Sunday 18 December 2011

When Is A Precedent Not A Precedent?

Why, when people who lie for a living say so, of course.

Back in 2007, ASH produced one of the most laughable public relations briefings of all time. Entitled Myths and Realities of Smokefree England, I think Snowdon described it best.

Myths and Realities of Smokefree England already has the makings of a fascinating historical document. With one or two possible exceptions that can be argued over, all of the so-called 'myths' have turned out to be true and all of ASH's 'realities' have turned out to be myths. And it took less than 3 years.
Now, I've pointed out a few glaring errors myself over the years, they're not hard to spot. Sadly, no-one in government - who pay this 'charity', remember - have bothered to pull them up on any of it.

So I suppose it's not too surprising when you see more state-funded fantasy being put forward to defend plain packaging of tobacco. Incredibly, they've produced another load of 'myths' which - if the last lot are to be taken as a guide - will be proven to be true as soon as our daft politicians have been stupid enough to pass the law.

In fact, myth #7 is already busted before they have even started. I mean, just have a gander at this bollocks!

Myth #7: It may be tobacco today but other consumer products will follow

FACT: Tobacco is not like any other product, it is the only legal consumer product on the market which is lethal when used as intended. That is why the UK and over 170 other governments have signed up to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control which places legal obligations on governments to strictly regulate tobacco products. Plain packs for tobacco will not therefore set a precedent for other consumer products.
Pick yourself off the floor and stop holding your sides, because they really aren't joking. Seriously, they believe this shit.

Quite apart from the fact that I could point to a hundred or more articles here detailing the tobacco control template being put to use in other areas, I don't really need to. There was a perfect example published just yesterday at the Lancet.

The battle against obesity: lessons from tobacco

There are striking parallels between obesity and cigarette smoking; we believe this comparison to be fruitful;
As in, err, let's use it as a precedent. If you can read something else into that, I'd love to see into your imagination cos it probably involves unicorns, fairies and Holly Willoughby.

Those with a vested interest in denying you your free personal choices in all manner of different behaviours have been queueing up to copy anti-smoking tactics for a long time. I'm sure you could post links to very many examples yourselves, it's not like they're rare.

Not only that. Anti-smoking zealots themselves seem to have forgotten that they have held summits with fellow fun-hating bastards to train them how to further diminish your life.

Alcohol Focus Scotland, ASH Scotland and Scottish Health Action on Alcohol Problems are pleased to announce a joint conference which will consider what progress has been made in alcohol control and tobacco control and explore what each sector might learn from the other.
So 'unique' is tobacco that the same people who are denying a precedent have been trading on creating one for the past year or so.

Myth #7 was not only busted before the Smokefree Coalition published their briefing paper, it was also busted by the very same people who helped to produce the lie in the first place.

All the other 'myths' will be shown to be true in time, but it's quite harrowing that politicians will be incapable of recognising that. And that they won't even notice that one of them is not only not a myth, but is being touted as a precedent by those who claim that such a thing will never exist.

Welcome to the new politics. Your sky is blue, theirs is purple with pink spots.


smokervoter said...

i seem to have homeostatic mechanism that regulates my calorie expenditure. The more exercise i do during the day, the less active i are during the evening.
The idea that small changes in life style are enough to offset obesity is wrong. In fact enormous changes in energy balance are needed and a pair of ladders and a hedge trimmer and that can only realistically be achieved through changes in the shed.
i have calculated energy expenditure using the \\\"doubly labelled water technique\\\" which tracks the progress of a water isoptopes through the body, the speed if which in turn indicates rate of metabolism.
i should be promoting exercise exercise for health reasons but weight is not realistically going to benefit from exercise.
Exercise is not enough to reverse the epidemic.
Dieting on the other hand does have an effect on energy intake and this is a more realistic approach.

probably best stick to fags

F***W*T TW****R said...

I've taken to going into the garage when I read this stuff. Well, there's nothing breakable in there.

George Speller said...

F***W*T TW****R:
might be a ladder and hedge trimmer tho'

Sorry DP, but you've gotta laff, otherwise I'd be in tears!

Eddie Douthwaite said...

The mention of Obesity reminded me of this study produced in 2008.


It all here:-


John said...

"The Government pays them" !!!! No No No - We do the taxpayer.

Anonymous said...

"it is the only legal consumer product on the market which is lethal when used as intended".

What - spark up and you're dead before you can take a second drag??

Thousands of cigarettes later, I'm still here. There's even the possiblility that I might die from a cause that even the deranged zealots can't pin on smoking.

Understatement's never been their forte, has it?


Mark S. said...

"Ash and cloud cuckoo land" would
be a better title for the report.

However the word Template seems to
have become a buzz word for puritans.

Anonymous said...

Dick, I think we all need to lodge a complaint with the Advertsising Standards Authority.

Packs of cigarettes are emblazoned with the words "Smoking Kills" and the multipacks state "Smoking is harmful to you and those around you"

Clearly, both these statements are untrue. I think we could set a precedent by complaining to the ASA and see if they will have the statements removed from the packages.

Mr A said...

Indeed, I have been rather depressed as of late and so have been trying to top myself. I considered sucking on an exhaust pipe or flinging myself from a train, but settled on the overdose route. I was assured by ASH that cigarettes were "poison," "lethal" and that "there was no safe dose." Imagine my disappointment, therefore, when, after smoking 100 a day for the last three months I am still here.

I am beginning to think that perhaps they aren't telling the whole truth.....

Ian Thorpe said...

Saw a story today about a young girl, a budding gymnast branded as "borderline obese" by NHS anti fat activists. Well they have taken kids into care because parents smoke. How long before they snatch kids who are healthy, active and well fed.

It seems to be obesity starts where undernourishment stops.

But the criminalisation of smoking has been such a big success for the finger waggers it's now a question of what they will hit next.

Lyn said...

Watch this space - sooner or later they will come up with regulating the number of times we can breath each day or the number of times we can have sex in a week or month!

Not so long ago these ideas would have sounded competely crazy; sadly not today, however!

It comes to the point where being here in this life is the greater of the 2 evils - death often seeming preferable - at least we would be at peace!

smokervoter said...

A EU think tank is already on the verge of a proposal about how many times you can breath per minute, its all about carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and the problems joggers cause and issues of road saftey at night with non visible units as the they call joggers

Dickie Doubledick said...

Sorry but voices in my head tell me to do it.