the marked drenchings of the fingers, the skin of the fingers which holds the cigarette, which are sometimes deeply brown stained have never so far as I know, developed cancer of the skin.
          One of the gentlemen, the proponents of the cigarette theory, has tried to explain that phenomenon by saying that the first three fingers of the right hand of man have a natural immunity against cancer.”


          That gentlemen being Fritz Lickint.

        • Nightlight says:

          @Rose — that’s a fascinating testimony by Dr. Hueper, I almost couldn’t put it down. Yes, it figures that Lickint would come up with such absurdity. I save these kinds of papers from the Tobacco archive since you never know when the antismoking lobby will purge them under some pretext and retain only those favorable to their agenda.

        • Rose says:

          In having to explain to the court in simple terms, Dr Hueper explained it to me.

    • westcoast2 says:

      “The only real difference is that smokers see their habit as sin (“smoking kills” or it’s harmful) while vapers see theirs as essentially harmless (like coffee).”

      Quite a lot seem to think that Vaping is the miracle savior for those sinners. This profound split occurred very early on, when vaping started hitting the mainstream. Many manufacturers were advertising e-cigs as an aid to quitting. Their claims were very similar to those of NRT. These claims were muted when it was pointed out that the MHRA might be miffed and they were. Remember the MHRA Consultation?

      They was much discussion on vaping forums and many put forward the idea of recreational use of nicotine. This gained some traction and also helped bring smokers and vapers together somewhat. This idea has also been muted as the anti-tobacco activists and charities have come on the scene. More emphasis has been put on quitting. A slight retreat , for the time being, from the complete medicalization of e-cigs.

      Vaping raises some really awkward questions for TC, not least the addictive nature of Nicotine.

      TC play good cop bad cop in this new dynamic. Some appearing to support vapers yet applauding smoking bans that include vaping . While others appear to speak against the bans yet are not opposed to increased regulation. If that regulation treats e-cigs as pseudo medical delivery devices even better.

      Remember that many people came to vaping as a result of the propaganda on tobacco, so will have been ‘persuaded’ to quit in one way or another. The “Congratulations for stopping smoking” left guilty feelings when they couldn’t. So they took to vaping and found that they could reduce their nicotine (how come when it is the most highly addictive substance on the planet?) or even quit. The congratulations came again and they felt good. Now they are in a quandary, throw smokers under the bus or recognise that the same group, who just wanted a separate non-smoking section, are not all they seem.

      Up until now vapers have been able to organize, most people who smoke are not aware of the things you mention because they are off-message and rarely said by anyone in a position of influence. Once TC infiltrate vaping communities, as they are doing, the messages will subtly change as they are doing now.

      As an aside, I once wrote a piece, years ago, on another forum about the links from the WHO health strategy –>EU health strategy–>UK ( and now UK–>local councils) and was ignored. It was suggested to me that it was just the UK government following the fashion for smoking restrictions, even when those strategies were hidden in plain sight.

      There is common ground. Arguing among ourselves doesn’t really achieve anything.

      • Jude says:

        You make some very good points, there are two distinct groups of vapers, those that look on vaping as a smoking cessation tool, and those that look on vaping as an acceptable, and often enjoyable alternative to tobacco smoking. I’m a vaper that falls into the latter category.

        I live in Australia, and smoking is an extremely expensive habit, it also has some of the most ridiculous anti-smoker laws in the world, and smokers are subject to a lot of discrimination, prejudice and persecution, all government sanctioned. When vaping came along, for me it was the perfect alternative, I have all the enjoyment that I used to get from smoking, at a vastly reduced cost, and apart from needing to import nicotine base liquid from overseas, I am pretty self sufficient, in that I can make my own liquids, and have even made my own mods, as well as using rebuildable atomisers. This type of self sufficiency was something I was never able to achieve as a smoker. Even growing a tobacco plant in your back yard is illegal in Australia, and obtaining seeds is extremely difficult.

        Once I decided to make the switch, I found I really enjoy vaping, and haven’t bothered to go back to smoking tobacco. For me, there is also a sense of freedom from the constant nagging from the same state that was extorting money from me to pay for my own persecution.

        However, I still feel a sense of solidarity with smokers, and will fight for the rights of people to smoke, as well as vape. I used to get angry at smokers who accepted the lies of zealots, and at their apathy in the face of the persecution, hatred, and oppression, directed at them. Now I just accept that for many people, they are simply just tired of fighting, after all this fascism has been going on for decades now. The tobacco control religion has grown so vast that for many, its just too big, and they have neither the time, or means to put up much of a fight.

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        A sin when they cant even prove it harms anyone………….get the fuck out

  6. The blocked Dwarf says:

    I have certainly been the target of very unpleasant blogs, tweets and direct emails, replete with [obscene language]

    awwwww diddums. Let Nanny kiss it better (ie bring in even more legislation).

    • Bandit 1 says:

      Self-awareness, or any kind of awareness, are clearly not requirements in the ‘public health’ sector. We’ve seen exactly this kind of shocked, shocked! “people are saying mean things to me! Whyyy??” whine / tirade before from such figures. They always act as if THEY HAVE DONE NOTHING WHATSOEVER TO WARRANT ABUSE OF ANY KIND. Assuming the moral high ground despite everything is obviously a reflex to them.

      As we all know – but those in Public Health do not, it seems – these people have caused, and go on causing, genuine harm to individuals, communities, businesses and culture at large. People have DIED because of smoking bans. And those who haven’t died have had their social lives, their friendships, and/or their family relationships damaged to varying degrees; in some cases wholly destroyed. And for what? What effect on the psychological wellbeing of MILLIONS have the litany of anti-smoking diktats had? Quite incalculable.

      And this cunt whines that he and his oh-so-righteous colleagues receive a few hate messages! If that’s all they get they should count themselves lucky that those they persecute are so civilised. I would have thought that anti-smokers were inured to hate, it being their stock in trade. After all, what is the entire, long history of the anti-smoking programme, if not a hate campaign? Whenever it finds distilled expression in billboard or TV ‘ads’ the hate positively drips.

      Hence the use of the term “vermin,” I suppose.

  7. Frank Davis says:

    The problem I have with Audrey (she knows this, we eventually had to agree to disagree) and other pro-smoker activists/groups is that they themselves live under the same spell, maybe not the extreme form “smoking kills” but just that it is harmful to smoker (hence a sin, at the bottom of it). They support THR (tobacco harm reduction, e.g. C.V. Phillips) activism, which tacitly accepts harm from tobacco (hence sinfulness of smoking at psychological level).

    I have the exact same problem with Carl Phillips, Simon Clark and the Forest crew. They’re all essentially leading the retreat. They make a big show of concerted resistance when some new atrocity is proposed, but soon fall back to a new front line deep in the rear.

    That said, I think it’s very, very difficult to break out of “the matrix”, and I can’t really bring myself to condemn people who are stuck in it. There are a lot of these matrices. For example I was raised as a Roman Catholic, and I spent about 10 years from the age of about 17 fighting my way out of that particular matrix. But even now I have to recognise that Christianity is still part of what I am, just like being English is too, and lots of other things.

    In the case of antismoking I had the very good fortune, at age 17, to live as a guest in the home of the antismoking Dr W, the very first antismoker I’d ever encountered. I’m the only person I know who actually started smoking as a result of encountering one of them. So when I’m fighting the antis, I’m very much fighting him (although he died some 15 years ago at the same age as my smoking father). But not everybody has been so lucky.

    For most people, it’s quite simply unthinkable to even begin to contemplate the idea that “smoking doesn’t kill” or, even more shocking, that “smoking is good for you”. They simply can’t do it. It’s simply amazing that if there’s one thing that most people know for sure, it’s that “smoking causes lung cancer”. They’re more certain about that than they are that the Earth goes round the Sun. It’s a real triumph of social engineering to have managed to do that. And now they’ve managed to do that, they’re using the same playbook with global warming. And most people believe that too.

    That said, I don’t believe that anyone’s beliefs are set in stone. I think everybody is changing their mind very slowly all the time. After all, I’ve incrementally changed my mind about all sorts of things over the years. And I think one big factor in that process is encountering other people who have changed their minds, and are now thinking differently. When that happens, people start to begin to think the unthinkable. Because it may never have occurred to them before to question some rigid dogma of theirs. The people I like – that I find most stimulating – are the people who say; “What if it’s not true? What if we’re mistaken?”

    I also think that the antismokers have to be changing their minds very slowly too. Clearly the resistance they’re meeting has had an impact on people like Daube. And maybe that’s a process that can be accelerated by pointing out to them the ways in which they deceive themselves.

    So I think there’s everything to play for. The ball is still in play. It always is. And everything is still in motion, even if we’ve got 10 men on the goal mouth, desperately trying to defend against a barrage of balls. It can all change very suddenly.

    • harleyrider1978 says:


      I have the exact same problem with Carl Phillips, Simon Clark and the Forest crew. They’re all essentially leading the retreat. They make a big show of concerted resistance when some new atrocity is proposed, but soon fall back to a new front line deep in the rear.

      If they got in the ditches and fought like most of us do this ban game would have already been over. Concede nothing and never compromise with radicals.

    • Nightlight says:

      @Frank Davis: “have the exact same problem with Carl Phillips, Simon Clark and the Forest crew. They’re all essentially leading the retreat. “

      You should also include there our other “friend” Dr. Siegel. In my view, by playing the ‘good cop’ roles (not all of them deliberately or consciously, the well meaning ‘useful idiots’ are always more numerous), they are more toxic to the morale and fighting spirit of smokers than the antismoking extremists who are playing the ‘bad cops’. The ‘good cops’ are providing minor palliative comforts to smokers, while reinforcing the the paralyzing spell “smoking kills” in their minds.

      in my view the smokers groups need to adopt a two prong strategy, the inward facing one of spreading the SIGFY message to smokers alone (strictly ignoring/excluding antismokers, general public and news media from these activities), and the outward facing one of ‘judo style’ encouraging/supporting (anonymously on discussion forums, polls etc) the most extreme public “health” technocrats (e.g. anti-vapers, anti-fatties, anti-salt, anti-supplements, drug warriors, advocates of forcible vaccinations and other medical interventions,… etc.). For example, whenever vapers groups post the ‘action link’ to a poll asking ‘should vaping be banned’ or some such, I go there and vote Yes as many times as deleting browser cookies and changing IP will let me.

      This is basically the judo technique of aiding the opponent’s leading move/attack front so you can trip him and turn his muscles against him more effectively at the right moment. Back in the old country where I grew up under communist tyranny, the old men advised the same wisdom as the paradoxical whisper: “the worse, the better” (the worse the tyranny gets, the closer it gets to the cliff edge where even a little push can send them over). In this regard, recall the collapse of Soviet Empire in late 80s/early 90s, or more recent “Arab spring” where a small spark of a minor incident is enough to scorch down seemingly invincible powers.

      The first prong would help build and grow the army of righteous, outraged folks (similar to vapers now), while the latter would expand and charge up the enemies of our chief direct enemy, the public “health” mafia (aka sickness industry).

  8. jaxthefirst says:

    OT (but on-topic for the previous post!), I just checked on the “charities” petition discussed on here a few days ago and it looks as if the numbers have actually gone DOWN! I am sure that when I signed it last week there were only just over 500 signatures (around 530 or something like that), but looking at it today, the number of votes cast has gone down to 494. Anyone on here know how that might happen?

  9. Clicky says:

    • Jude says:

      This is just one of those “unintended consequences” that seem to plague the tobacco control industry. Taking away the ability of tobacco companies to compete for brand loyalty using advertising on packs, they are left with only one option, and that is to compete with other brands on price. Even with the idiots in government jacking up the tobacco taxes, the tobacco companies have been able to lower the price of their cheaper brands, which in turn has led to greater volumes in sales. So although their profits are not rising very much, the volume of units sold has increased greatly. I remember this also happening when tobacco companies were banned from advertising.

      The other unintended consequence is the huge, (and I do mean huge) , rise in smuggled cigarettes, and in “chop chop”, (loose tobacco often grown locally). Its actually hilarious to watch the tobacco control nutters denying that this is happening, when even in my very small and remote town, has a large black market for tobacco products, and an observation of smokers here would suggest that at least 30-40 % of smokers are utilising this black market.

  10. Jude says:

    Daube has been caught, along with others in his little anti-smoker fake charity, “Healthways” rorting the taxpayer by having his nose firmly in the trough. This is why not much has been heard from him lately. His little pet “charity” has been shown to be corrupt, and he himself forced to resign, along with his greedy cronies.


    Puts his whinging about vapers into perspective. I for one will be quite glad if little Daube clones are put off getting into “public health”.

  11. garyk30 says:

    Vapers are no more than a sub-group of ex-smokers and ex-smokers are more likely to get lung cancer than smokers.

    Sadly, such news does not get any attention.

    11th International Lung Cancer
    Conference (ILCC)
    July 8 – 11, 2010; Rancho Palos Verdes, California
    Conference News

    ILCC Many Lung Cancer Patients Stopped Smoking Years Before Diagnosis
    Medscape Medical News, July 14, 2010
    July 14, 2010 (Los Angeles, California) — Much of what people think they know about smoking and lung cancer might be wrong, according to findings presented here at the 11th International Lung Cancer Conference.

    This is how the data works out.

    1. 23% of the lung cancers were in never-smokers

    2. 11.3% of the lung cancers were in current smokers

    3. 65.6% of the lung cancers were in ex-smokers

    NOTE: GK
    Never smokers are twice as likely as current smokers to get lung cancer.

    Ex-smokers are 6 times as likely as current smokers to get lung cancer.

    • garyk30 says:

      Due to difference in numbers, first line of ‘note’ should read like this;
      Compared to never-smokers, current smokers are only 1.4 times more likely to get lung cancer.

      A RR of 1.4 shows that a smoker’s lung cancer has a probability of 71% of not being caused by smoking.

    • nisakiman says:

      Gary, do you have a link to those figures? According to everything we read, smokers are five times more likely (or whatever the figure is) to get LC than non-smokers, yet going by your figures there, never-smokers are twice as likely to get LC. Where do those numbers come from?

  12. dobbsy dobbs says:

    The health lobby deserve all they get…they and their tedious campaign have pushed smokers to the outside if polite society, made them modern day lepers. They deserve all they get.

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      The heLLTH Lobby will get plenty of nooses at the next Nuremberg trials we will hold in Brussels where they can hang all the EU leaders too………..who created all this shit to start with and not just anti smoking bs……..

  13. harleyrider1978 says:


  14. harleyrider1978 says:
  15. beobrigitte says:

    When I first read:
    Prominent health activist Professor Mike Daube……..
    my reaction was: ‘WHO???? Must be some health-nut no-one wants to know….’

    The Curtin University professor, who chaired the committee that recommended plain packaging of tobacco in Australia, says the vitriol dished out by nameless attackers could have a chilling effect on individuals’ readiness to speak out about the health impacts of alcohol, tobacco and other social ills.

    “I do think it’s getting to the stage where people in public health are at risk of being intimidated out of it,” Professor Daube told Medical Observer.

    What an entertainer this … erm…. health nut is!!! It is these ?with inferiority complex riddled individuals who compensate by pretending to become a ‘super hero’ to ‘save-the-world’ seeing a chance to become a somebody?
    Hey, we no longer are subjected to the next Miss World proudly announce: “I-want-to-make-the-world-a-better-place”………..

    I, personally, hold this Daube guy (and all the other scared-of-life health nuts) responsible for REAL deaths. I will NEVER forgive them for the funeral I had to attend – 3 day before the youngsters 27th birthday!!! Or the three others who thought of life as nothing good and ended their life 13 month before the funeral just mentioned.
    And, when you, as an old person and smoker of 46 years, who watched all of them growing up, can’t even light up a cigarette at the wake because “smoking kills”, you lose your temper.
    I often think back of me at that age: I had A LIFE!!!! I had plans, I socialized, I travelled, I worked, I went out, be it pub, theatre, gigs or even opera and ballet. Health worries? We were far too busy having a life – and still ARE!!!! (Just not going out anymore)
    And we’re still here. Apart from those who died in car crashes and one of a ruptured brain aneurysm.

    I do think, Harley is a bit harsh, but I do want to see these health nuts serving time!!! The fallout of 4 dead “kids” in 14 month is huge!!! Health nuts, what are you going to do about it? Bully another “fat” person into buying dubious weight loss stuff from the internet by vaccinating them with “I-can’t-help-myself-it’s-an-addiction”?

    I really have learned to see people like this Daube as a cancer that spreads and destroys communities everywhere. Fact is, we all die. Shouldn’t we live before we do so?

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      BEO Im not harsh they made you a criminal and then forced you and others into positions of harm…………go read the graveyard posts……….then tell me Im harsh!

No need to log in

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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.