The Antismoking Bureaucrats

I probably won’t publish every day for a while. So a few fragmentary thoughts.

In the hospital, none of the doctors  seemed much interested in smoking. But hospital doctors probably aren’t ideologues. Hospital doctors are just trying to fix sick people. not advance theories of why they’re sick.

Antismokers are theoreticians with ideas about what makes people sick (e.g. smoking, obesity). They don’t think of people as individuals, but as members of abstract classes. And this dehumanises them, claps them in straitjackets, erasing their uniqueness.“““““““““““

My antismoking Dr W wasn’t a hands-on doctor treating individual sick people: he was a district health officer dealing with thousands of people, most of whom he never met face to face. He worked for many years for the WHO.  Does anyone in the WHO ever meet any real patients?

But there are probably no practising doctors who think that the real patients in the beds in front of them are there because they smoked. If nothing else their gunshot wounds probably tell them otherwise. It’s only when you deal with large numbers of people that you can start to entertain the idea that they may have shared causes for their maladies.

A practising doctor will at any one time be dealing with one single patient. A bureaucratic doctor will always be dealing with thousands of anonymous faceless people. Dr W was a bureaucrat. I”m not sure he ever treated any individual patients.

Perhaps this is how zealots arise. They grow from always dealing with large numbers of people rather than individual people. And they start to classify these large numbers of people into different groups. They begin to discriminate between them, putting them in different boxes. Black,white. Men, women. Child, adult. And in the process they gain separate new identities, separate new labels, which become more important than any others. They become “smokers.” Or they become “obese”. And they gradually attract greater or lesser opprobrium. Once someone has been classified in these ways, they’re stuck with a label which may well dominate the way they are treated.

One of my own labels is: “English”. And “English” is subtly different from “Scottish” or “Irish.” They are all regarded as possessing different character traits – and perhaps they in fact do. I’m inclined to think that people who spend their lives in noisy bustling cities are slightly different than those who live in quiet countrysides. These differences are likely to intensify; there seems to be a deep and growing difference between coastal metropolitan Americans  and those in the “flyover” country in between.

And all these classes meet with different degrees of approval or disapproval. “Smokers” have become become a disapproved  class, along with the “obese”..The labels come with their own approval ratings, and if you are to increase your approval you’ll need to lose the label.

About Frank Davis

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

16 Responses to The Antismoking Bureaucrats

  1. Philip Neal says:

    It is notable how few leaders of the anti-smoking movement were physicians. Richard Doll and Charles Fletcher were, but the Petos, Stanton Glantz and Simon Chapman were/are not.

    Glad you are blogging again, and keep us posted about your health, Frank.

  2. peter partridge says:

    Frank – so glad you’re ok – I don’t remember ever having commented here but I did quote you once –

  3. Lepercolonist says:

    There are large numbers of Dr. W’s in the WHO. Faceless bureaucrats who are clueless about the true health of the common man. Donald Trump stated that the U.S. will match China’s contribution to the WHO. Which is 50 million dollars and one tenth of our previous yearly contribution of 500 million.

  4. Rose says:

    David Hockney gives the wasp’s nest a kick again.

    David Hockney accuses newspaper of censorship for refusing to publish his letter saying smoking could fight coronavirus
    18 May 2020

    It’s highly entertaining watching all the wasps fly out and I strongely suspect he is enjoying it himself.

    This is where it’s important to know what is actually in the smoke rather relying on observations of its effect. My money is still on Nitric Oxide as the antiviral in question, rather than the antismokers beloved nicotine.

  5. slugbop007 says:

    I was just thinking about ‘Yes, Minister’ and thought it would be an ideal template to create a new TV series titled, ‘Yes, Nanny’.


  6. Clicky says:

    • Rose says:

      This is the kind of thing that makes unraveling tobacco science so difficult, theres permitted knowldege and hidden knowledge that nobody is permitted to know because it makes a nonsense of TC’s case.
      You end up with the image of a plant made entirely of holes, with tiny things magnified and important things missing. Have you ever heard antitobacco admit that nicotine is not unique to tobacco, but part of the blueprint of building most of the nightshade family vegetables we all eat every day? Yet nothing is ever said about that.

      With their wild speculations and mouse painting over the years they’ve even managed to confuse their own.

      The composition of cigarette smoke: a chronology of the studies of four polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons

      “Despite an 18-month study in the late 1950s, the search for a “supercarcinogen” in MSS and CSC to explain the observed biological effects was unsuccessful. In addition, the exceptional study on MSS PAHs by United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) personnel in the 1970s indicated no “supercarcinogen” was present. Only recently has the concept of complex mixtures in relation to the understanding of the complexity of carcinogenesis taken hold.

      Perhaps the reason why MSS is less tumorigenic than expected in humans is because of the presence of other MSS components that inhibit or prevent tumorigenesis. For example, it is well known that MSS contains numerous anticarcinogens present in quantifies significantly greater than those of the PAHs of concern. When one reviews the history of these four PAHs in MSS or CSC it is clear that many unanswered questions remain.”

      Have you ever been told of these “numerous anticarcinogens” in Main Stream Smoke so that you could make a considered judgement on whether to smoke or not?

  7. IanStaffs says:

    Hi Frank. I would love to know what you make of the near earth orbit rocks mentioned in Legirons post recently, especially if you were able to crunch the numbers surrounding the apparent impact of one in Nigeria. See

    • Frank Davis says:

      Legiron provides no link. I need to have the rocks identified to get their orbits. So I can’t do anything.

      was it this?

      • IanStaffs says:

        Yes, it is quite possible that is the impact/explosion in question.
        I wonder if there is any information available regarding asteroid 2012 XA133, especially if it had any trailing debris, and which could have landed in Akure, Nigeria.

        • Joe L. says:

          Hi Ian. I asked Frank to plug that asteroid into his simulator a little over a month ago. You can read our discussion here.

        • Joe L. says:

          Correction: I asked Frank to simulate a different asteroid, 2020 FL2 to see if one of its companions could have been the culprit, because it passed much closer to earth than 2012 XA133, but a few days earlier.

        • IanStaffs says:

          Thank you Joe. I now recall reading that particular post. I had not read the comments though, so apologise for going over the same ground.
          Frank may have had deja vu whilst replying to my initial comment?

  8. Clicky says:

  9. slugbop007 says:

    I just found this weblink:

    It is a series of Press Releases and Statements from the Gates Foundation, starting in 1997 and presently being updated as I type. There are over 160 pages at the moment and the majority of them are announcements for new programs and investments.


No need to log in

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

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

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.