Every Breath We Take

It’s my custom, when I eat, to watch a YouTube or BBC iplayer documentary. So as I was forking down some fish fingers, croquettes, and baked beans this evening, I found myself watching Every Breath We Take with Gabrielle Walker  (2014) on BBC iplayer.

It was a very interesting programme describing how chemists in the late 18th century had begun to understand that the air in the atmosphere wasn’t a single substance, but was in fact a mixture of different gases, including oxygen, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, and water vapour, among others.

I was expecting the mention of carbon dioxide to be accompanied by a reminder that this is the killer gas which is the cause of the runaway global warming which will most likely end all life on Earth in a few decades time. And I was a little distressed when no such reminder was forthcoming.

But the reason soon became evident, when it emerged that one of the other gases in the atmosphere was far more dangerous: oxygen.

All the cells in our bodies burn fuel from food with oxygen to produce the energy that warms us and powers our every activity. But this combustion process releases very powerful and destructive particles: free radicals. Gabrielle Walker:

“Flames are full of free radicals. So are our bodies every time we breathe. They tear through our molecules and cells. And over time the damage accumulates. And in the end that damage is the reason why we all grow old and die. With every breath we take, oxygen is slowly killing us.”

I was so shocked that the fish finger fell off my fork!

Nobody had ever told me this before. It doesn’t need cigarette smoke to kill people: pure air does it too.

Gabrielle Walker went on to immediately say:

“But I still think it’s worth it.”

But isn’t that exactly the same sort of bleat that’s made by cigarette smokers? They know their habit is killing them, but they “still think it’s worth it.”

Clearly Gabrielle Walker is addicted to oxygen. Yet even though she knows it’s killing her, she still thinks it’s “worth it” to be able to ‘live her life’! Simply to be able to run, jump, talk and think for a few short years, she’ll gladly inhale this deadly gas. But is it really worth it? I think not.

I hope that when all the carbon dioxide has been removed from the atmosphere, they’ll start removing the oxygen too.

Because I for one would very much like to be able to breathe oxygen-free air for once in my life, just like I now breathe smoke-free air.

Advertisements

About Frank Davis

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

31 Responses to Every Breath We Take

  1. waltc says:

    Mostly OT: What’s interesting here is that the editorial correctly defends the rights if the climate “deniers” –corporate or other–to deny, agrees that “science is never settled” but then at least tacitly agrees that tobacco “science” IS settled and that tobacco companies therefore racketeered. Either that, or the paper doesn’t see that its analogy works –or should work– both ways.
    http://www.detroitnews.com/story/opinion/editorials/2016/03/19/climate-change-denial-trials/82033894/

    • Joe L. says:

      Walt, this sentiment seems to be quite prevalent among climate change deniers that I have encountered. Seemingly open-minded people who adamantly believe that the foundations of science are being abused to promote climate change boldly refuse to even entertain the idea that tobacco has suffered the same consequences of “settled science.” The hypocrisy is mind-boggling.

  2. The Blocked Dwarf says:

    As St.Sting might have warbled: ♫ Every breath you take, every molecular bond you break ♫

    It is one of the Lord’s top ten ‘Jokes On Humanity’, the very thing that gives us life also kills us.

  3. Pingback: Tracheotomy Tears – Library of Libraries

  4. Clicky says:

  5. Rose says:

    Crumbs

    Hundreds of Scots pubs take a hit after new figures reveal closure of over 1000 bars since smoking ban
    21 Mar 2016

    HUNDREDS of Scottish pubs have closed in the decade since the smoking ban was introduced.

    “But new figures released by the Campaign for Real Ale (Camra) show that in the last ten years 1,236 pubs ceased trading.

    There were 5,794 licensed premises in Scotland at the end of 2005 just weeks before the smoking ban was introduced in March 26, 2006. Today, just 4,558 pubs remain open.

    Ray Turpie, Camra’s Scotland and Northern Ireland director, expressed concern that pub closures could impact on communities.

    He told The Scottish Daily Express: “Over the last 10 years, there have been quite a lot of outlets lost. It is a crisis the whole of the UK is experiencing and there are a lot factors coming into play.

    “The anti-drinking lobby is now more active and there are more health guidelines from the Government, which are really just plucked out of the air to be honest.

    “They are just against people going out and enjoying themselves, really.

    There are certain aspects of wellbeing in going to the pub, especially for older people on their own. It’s a good place to go to engage with people.

    “It might be the only people they see all day, so there’s a social aspect – the promotion of wellbeing – and that contributes to mental health.”
    http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/hundreds-scots-pubs-take-hit-7599615#AhTyqe8pbh3GZbcM.97

    Previously, in England

    Millions will return to the Pub after Smoking Ban – 20/02/07

    “A new survey by the Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA) has revealed the public’s attitudes to the forthcoming smoking ban in England and Wales later in 2007.

    The sample survey’s key findings indicated that:

    6.2 million people (17% of all adults in England and Wales) who visit pubs regularly are likely to visit pubs more often. Of that group 97% were non-smokers.

    “840,000 people who currently never go to a pub said they will after the smoking ban. Added to the figure for people who currently visit regularly that is a total of 7,040,000 people who will visit pubs more often.
    http://web.archive.org/web/20070313005142/http://www.camra.org.uk/page.aspx?o=233601

    I wonder who told them that?

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Like always it was just PURE LIES AND PROPAGANDA FOR THE MOVEMENT.
      I doubt they polled anyone except maybe themselves.

    • garyk30 says:

      That is a total of 7,040,000 people who will visit pubs more often

      Well, they never showed, did they.

    • beobrigitte says:

      “840,000 people who currently never go to a pub said they will after the smoking ban. Added to the figure for people who currently visit regularly that is a total of 7,040,000 people who will visit pubs more often.

      My guess is that even the 840,000 people did not bother to go to the pub after the smoking ban because it was empty and boring there?

  6. harleyrider1978 says:

    ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL

    Smoking ban session draws little response

    Only person to show up speaks against banning smoking outdoors downtown

    http://www.dailytidings.com/news/20160318/smoking-ban-session-draws-little-response#ReaderReaction

    Andrew Kubik

    Daniel Hammond: I’m the guy quoted in the first sentence of the first paragraph of the article. I had also stated during the meeting (not included in article)that I fully support indoor bans because they serve a legitimate public health purpose. I simply feel that outdoor bans go too far and, in Ashland’s case, could potentially interfere with other more pressing enforcement matters. You’re quite a writer. Next time there’s a meeting, try showing up.

    Daniel Hammond

    @Andrew Kubik legitimate public health purpose

    There are no legistimate public health purposes if there was OSHA would have passed smoking restrictions indoors decades ago.

    Your own human breath is whats a health risk to others due to over 3500 exhaled chemicals almost all the same as tobacco smokes yet containes contangion ie bacterial and viral components.

    You want an indoor ban on something it sure isn’t smoking as it actually was once used to disinfect indoor areas the same as ecig juice was FDA and EPA approved for indoor disinfecting as propylene glycol in 1958 for use in hospitals.

    Human indoor breathing is the health problem not the smoking

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      I think the guy and the city figured out smoking bans are a dead issue anymore drawing only one person who was likely a plant from the local smokefree coalition and changed his testimony around after nobody showed up……..

  7. garyk30 says:

    Well, this explains why everyone that drinks water eventually dies.

    By weight, water(H2O) is 90% oxygen.

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      The internal corrosive effects of oxygen,I guess Woody Harrelsons OXYGEN BARS can now be sued for causing death and disease.

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        Latest fad offers breath of fresh air O2 bar gives patrons a dose of new trend: therapeutic oxygen

        Gene Triplett • Published: September 19, 1999 •
        http://newsok.com/article/2668056

        NEED a little breathing room? Julie Adams has it. It seats two.

        She calls it the O2 Bar. It’s dimly lit, with Bengal tiger and panda photos adorning the dark gray walls, an illuminated aquarium bubbling soothingly in the corner, and muted light jazz oozing from the FM on the shelf.

        Nice atmosphere. And the house specialty: fresh air. All you can breathe in about 15 to 20 minutes.

        It’s a real pick-me-up, to hear proponents of this new trend tell it. Famous athletes and a good portion of the former cast of “Cheers” swear by it.

        And what seemed at first to be another passing fad among the health-conscious hip of California and New York has gradually spread inland.

        “I didn’t like the thought that there was not one in Oklahoma,” says Adams, the petite and personable proprietor of Two Tens Body Spa at 1010 NW 63, which houses the O2 Bar.

        “Before, you had to go to Las Vegas or Colorado” to find a commercial oxygen bar, Adams says.

        A licensed endermologie technician who’s worked in nursing for 12 years, Adams opened the spa with her mother, Carolyn, in February. She makes the proud claim to be the first in Oklahoma to practice endermologie – a massagelike process to reduce cellulite -outside a physician’s office setting. She offers facials, manicures and pedicures as well.

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          O2 – Woody Harrelson’s oxygen bar (photo) – Seeing Stars

          http://www.seeing-stars.com/ImagePages/O2Photo.shtml

          A photo O2, and oygen bar and restaurant in West Hollywood, owned by Woody Harrelson.

          an Oxygen Bar – Seeing Stars

          http://www.seeing-stars.com/Dine/O2.shtml

          Where the Stars Dine: a look at O2, an oxygen bar in Hollywood, opened by actor Woody Harrelson.

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          Room to Breathe : Oxygen Bars Would Serve Customers a …

          articles.latimes.com/1997-05-17/news/mn-59768_1_oxygen-bar

          May 17, 1997 – Room to Breathe : Oxygen Bars Would Serve Customers a Shot of Clean Air … says she will open two, and actor Woody Harrelson plans a third. “It gives you a nice little buzz,” said Harrelson, whose oxygen bar is expected to …

          TIL Oxygen bars exist and Woody Harrelson once briefly …

          https://www.reddit.com/…/til_oxygen_bars_exist_and_woody_harrelson…

          Mar 10, 2013 – TIL Oxygen bars exist and Woody Harrelson once briefly owned one (articles.latimes.com). submitted 3 years ago by thafunkeehomosapien.

      • beobrigitte says:

        The internal corrosive effects of oxygen,I guess Woody Harrelsons OXYGEN BARS can now be sued for causing death and disease.

        OXYGEN BARS???? *Giggle* Can we please have the bars with ashtrays on the table back? I mean, if the free radicals make us old, a polluted atmosphere must keep us young? (What have the environmentalists to say to that?)

        Joking aside; I have a question: Since we (our bodies) do produce and NEED free radicals (something that is only mentioned in literature but never gone into great depth)
        HOW did humanity survive without the whacky health “improvements” we are indoctrinated with?

  8. harleyrider1978 says:

    “In his comment on the formaldehyde issues, Schnell displayed his expertise and his knowledge of EPA misconduct as a view from the belly of the beast. He outlined the science misconduct directed by the EPA and its agency allies, supported by fanatic environmentalists inside and outside the government.”

    Ps;

    About Frank Schnell
    Dr. Frank Schnell, PhD, is a retired toxicologist for the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, part of the CDC, in Atlanta, Georgia, and is a member of the American Council on Science and Health Scientific Advisory Panel.

    http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/03/a_word_from_a_toxicologist_who_defected_from_the_federal_junk_science_army.html?source=acsh.org

  9. harleyrider1978 says:

    March 15, 2016

    A word from a toxicologist who defected from the federal junk science army

    Last week, I discovered Frank Schnell when he wrote a comment on formaldehyde and said it was not a cancer-causing agent and that the EPA had lied about it. His comment was on an American Council on Science and Health posting by Josh Bloom, Ph.D. (organic chemistry), with a 20-year history of pharmaceutical research. Bloom busied himself in the post eviscerating a scare-monger on formaldehyde from the enviro-fanatic group National Resources Defense Council, and did a good job, but in the third or fourth comment, I saw a gem – a brief but insightful discussion by a man who described himself as a Ph.D. toxicologist retired from the Communicable Disease Center – Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) for 20 years.

    Katy, bar the door.

    In his comment on the formaldehyde issues, Schnell displayed his expertise and his knowledge of EPA misconduct as a view from the belly of the beast. He outlined the science misconduct directed by the EPA and its agency allies, supported by fanatic environmentalists inside and outside the government.

    I thought, This is like Whittaker Chambers exposing the ugly underbelly of commie infiltration of the American government, because not only was Schnell a Ph.D. toxicologist, but he knew how to explain how the EPA and other federal agencies promulgate junk science. I told Bloom I needed more from this man, and he asked for a more fleshed out discussion from Dr. Schnell on EPA misconduct. I was not disappointed.

    I have a modest archive here at American Thinker that includes essays on EPA misconduct. Steve Milloy, proprietor of JunkScience.com, and I have written some articles on the same subject together for AT. We focus on EPA cheating on air pollution research but also human experimentation with air pollutants.

    All of our efforts are intended to show that EPA sponsors scare-monger scientists who promote the idea that small particle and other air pollutants are deadly when they are not. We have written a number of essays about how the EPA cheats on science and creates false scares. Here is a guy who can confirm the nature of the deceit that we saw and understood from the outside, and he knows the how and why and even the motives. What a find.

    Read this wonderful man’s explanation in multiple articles that I admire and applaud from his ACSH archive, but also look at his archive at Science 2.0. For those who are interested in the politics, he is lucid; for those who are interested in getting into the scientific weeds, he is plenty smart and easy to understand.

    Dr. Schnell is a man after my heart. He explains the way junk scientists can make anything a toxin or a carcinogen if they try hard enough, and he even gets into the unfortunately little known area of hormesis, where another colleague, Dr. Ed Calabrese, reigns supreme. Dr. Schnell is up to speed on hormesis and discusses the importance of dose and how all chemicals, toxics, pharmaceuticals, pesticides, herbicides, have to be evaluated based on effects at various dosages or exposures and how sometimes even notorious toxins can be beneficial at low ranges. At excess exposures above threshold for toxicity, most substances – even benign ones, and certainly toxic ones – can overwhelm a host and cause toxic effects or death.

    As a physician, I always remind people that there is a sweet spot for all therapeutic drugs. Well, Schnell talks about sweet spots and more.

    He fought the good fight for scientific integrity in the government but was harassed and marginalized by the agency leftists. See why and how they lie and cheat to scare the public.

    I think that what he has to tell us is incredibly important – beginning with his first sentence in the essay he wrote as a bounce off his comment about the formaldehyde article by Bloom.

    Dr. Schnell says, “In the last 15 years, EPA has invented three bogus human carcinogens (chemicals that cause cancer), all for political reasons or with a political not a scientific basis. The Carcinogens invented were, dioxin, because of the anti-Vietnam War crusade, formaldehyde because of the hysterical reaction to the ‘toxic’ trailer homes for the refugees of Katrina, and the last one, trichloroethylene, because of the noise about the contamination of water at Camp Lejeune.”

    None of these three chemicals passed any real scientific tests for proof of carcinogenicity, but politics is more important than science at the EPA. The complaints and scares were typical of these enviro-scares and the wheelchair brigades that form, encouraged by lawyers and enviro-advocates. Gulf War Syndrome was another example of a politically motivated toxin story.

    Dr. Schnell explains in his writings how an agency can highjack science for political purposes. In this post-modern political environment, where the truth is not important and political points made are, is that such a surprise?

    Please read the insightful and eloquent explanations of Dr. Schnell that deal with not only the scandals mentioned above, but how EPA research in epidemiology (study of populations) and toxicology (study of harmful substances) is poisoned by politics.

    Dr. Schnell is an important find, and I sure would like to see what he could do to the EPA crackpots and their supporters in Congress at a few hearings on the Hill before a House or Senate committee chaired by someone with good sense who is well prepared and doesn’t allow the deceit and obfuscation we see too often from the agency apparatchiks.

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Last week, I discovered Frank Schnell when he wrote a comment on formaldehyde and said it was not a cancer-causing agent and that the EPA had lied about it.

      Don’t fret over list of cancer ‘risks’

      “We are being bombarded” with messages about the dangers posed by common things in our lives, yet most exposures “are not at a level that are going to cause cancer,” said Dr. Len Lichtenfeld, the American Cancer Society’s deputy chief medical officer.
      Linda Birnbaum agrees. She is a toxicologist who heads the government agency that just declared styrene, an ingredient in fiberglass boats and Styrofoam, a likely cancer risk.
      “Let me put your mind at ease right away about Styrofoam,” she said. Levels of styrene that leach from food containers “are hundreds if not thousands of times lower than have occurred in the occupational setting,” where the chemical in vapor form poses a possible risk to workers.
      Carcinogens are things that can cause cancer, but that label doesn’t mean that they will or that they pose a risk to anyone exposed to them in any amount at any time.

      Now,Im glad to see the ACS admitting to the dose response relationship finally!

      So now we understand why the following is factual:

      are hundreds if not thousands of times lower than have occurred in the occupational setting,” where the chemical in vapor form poses a possible risk to workers.

      Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, Vol. 14, No. 1. (August 1991), pp. 88-105.

      ETS between 10,000- and 100,000-fold less than estimated average MSS-RSP doses for active smokers

      OSHA the components in tobacco smoke are diluted below existing Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS.) as referenced in the Air Contaminant Standard (29 CFR 1910.1000)…It would be very rare to find a workplace with so much smoking that any individual PEL would be exceeded

      JUST AMAZING ISNT IT

  10. beobrigitte says:

    All the cells in our bodies burn fuel from food with oxygen to produce the energy that warms us and powers our every activity. But this combustion process releases very powerful and destructive particles: free radicals. Gabrielle Walker:

    “Flames are full of free radicals. So are our bodies every time we breathe. They tear through our molecules and cells. And over time the damage accumulates. And in the end that damage is the reason why we all grow old and die. With every breath we take, oxygen is slowly killing us.”

    Oh deary me. Mrs/Miss/Ms Walker appears to be the prototype of a produced produced by health scare scaremongering …..
    Growing old is NATURAL. None of us can avoid it. Mrs/Miss/Ms Walker might wish to start holding her breath and never grow old.

    Gabrielle Walker went on to immediately say:

    “But I still think it’s worth it.”

    But isn’t that exactly the same sort of bleat that’s made by cigarette smokers? They know their habit is killing them, but they “still think it’s worth it.”

    They KNOW their habit is killing them? No, we are being told, as we grow older and older, that our habit is killing us. And we are still here. Alive and kicking ( and told that we are soooooo healthy that we just want to work forever!!!).

    …but they “still think it’s worth it.”

    Of course! After all, we are still very much ALIVE.

    Thanks to the healthists and smoker haters this country has become incredibly boring and loneliness is on the increase. And, worse even, we know smoking hasn’t killed us old ones …..

    Of course the comfortable interaction with others in a group in a pub would make life worth living:
    …but they “still think it’s worth it.”

    • Rose says:

      Brigitte, isn’t that what antioxidants are all about?

      I always thought of it as a case of what you lose on the roundabouts you gain on the swings.

      “An antioxidant is a molecule that inhibits the oxidation of other molecules. Oxidation is a chemical reaction that can produce free radicals, leading to chain reactions that may damage cells. Antioxidants such as thiols or ascorbic acid (vitamin C) terminate these chain reactions.

      To balance the oxidative state, plants and animals maintain complex systems of overlapping antioxidants, such as glutathione and enzymes (e.g., catalase and superoxide dismutase) produced internally or vitamin C, vitamin A and vitamin E obtained by ingestion.”
      Wikipedia

      With every breath we take, oxygen is slowly killing us

      It’s that lying by omission that anti-tobacco do so well and ably demonstrated by Frank in todays post.

      Whatever you do, Frank whilst musing on gases, beware of the Phlogiston

      Come to think of it, thats one of the few tricks that TC seem to have missed, I wonder why.
      http://www.britannica.com/science/phlogiston

      • Frank Davis says:

        Every Breath We Take had a lot about phlogiston, which was something that was thought to be subtracted during combustion, instead of oxygen which was added, as was later found out by Lavoisier (who named it).

  11. Joe L. says:

    I hope that when all the carbon dioxide has been removed from the atmosphere, they’ll start removing the oxygen too.

    Or, just maybe the real goal is depopulation. Remove CO2 from the atmosphere, thereby increasing the oxygen concentration, thus increasing free radical production, expediting the aging process, decreasing lifespans.

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s