Next, Ban Gardening?

H/T Audrey Silk for this from theinertia.com, which seems to be a website devoted to unnecessary pastimes like surfing and white-water rafting:

Cigarettes are a global health epidemic. More than seven million people die per year from tobacco use, leading the World Health Organization to call the substance the world’s largest cause of preventable death.

By now smokers and non-smokers are well aware of the impacts of first-hand and second-hand smoke. But, in a recent study released Wednesday by the WHO, it turns out the tobacco industry also has a detrimental impact on the environment.

From crop to pack to ashtray (or in most cases the street or sidewalk), tobacco products are resource intensive, release a harmful amount of greenhouse gases, and result in between 430,000 and 860,000 tons of waste per year. That waste ultimately ends up in our oceans and waterways releasing known carcinogens into our environment.

But tobacco’s impact begins long before it’s even planted. According to the study, tobacco farmers must clear large swaths of forested land to make room for their crop. And after it’s harvested, wood is required for curing, and to create rolling papers and packaging. CNN estimates that 11.4 million metric tons are used annually, or 1 tree per 300 cigarettes. Tobacco, therefore, contributes significantly to deforestation which has been identified as a major source of CO2 emissions, and as a result climate change.

Plus, tobacco is often grown as a monocrop – meaning it’s not rotated with other crops – leaving the plants and soil vulnerable to pests and disease. As a result, tobacco farming uses large quantities of chemicals like pesticides and growth regulators, and the intensive use of fertilizers.

Dr. Armando Peruga, a consultant that previously coordinated the WHO Tobacco Free Initiative told CNN, “Tobacco also takes away a lot of nutrients from the soil and requires massive amounts of fertilizer, a process that leads to degradation of the land and desertification, with negative consequences for biodiversity and wildlife.”

Beyond the devastating impact of production on the environment, the WHO estimates that tobacco smoke contributed to thousands of metric tons of known carcinogens. “Toxic emissions include 3,000-6,000 metric tons of formaldehyde; 12,000–47,000 metric tons of nicotine; and the three major greenhouse gases found in tobacco smoke – carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxides,” explains the study.

The WHO argues that particularly with post-consumer waste, localities bear the brunt of the economic burden of managing and mitigating the problem. This, they suggest, should be shifted on to producers who have obfuscated tobacco’s impact on the environment over the years. The study also recommends countries tax tobacco products even more heavily than many of them do already – CNN reports that governments collect $270 billion annually in tobacco taxes.

The study concludes with a slightly ominous note. “Ultimately, every effort made will move us a step nearer to a world that recognizes tobacco as a serious problem for the entire planet,” the study reads. “And it is imperative that we act fast. The human, financial and environmental costs are simply too great for us not to.”

So even just growing tobacco is “a serious problem for the entire planet”.

I can’t help but think that if growing tobacco is a serious problem for the entire planet, growing more or less anything at all must be a “serious problem”.

What about all those farms in which they just grow flowers? Or lettuce? Or cress? Or celery? Or more or less anything you care to mention?

Audrey Silk seemed to think that the article was saying that tobacco was an unnecessary crop, and that people should only grow things that were necessary. I didn’t read that in the article above, but it may well be what they meant.

But if growing “unnecessary” plants should be stopped, then shouldn’t every single garden, filled with flowers and shrubs and trees be condemned? Shouldn’t gardening be banned? After all, gardeners use lots of fertilizers and herbicides and insecticides. And they also grow mono-crops. I don’t remember my Mum ever digging up her rose bushes and saying “This year we’re going to rotate, and grow mangoes instead.”

And in fact aren’t most forests – including the Amazon rainforest – sort of unnecessary as well.  Couldn’t they be replaced with useful potato fields?

It reminds me of attempts that were made to wipe out other “unnecessary” plants, like hemp or opium poppies. Now the fuckers want to wipe out tobacco as well. But surely “bad” tobacco and hemp and poppies must be just as integral to any ecosystem as “good” potatoes and wheat and rice and oak. After all, these plants evolved along with all the rest. 

Why are these people so fucking controlling?

Advertisements

About Frank Davis

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

45 Responses to Next, Ban Gardening?

  1. Why are these people so fucking controlling?
    No idea but if you ever find out please let me know. I’m guessing anal fixation and poor potty training played their part…

  2. Mark Jarratt, Canberra, Australia says:

    Controllers always need something to control, to produce feelings of power and righteousness. The endless crusade, aspiring to smoke free utopia by monomaniacs who ignore any facts, evidence or logic refuting their preconceived biases.

  3. Andi says:

    I love for them to explain why any farmer would be stupid enough to grow tobacco as a monocrop, resulting in vast expenditure on pesticides and fertilizer and ultimately leading to degradation and desertification of his own f**king land.

    • Good point Andi, bloody good point.

    • Rose says:

      They are going back to the 1600’s for that one.

      Tobacco: Colonial Cultivation Methods

      “One third of the year was consumed from the time the tobacco seed was planted until the cured leaves were prized (pressed) into hogshead barrels. However, since tobacco grew best in previously uncultivated soils, land-clearing often took up most of the rest of the year.”

      “The need for fertile soil on which to grow the year’s crop required that the planter own large tracts of land, which had to be arduously cleared and prepared as field. Although the tobacco’s depleting effect on the soil was at first considered an asset, all too soon the planters were left with land which was virtually useless for anything but grazing and which would take many years to regain its lost fertility.”
      https://www.nps.gov/jame/learn/historyculture/tobacco-colonial-cultivation-methods.htm

      When I decided to grow tobacco plants in my garden to see this fabulous beast first hand, I was warned by several people that tobacco would deplete my land, as if it was some kind race memory.

      So that was the first thing I tested and grew tobacco on the same patch in the border for three years without detriment to the surrounding plants, because being a modern gardener I have unlimited access to neatly packed bags of well-rotted manure from the garden centre, which the early tobacco farmers didn’t.

      Tobacco is not nearly as greedy a feeder as a pumpkin, for instance.

      The 2007 flower border with mixed planting, using virginian tobacco as a back of the border subject.

      Clicky, could you oblige me?
      I have no idea how to post the image.
      https://web.archive.org/web/20130625003241/http://www.forces.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=363&t=1535 top of the page

        • Rose says:

          Thank you.

        • Pat Nurse says:

          That’s how I do it Rose. Planting in beds also stops slugs and catterpillars if you plant it alongside bedding plants they do not like to eat. Of course what the smokerphobics say about tobacco plants depleting the soil is yet another lie. They want control of the plant for pharmaceutical use only. This is part of the endgame. I expect if they grow it, the bullshit they spout does not apply. A bit like they say nicotine is addictive but not when given to children in school in either gum or patches.

        • beobrigitte says:

          Referring to

          What a majestic plant tobacco is – and thanks for the tip planting tobacco at the border!

          Tobacco is not nearly as greedy a feeder as a pumpkin, for instance.
          I am just about getting to know that….. The area of last year’s pumpkin growth shows meager bean growth this year.
          I also find that potatoes are greedy feeders. I planted some where I grew them last year. They are small plants in comparison to the ones I planted in another area.

          My friend in Germany has horses and I do wonder if she can send me some horse manure in the post…..

        • Rose says:

          “My friend in Germany has horses and I do wonder if she can send me some horse manure in the post…..”

          Ghastly thought.

          It’s got to be well rotted though or it will burn your plants,you’d need to get rid of the weed seeds too.

        • beobrigitte says:

          It’s got to be well rotted though or it will burn your plants

          Good point! I guess the post in both countries would want to work very fast and deliver the parcel quickly…….

    • garyk30 says:

      Well, if you use fertilizers, you are putting nutrients into the soil and you will not turn your fields into a desert.
      Also, in the USA, tobacco is 10-15 times as profitable as is,for instance, corn/maize.

      Corn will give you a profit of about $100 per acre and tobacco will give you a profit of $1000 – $1500 per acre.

      Note, corn growers use a lot of herbicides and pesticides and since you need 10 times the acreage for the same profit, corn may be worse for the planet.

      • Rose says:

        The amount of pesticides used depend on where you are growing the tobacco.

        The infamous and quite enormousTobacco Hornworm ( up to 70 millimeters in length ) is unique to the Americas.

        Growing tobacco in an English garden requires only slug protection when the plants are very young, like most everything else..
        Slug pellets, nematodes or a bit of copper tape, depending how green you want to be.

  4. garyk30 says:

    That article is full of useless numbers.
    It says that 7 million die from smoking.
    Well, 7 million may die from the diseases said to be ’caused’ by smoking; but, Doll’s study of the mortality of British doctors shows that current smokers and never smokers have the same probability of dying from said diseases.
    Doll’s study showed that; while 85% of current smokers deaths were from those diseases, 84% of the neversmokers deaths were from those same diseases.
    If there were no/ zero smokers, there would still be very close to the same number of deaths from those diseases.

    Since there are about 4 non smokers for each current smoker, the article should point out that about 28 million deaths happen each year to non smokers from those same diseases.

  5. Rose says:

    “And after it’s harvested, wood is required for curing”

    Wood hasn’t been used for curing tobacco since World War Two, in America at least.

    “and to create rolling papers and packaging”

    Thank heavens paper manufactures plant more trees than they take and have been doing for decades.
    My family were in the paper trade.

  6. beobrigitte says:

    Cigarettes are a global health epidemic. More than seven million people die per year from tobacco use, leading the World Health Organization to call the substance the world’s largest cause of preventable death.

    Aren’t ‘tobacco-related diseases’ all old peoples’ diseases that occur as our bodies start to give in? One of the most obvious signs for this is the greying hair, of which I believe, Deborah Arnott has quite a lot.

  7. Rose says:

    Pharming

    Tobacco promises hope in HIV Aids research
    2011

    “Researchers at East Malling Research are helping to grow genetically-modified tobacco plants which give off a potentially life-saving drug through their roots.”

    “Tobacco is an ideal non-food crop for this research, thanks to the speed it grows and matures and our deep knowledge of its physiology and transformability, which has been the focus of scientific attention for more than 20 years.”

    “Professor Ma and EMR’s work is a three-year investigation funded by the National Institutes of Health, the US national medical research funding agency.”
    http://www.kentonline.co.uk/kent/news/tobacco-promises-hope-in-hiv-aid-a69031/

    There was a lot of concern when Pharma started genetically modifying food species to grow medicines in and much worry that they might escape and contaminate the food chain.

    Consequences of GM crop contamination ‘are set to worsen’
    2008
    “So-called “pharma crops” can offer advantages over current methods of drug manufacture. Vaccines produced this way could be grown cheaply in developing countries and simply given to patients in the food. That would remove the need for sterile needles and refrigerators to keep vaccine doses cold – a major obstacle for delivering therapies in poor countries.

    Prof Paul Gepts, a plant geneticist at the University of California, Davis, said past experience suggests that “contamination” events cannot be avoided. “Gene flow is really a regular occurrence among plants. So if you put a gene out there it’s going to escape. It’s going to go to other varieties of the same crop or to its wild relatives,” he said. “It’s clear that zero contamination is impossible at present.”

    The Union of Concerned Scientists is calling on the US Department of Agriculture to ban the growth of GM pharma crops outdoors unless they are species that are not eaten by people or livestock.”
    https://www.theguardian.com/science/2008/feb/18/gm.contamination

    What they need is a prolific, easily modified, fast growing, edible plant that they can take several harvests from before it dies, that is not or no longer in the food chain.

    Harvesting “green” pharmaceuticals
    November 12, 2001

    “The tobacco plant is most suited to large-scale production of active agents. It can easily be genetically modified and cultivated at low cost. Tobacco generates a great volume of biomass per hectare and year, and thus produces the very high yield of the final product,” says the biologist, summarizing the results.

    Dr. Schillberg was awarded the 2001 Joseph-von-Fraunhofer special-merit prize for his work, in view of the pressing need for large quantities of novel therapeutic agents to diagnose and treat certain types of cancer and infectious diseases. Molecular farming is a cost-effective and reliable means of manufacturing pharmaceutical products on a large scale.
    https: //web.archive.org/web/20130612084625/http://www.brightsurf.com/news/headlines/16611/Harvesting_%22green%22_pharmaceuticals.html

    • beobrigitte says:

      Consequences of GM crop contamination ‘are set to worsen’
      2008
      “So-called “pharma crops” can offer advantages over current methods of drug manufacture. Vaccines produced this way could be grown cheaply in developing countries and simply given to patients in the food. That would remove the need for sterile needles and refrigerators to keep vaccine doses cold – a major obstacle for delivering therapies in poor countries.

      GM crop “contamination”? Correct me if I’m wrong, it is incredibly difficult to keep the modification in plants, usually plants are good kicking out the modified/added gene after 1-2 generations.

      Cheap vaccines that can be grown cheaply and are taken in with food reduce big Pharma’s profit. Full stop.

  8. Vlad says:

    ‘Doctor’ Armando Peruga is the 21st century equivalent of the Dark Ages doctors…you know, those ‘consultants’ who figured out that black plague was caused by cats and witches…

    • smokingscot says:

      Seems Armando Peruga has spent his entire adult life doing very little other than Tobacco Control.

      https://cl.linkedin.com/in/armando-peruga-66171522

      Or at least since he got his PHD from John Hopkins in 1990.

      As the article says our Armando WAS with the WHO, then he chose the “self employed” route and is now a “Freelance Tobacco Control Consultant”.

      Clearly that wasn’t terribly lucrative, so last October he returned to academia and claims to be a Research Scholar.

      I suspect he owes most of his career to Bloomberg, whose foundation is probably funding his current “research”.

      Peruga knows SFA about agriculture and uses the handle of “Doctor” simply because some university somewhere awarded that to him for passing an exam.

      • Vlad says:

        Yeah, I googled him before writing that, which I actually mean. Some people think that because we have airplanes and internet and mobile phones we’ve now reached the summit of human knowledge and therefore we can pity those backward people from the past. Funny thing is, each generation or so thinks they’ve discovered all there is to discover. And every successive generation then looks in bewilderment, how could the previous generation be so narrow minded. For instance, how can the earth be round? Won’t the people on the other side just fall? Elementary, my dear Watson. So elementary that you’d get burned at the stake for daring to disagree. The name of the church has changed and the burning at stake is not literal anymore, but otherwise the human nature is the same.

  9. Oi you says:

    You’d think our leaders would be glad that so many are dying, since we’re suffering from a global population explosion. Just think how much money could be saved if a few more died? Quick, hand out the cigarettes!

    :o)

    • beobrigitte says:

      Perhaps our leaders do know that tobacco deaths do not exist? How come the pension age has been raised and that includes the baby-boomer generation.

      Apropos baby-boomers;
      When I need a laugh, I read this:
      http://www.healthline.com/health/erectile-dysfunction/impotence-and-smoking#overview1
      Erm, explain the existence of the baby-boomers. Wasn’t this the time (post WW2) when smoking boomed, too?

    • beobrigitte says:

      Oi you!!! I have asked a question!!!

      • beobrigitte says:

        Oi you!!! You still haven’t answered my question. It’s getting late, you know. And this baby-boomer will retire for the night shortly. Alive, smoking and well.

        • Joe L. says:

          I think “Oi you” may have intended to convey sarcasm, but even if not, it brings up a question that I’ve pondered a lot, and should raise anyone’s suspicion, smoker or non-:

          If smoking was actually responsible for the number of deaths the Antismokers claim it is, shouldn’t their Globalist cohorts (who intend to depopulate our planet [refer to the 2030 Agenda]) be promoting smoking rather than discouraging it?

  10. Dr Evil says:

    Why do people smoke plants? They eventually kill you. They cause COPD and emphysema. I know they give transient pleasure but FFS. Have you seen these poor bastards on oxygen and they still wheeze? I’m all for freedom et al but some people take it to excess. Moderation in all things bar drinking alcohol.

    • Pat Nurse says:

      My father in law died in the manner you describe from lung disease. He never smoked in his life and never lived with smokers, nor was he a regular pub goer. He did, however, work on roads and was killed by traffic fumes and rid of the same illness at the same age as my lifelong smoker father. A school friend ended up with a lung transplant after working a long time as a petrol pump assisstant and tragically died last year. It appears the same people who attack smokers and smoking are happy to keep on driving and killing millions. The hypocrisy and and ignorant intolerance is astounding.

    • beobrigitte says:

      Why do people smoke plants? They eventually kill you. They cause COPD and emphysema.
      Barking up the wrong tree?

      Have you seen these poor bastards on oxygen and they still wheeze?
      What was the age of “these-poor-bastards”?

      I’m all for freedom et al but some people take it to excess.
      I’m afraid this requires a little more detail. Are you applying your personal measure of excess?

      Moderation in all things bar drinking alcohol.
      Drinking unlimited or banning alcohol?

      • beobrigitte says:

        Dr Evil, I’ve asked a few questions!!!!! Eagerly awaiting the answers.

        (Frank please delete the comment below, my fault. Didn’t click the reply button)

    • Bandit 1 says:

      Why do people smoke plants?

      I think a better question would be, what business is it of yours if they do?

  11. Rose says:

    Why do people smoke plants?

    Modern science explains.

    Medicinal Smoke Reduces Airborne Bacteria
    2007

    “This study represents a comprehensive analysis and scientific validation of our ancient knowledge about the effect of ethnopharmacological aspects of natural products’ smoke for therapy and health care on airborne bacterial composition and dynamics, using the Biolog® microplate panelsand Microlog® database.

    In this study, we have designed an air sampler for microbiological air sampling during the treatment of the room with medicinal smoke. In addition, elimination of the aerial pathogenic bacteria due to the smoke is reported too.

    We have observed that 1 h treatment of medicinal smoke emination by burning wood and a mixture of odoriferous and medicinal herbs (havan sámagri = material used in oblation to fire all over India) on aerial bacterial population caused over 94% reduction of bacterial counts by 60 min and the ability of the smoke to purify or disinfect the air and to make the environment cleaner was maintained up to 24 h in the closed room.

    Absence of pathogenic bacteria Corynebacterium urealyticum, Curtobacterium flaccumfaciens, Enterobacter aerogenes (Klebsiella mobilis), Kocuria rosea, Pseudomonassyringae pv. persicae, Staphylococcus lentus, and Xanthomonas campestris pv. tardicrescens inthe open room even after 30 days is indicative of the bactericidal potential of the medicinal smoke treatment.

    We have demonstrated that using medicinal smoke it is possible to completely eliminate diverse plant and human pathogenic bacteria of the air within confined space. ”
    http://asianagrihistory.org/research/Medicinal-smoke.pdf

    Medicinal smokes
    2006

    Abstract
    “All through time, humans have used smoke of medicinal plants to cure illness.
    To the best of our knowledge, the ethnopharmacological aspects of natural products’ smoke for therapy and health care have not been studied.
    Mono- and multi-ingredient herbal and non-herbal remedies administered as smoke from 50 countries across the 5 continents are reviewed.

    Most of the 265 plant species of mono-ingredient remedies studied belong to Asteraceae (10.6%), followed by Solanaceae (10.2%), Fabaceae (9.8%) and Apiaceae (5.3%). The most frequent medical indications for medicinal smoke are pulmonary (23.5%), neurological (21.8%) and dermatological (8.1%).

    Other uses of smoke are not exactly medical but beneficial to health, and include smoke as a preservative or a repellent and the social use of smoke.

    The three main methods for administering smoke are inhalation, which accounts for 71.5% of the indications; smoke directed at a specific organ or body part, which accounts for 24.5%; ambient smoke (passive smoking), which makes up the remaining 4.0%. Whereas inhalation is typically used in the treatment of pulmonary and neurological disorders and directed smoke in localized situations, such as dermatological and genito-urinary disorders, ambient smoke is not directed at the body at all but used as an air purifier.

    The advantages of smoke-based remedies are rapid delivery to the brain, more efficient absorption by the body and lower costs of production. This review highlights the fact that not enough is known about medicinal smoke and that a lot of natural products have potential for use as medicine in the smoke form. Furthermore, this review argues in favor of medicinal smoke extended use in modern medicine as a form of drug delivery and as a promising source of new active natural ingredients”
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17030480

    Validation of smoke inhalation therapy to treat microbial infections.
    2008

    Braithwaite M, Van Vuuren
    AIM OF THE STUDY:
    “In traditional healing, the burning of selected indigenous medicinal plants and the inhalation of the liberated smoke are widely accepted and a practiced route of administration.
    This study elucidated the rationale behind this commonly practiced treatment by examining the antimicrobial activity for five indigenous South African medicinal plants commonly administered through inhalation (Artemisia afra, Heteropyxis natalensis, Myrothamnus flabellifolius, Pellaea calomelanos and Tarchonanthus camphoratus).

    MATERIAL AND METHODS:
    An apparatus was designed to simulate the burning process that occurs in a traditional setting and the smoke fraction was captured for analysis and bioassay. Methanol and acetone extracts as well as the essential oil (for the aromatic species) were prepared and assayed in parallel with the smoke fraction.

    RESULTS:
    Antimicrobial data revealed that in most cases, the ‘smoke-extract’ obtained after burning had lower minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) values than the corresponding solvent extracts and essential oils. The combustion, acetone and methanol extracts produced different chromatographic profiles as demonstrated for Pellaea calomelanos where several compounds noted in the smoke fraction were not present in the other extracts.

    CONCLUSION:
    These results suggest that the combustion process produces an ‘extract’ with superior antimicrobial activity and provides in vitro evidence for inhalation of medicinal smoke as an efficient mode of administration in traditional healing”
    http: //www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18778765

    Essential oils ‘combat superbug’
    2007
    “Tests of new machine at a hospital have found it could be effective in the battle against the superbug MRSA.

    Consultants at Wythenshawe Hospital found that using a vaporiser to spray essential oils into the atmosphere killed off micro-organisms.
    Airborne bacterial counts dropped by 90% and infections were reduced in a nine-month trial at the burns unit.

    The recipe of oils used in the machine was refined by microbiologists at Manchester Metropolitan University”

    “However, the researchers say they are unable to reveal which oils carry benefits because of commercial sensitivities”
    http: //news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/manchester/6471475.stm

  12. Rose says:

    Two years after the anti-bacterial smoke had cleared, they were expecting a massive pandemic, but in the meantime a great many people had changed the habit of a lifetime and stopped breathing over each other all evening, squashed together in crowded pubs.

    Swine flu could kill 65,000 in UK, warns chief medical officer
    16 July 2009

    “Up to 65,000 people could die from swine flu in the UK in a worst case scenario set out by the chief medical officer as the government launched a national service for patients to obtain antiviral drugs over the internet and telephone.”
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jul/16/swine-flu-pandemic-warning-helpline

    Luckily, it never happened.

    The pandemic that never was: Drug firms ‘encouraged world health body to exaggerate swine flu threat’
    2010

    “Declaring a swine flu pandemic was a ‘monumental error’, driven by profit-hungry drug companies spreading fear, an influential report has concluded.
    It led to huge amounts of taxpayers’ money being wasted in stockpiling vaccines, it added.

    Paul Flynn, the Labour MP charged with investigating the handling of the swine flu outbreak for the Council of Europe, described it as ‘a pandemic that never really was’.
    The report accuses the World Health Organisation of grave shortcomings in the transparency of the process that led to its warning last year.
    The MP said that the world relied on the WHO, but after ‘crying wolf’, its reputation was in jeopardy.

    The report questions whether the pandemic was driven by drug companies seeking a profit. Mr Flynn said predictions of a ‘plague’ that would wipe out up to 7.5million people proved to be ‘an exaggeration’, with fewer than 20,000 deaths worldwide.

    Britain braced itself for up to 65,000 deaths and signed vaccine contracts worth £540million.
    The actual number of deaths was fewer than 500 and the country is now desperately trying to unpick the contracts and unload millions of unused jabs.

    The focus on swine flu also led to other health services suffering and widespread public fear.
    Pharmaceutical companies, however, profited to the tune of £4.6billion from the sale of vaccines alone.

    Mr Flynn said: ‘There is not much doubt that this was an exaggeration on stilts. They vastly over-stated the danger on bad science and the national governments were in a position where they had to take action.

    ‘In Britain, we have spent at least £1billion on preparations, to the detriment of other parts of the health system. This is a monumental failure on the WHO’s part.’
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1284133/The-pandemic-Drug-firms-encouraged-world-health-body-exaggerate-swine-flu-threat.html

    The next year the Chief Medical Officer got a job at the WHO.

    WHO Director-General names Sir Liam Donaldson envoy for patient safety

    “Sir Liam, who served as England’s Chief Medical Officer between 1998 and 2010, will help the Organization promote patient safety as a global public health priority.”
    http: //www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2011/patient_safety_20110721/en/

    • beobrigitte says:

      The pandemic that never was: Drug firms ‘encouraged world health body to exaggerate swine flu threat’
      2010
      […] […]
      ‘In Britain, we have spent at least £1billion on preparations, to the detriment of other parts of the health system.

      I do remember that. I believe the NHS bosses tried to reduce the forthcoming waste of the vaccine stock pile by recommending all staff to go for the jab.

      WHO Director-General names Sir Liam Donaldson envoy for patient safety

      “Sir Liam, who served as England’s Chief Medical Officer between 1998 and 2010, will help the Organization promote patient safety as a global public health priority.”
      God help us all!

  13. Vlad says:


    From a nurse lighting a patient’s cigarette on the hospital bed to the patient having to leave the hospital grounds to smoke a cigarette…

  14. beobrigitte says:

    Dr Evil, I’ve asked a few questions!!!!!

  15. legiron says:

    So an entire tree fits into 15 packs of cigarettes – and that’s not counting the tobacco!

    Some serious wood compression there. Or could it just be a made up figure?

  16. garyk30 says:

    Dr. Evil is full of bs.
    I have COPD and I am neither on O2 or incapacitated.

    What does scare me is the thought of having a stroke and all of the severe crippling that a stroke can cause.

    However, Doll’s doctor mortality study showed that strokes are 5 times more common than COPD and smokers are about 15% less likely to have a stroke.

    • beobrigitte says:

      Did you know that most elderly have COPD/lung emphysema? Gradually our hearts lose the full capacity so there is pressure building up, resulting in the above. Also, the rate of cell renewal has decreased, hence the wrinkles.

      Have you ever seen a 30 year old smoker with COPD/ Lung emphysema? Why not?
      Next thing, if it takes a 20 year “lag” phase to show some illness it means it’s useless data. In these 20 years you encounter many things (including micro-organisms) that are very likely to stress your physical system. After all, Henrietta Lachs provided after her death of cervical cancer (straying husband, HPV) the world with an immortal cell line.

      I can’t see where cigarettes enter the stage.

      • Smoking Lamp says:

        I’m not sure they really do enter the stage contrary y to contemporary antismoking propaganda. Interestingly incidence of both asthma and COPD have been rising as smoking rates decrease (and smoking bans become more common).

        On COPD: “Never smokers represent a significant proportion of airway obstruction in US adults. Only one fifth of obstruction in this group is explained by asthma. COPD may explain much of the remainder, although known risk factors were not explanatory in this dataset. Recommendations that lung health screening programs be limited to smokers should be reconsidered.” Celli BR, Halbert RJ, Nordyke RJ, Schau B. (2005). Airway obstruction in never smokers: results from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Am J Med. Dec;118(12):1364-72.

        Causal inferences between second hand smoke and lung function are difficult to access due to recall bias, limited data on temporal relationships, and dose-response. In addition, the effects of passive smoking on lung function are inconsistent among studies. If there is a decrement in lung function due to passive smoking the effect is likely small. Additional research is needed to justify this conclusion. (See Coultas, Passive smoking and risk of adult asthma and COPD: an update, Thorax 1998;53:381-387.)

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