Abolish Them All

Good piece by Dick Puddlecote on the Wild West of Public Health:

They squeal that industry is not transparent but considering groups like ASH have been in receipt of taxpayer funding for over 40 years, why are they excluded from Freedom of Information legislation? Seeing as they take billions of our taxes and play fast and loose with the truth regularly, who regulates their output? Why can’t we request to see minutes of their meetings? Who do you complain to when they lie? There’s the Charity Commission but they only look into compliance, who looks at whether their pronouncements are factually correct instead of the customary blizzard of half-truths and cleverly-worded mendacity?

ASH, and others like them, bang on about organisations like the IEA not disclosing their funders but they are voluntary donations from businesses and private individuals, ASH – and hundreds of other NGO which have followed their lead – uses OUR money and uses it to manipulate the government that handed it to them, but they are effectively accountable to no-one. They are also immune to the usual rules of competitive tendering for public contracts.

In short, the entire ‘public health’ movement – both nationally and globally – is a gargantuan deceitful tax-sucking gravy train. Firing off wilfully mendacious research, reports and studies on a whim; entirely unaccountable; and completely unregulated.

The whole lot should be closed down. ASH is a cancer on society. And it’s part of a global cancer of non-governmental or supranational organisations that has been proliferating across the world for the past half century or more.

The World Health Organisation (WHO) is one such supranational organisation,  and is itself an agency of the United Nations, which is another supranational organisation. The WHO used to concern itself with communicable diseases like malaria. Now it seems to be unable to cope with epidemics like the Ebola and Zika epidemics, and instead concentrates its efforts against the likes of an entirely imaginary smoking ‘epidemic’, while holding secret conferences in places like Moscow or New Delhi. What started out as something perfectly reasonable has become completely deranged.

I don’t know why this has happened. Perhaps it’s simply that these sorts of organisations attract the sort of people who are less interested in medicine (or whatever the organisation is concerned with) than they are in climbing to the top of organisations. Over several decades these highly paid bureaucrats gradually lose touch with the original purpose of the organisation, and start inventing their own new purposes (e.g. stamping out smoking). Out of this Tobacco Control, ASH, and all the rest of them have gradually evolved and mutated into the cancers now metastasising across the world.

Hopefully Donald Trump will start taking an axe to some of these organisations.

In a sign of what’s to come for the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), President Donald Trump told pharmaceutical company CEOs Tuesday that his administration will be “cutting regulations at a level no one has ever seen before.”

Between 75% and 80% of all FDA regulations will be eliminated…


This is not a drill – a bill has been drafted to “completely abolish” the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Penned by freshman GOP lawmaker Matt Gaetz of Florida, the bill will aim to entirely dismantle the EPA – the organization responsible for mitigating against pollution, dangerous climate change, and the destruction of America’s public land – before the end of 2018.

Although it is currently being written up and has not even reached the House of Representatives, an email obtained by the Huffington Post reveals that Gaetz is looking for co-sponsors for the bill. In it, he claims that “the American people are drowning in rules and regulations promulgated by unelected bureaucrats, and the Environmental Protection Agency has become an extraordinary offender.”

In addition:

Thanks to Donald Trump, the United Nations may now be facing its greatest existential crisis. According to some reports, there exist draft executive orders reducing US funding to the United Nations and other international organizations by at least 40% overall. That would reshape the organization, whose aim is world peace and international cooperation, unalterably.

These are all just rumours at the moment. Any attempt to slash the funding of any of these organisations would undoubtedly evoke howls and screams of protest, and comparisons of Trump with Genghis Khan/Hitler/Antichrist.

But that seems to happen when Trump does anything at all, as far as I can see. So why not just abolish them all?

About Frank Davis

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

29 Responses to Abolish Them All

  1. Timothy Goodacre says:

    Exactly right Frank. ASH,PHE etc should all have their public funding withdrawn. It should be up to the individual to make their own lifestyle choices without being constantly lectured. Pub landlords should be free to make their own decision as to whether to allow smoking in their pub. Of course we all know that smoking pubs would be packed and vibrant and no smoking pubs empty and cheerless.

    • nisakiman says:

      Of course we all know that smoking pubs would be packed and vibrant and no smoking pubs empty and cheerless.

      And of course TC knew that as well as we did, which is why they insisted on a blanket ban, with no exceptions. Had they allowed exceptions, the ban would have been seen by all to be an utter failure, and that possibility could not be countenanced in any way, shape or form.

      • Joe L. says:

        Absolutely. It had to be all or nothing. I also believe that is also why we have seen outdoor bans tacked on in areas of the U.S., as well. The bars who already had outdoor areas were enjoying the patronage of smokers, while bars that did not have the space or money to construct them suffered.

  2. Clicky says:

  3. Vlad says:

    BS story of the day:
    Dr Antoine Snijders, who was involved in the research, said: ‘Third-hand smoke is an underappreciated risk factor in health.’ It’s clear that more and bigger studies are needed, particularly in humans, so we can support policy decisions on third hand smoke.’
    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-4187988/Why-REALLY-shouldn-t-smoke-indoors.html

    • Vlad says:

      This is just so mind-blowing. Expecting a cancer cure from these people? It’s as likely as worshiping the sun and the moon and asking them for a cure. One can hardly get more removed from science in the 21st century than this type of ‘research’. Policy decisions? How about demolishing all buildings and installing surveillance in the new ones. If someone lights up, send the cops to arrest and put him/her in a smoke-free jail.

    • Rhys says:

      I love part of that headline:

      ‘In a study on mice, exposure was found to make rats weigh significantly less’

      It crosses to different species that weren’t part of the experiment. Be afraid.

      • nisakiman says:

        All part of the day’s work in Tobacco Control.

      • Tony says:

        We’ve heard from them before about the magical properties of tobacco smoke. Passing through solid walls and time travel to name but two.

        But now they’ve found that effects due to residual tobacco smoke can jump from exposed animals of one species to non-exposed ones of an entirely different species. Wow!

        This post-modern science is truly wondrous to behold.

      • Oh Rhys! LOL! **WONDERFUL** catch! That flew RIGHT by me!!! Beautiful!

        And thirdhand smoke is worse than secondhand which in turn is worse than first hand. Heh, here’s what I said in TNacht about it:

        “So thirdhand smoke is now claimed to be more damaging (at least “in some cases”) than firsthand smoke??? By the time we get to fifthhand smoke, thermonuclear weapons will have been rendered obsolete! As a statement to the media by a professional, and supposedly responsible, scientific researcher, such wording is simply unforgiveable. “The constituents of” may be an important qualifier to scientists, but as a media statement to the general public, the message was clear: a deadly threat from invisible traces left behind by smokers can be more dangerous than actually smoking.”

        and a note there about how study authors in UCLA’s 2011 study by a Dr. Rehan on THS made sure reporters were too intimidated/confused to challenge their nonsense:

        “None of that information was given in the news stories. Almost none of it was provided in the study abstract. The little that was provided in the abstract would have been quickly overlooked by most reporters after they were hit with the following opening line:

        ‘The underlying mechanisms and effector molecules involved in mediating in utero smoke exposure-induced effects on the developing lung…’

        If any reporters did manage to stay awake after that, rather than simply heading straight to the press release with all its juicy quotes (and no hint of rodents), they might have noticed the one mention of the word “rat” in the following excerpt:

        ‘Fetal rat lung explants were exposed to nicotine, 1-(N-methyl-N-nitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridinyl)-4-butanal (NNA), or 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanone (NNK).’

        Even that explicit mention would have been blasted out of almost anyone’s consciousness once they hit the phrase

        ‘breakdown of alveolar epithelialmesenchymal cross-talk, reflecting lipofibroblast-to-myofibroblast transdifferentiation.’

        No one, anywhere in the world, reading any news stories that I was able to find in English, would have had the slightest clue that this study had done anything other than observe the horrible effects of thirdhand smoke exposure on human children who had suffered from their mothers’ unwise visits to those George Washington tourist traps.

        It’s a very similar technique as that applied in Minnesota after I ripped apart an economic study where they tried to show the smoking ban hadn’t hurt bar business. Two years later, operating under the same grant, the researchers came out with a new study that they figured would be harder to attack. Why would it be harder? Because it used language like this:

        The processes of the Box–Jenkins ARIMA (p,d,q)(P,D,Q) model is described for a general seasonal ARIMA model for outcome variable yt as [follows]: where p is the order of the auto-regressive process, d is the degree of nonseasonal differencing, q is the order of the moving-average process, P is the order of the seasonal auto-regressive process, D is the degree of seasonal differencing, Q is the order of the seasonal moving-average process, s is the seasonal span, phi1 to phip are the seasonal auto-regressive parameters, phi1 to phiq are regular autoregressive parameters, theta1 to thetaQ are the seasonal moving-average parameters, theta1 to thetap are regular moving-average parameters, mut is a random (white-noise) error component, alpha is a constant, and B is the backshift operator such that B(zt) equals zt–1. To reduce hetereoscedasticity, we transformed each series taking the natural logarithms. … The dependent and independent variables are log transformed, the exponentiated parameter estimate … [etc.]

        Amazingly enough I was actually able to find a glaring problem in the midst of all that nonsense in the study and wrote to the study author about it. Their response was to tell me to go read a statistics textbook and a refusal to allow me to quote their personal email to me in my book! Seriously!

        – MJM

    • nisakiman says:

      Obviously the crucial part of his statement is:

      “It’s clear that more and bigger studies are needed…”

      These people make a fat living from the anti-smoking bandwagon. It’s no wonder they’re so keen to suppress any debate.

  4. Rose says:

    At last Britain is pushing the WHO to reform. It’s sorely needed

    “This year marks the end of an era for the World Health Organisation: its director-general for a decade, Margaret Chan, is stepping down. But, just as the shortlist of figures to replace her was reduced to a final three, the organisation was dealt a blow — with a report from the British government suggesting that half of Britain’s voluntary funding could be withheld if a reform programme is not drawn up in the next three months.”

    Looks like those champagne and caviar fuelled anti-tobacco junkets might be off.

    ‘Broke’ WHO host £1.6million caviar-fuelled beano

  5. Smoking Lamp says:

    The pseudo-charities should be cit off from public funds. ASH, and its ilk are political action groups. They lobby with public funds and disseminate propaganda. Tobacco control should be removed from the WHO mandate and the FCTC abolished.

    • Yvonne says:

      Trouble is that they often get funds from charities such as CRUK who get funds in turn from people who have lost loved ones to Cancer taking part in marathons and other fundraisers. Then there is the ubiquitous funding through corporate supported charities. , You may still find yourself innocently funding these organisations through a simple purchase or your household fuel supplier, for example Tesco supports BHF and Scottish Power supports CRUK who in turn contribute to ASH.

  6. prog says:

    A shocking statement was made by a United Nations official Christiana Figueres at a news conference in Brussels.

    Figueres admitted that the Global Warming conspiracy set by the U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, of which she is the executive secretary, has a goal not of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity, but to destroy capitalism. She said very casually:

    “This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution.”

    She even restated that goal ensuring it was not a mistake:

    “This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model for the first time in human history.”
    I was invited to a major political dinner in Washington with the former Chairman of Temple University since I advised the University with respect to its portfolio. We were seated at one of those round tables with ten people. Because we were invited from a university, they placed us with the heads of the various environmental groups. They assumed they were in friendly company and began speaking freely. Dick Fox, my friend, began to lead them on to get the truth behind their movement. Lo and behold, they too admitted it was not about the environment, but to reduce population growth. Dick then asked them, “Whose grandchild are we trying to prevent from being born? Your’s or mine?

    All of these movements seem to have a hidden agenda that the press helps to misrepresent all the time. One must wonder, at what point will the press realize they are destroying their own future?

    Investors.com reminds Figueres that the only economic model in the last 150 years that has ever worked at all is capitalism. The evidence is prima facie: From a feudal order that lasted a thousand years, produced zero growth and kept workdays long and lifespans short, the countries that have embraced free-market capitalism have enjoyed a system in which output has increased 70-fold, work days have been halved and lifespans doubled.


    • ” a system in which output has increased 70-fold, work days have been halved and lifespans doubled.”

      Hard to argue with figures like those!

      Heh, and as for this: ” they placed us with the heads of the various environmental groups. They assumed they were in friendly company and began speaking freely. ” I had a similar experience in 2000 when I went to NYC to testify at a city council ban hearing. Because I had my hair down around my shoulders and was dressed like a typical hippie a pre-meeting group of Antis assumed I had to be one of them and included me in their group. LOL! When things started up and I went to join Audrey Silk et al from our supporters the Antis were casting death-looks at me from across the aisle!


  7. slugbop007 says:

    Yesterday I read a Montréal newspaper called 24H. It’s like a Reader’s Digest, freely distributed all over the city. There was an ad for a Laser Therapy company called TherapieLaser.ca. The ad promised that for as little as $139 dollars their therapy methods would help anyone to quit drinking, smoking, vaping or drugtaking. They offer a1 year guarantee. At the bottom it read ‘certain conditions apply’. Several pages later I read an article about the President of the Philippines. Unlike the laser therapy company in Montreal and elsewhere in Canada, his therapy treatment is certain death with an unlimited guarantee and no fine print at the bottom of the page.


  8. waltc says:

    Late buckshot:

    “Third-hand smoke is an underappreciated risk factor in health.’ It’s clear that more and bigger studies are needed, particularly in humans, so we can support policy decisions on third hand smoke.’” IOW they admit that the more-and-bigger studies will be designed to bolster a predictably pre-determined policy agenda.

    The govt funded NGOs aren’t just turning around and lobbying/influencing the govt, the govt funds them specifically to provide ammo for the govt’s pre-determined policy agenda.

    The game is every whichway rigged.

    Finally, the main goal of all bureaucracies is self-perpetuation. That’s why The Problem they’re ostensibly tasked with solving can never be allowed to be solved. Another nit must always be found to be stomped.

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.