Monday, 13 July 2015

Food Is A Disease Accelerant, Obviously

Nanny Knows Best and Snowdon have already had their fun with this from Australia, but it's worth milking it a little more.


Remember that smoking bans are purely about health, aren't they? The concept is solely about protecting bar and restaurant staff from harm - because they don't choose to go to bars like customers do - and absolutely not about egregious illiberal bullying of smokers and trampling over property rights. Got that?

So, as we {cough} know this to be true - I mean, who would disbelieve a tobacco controller who derives his/her considerable tax-funded income from exploiting selfishness and vile anti-social snobbery - we can only assume that there is some dread health threat which comes from the mixture of outdoor smoke and food. The New South Wales law, after all, doesn't ban all smoking outdoors, just smoking outdoors where food is served.

There is no credible evidence that secondhand smoke harms anyone outdoors on its own, therefore food must be an accelerant or catalyst for cancer and heart disease for those who might get a faint whiff of smoke while eating their nice, healthy double mega-burger and deep fried chips with a foot long side stack of onion rings. Or maybe it's the qinoa and kale paella which is causing the specific problem of smoking around food, I dunno. Whichever it is, the ban must be evidence-based because no legislature would pass illiberal and absurd laws without it, now would they?

Or, just perhaps, smoking bans were never about health at all. Just an exercise in bigotry from tobacco control executives, and gullible politicians, designed to massage the crass prejudice of the selfish and intolerant who demand the world revolves around them and that the law panders to their petty, vindictive preferences.

No, can't be that. No chance.


7 comments:

The Filthy Engineer said...

They started on the sugary drinks today.

nisakiman said...

Oh yes, DP, it really makes perfect sense. We all know how deadly saturated fats are (or is it unsaturated fats now? Trans-fats? Oh, and sugar. And salt. Science moves at such a pace, it's hard to keep up...), well, one of those fats must be the currently deadly one, anyway. Then you add to that a wisp of deadly, toxic tobacco smoke, and...kaboom! You're dead! Instantly!

I mean, that deadly, toxic tobacco smoke from someone else's cigarette kills six million a year, doesn't it? I know we haven't seen any body bags or death certificates yet, but experts have said, so it's obviously true. I'm sure the body bags and death certificates will turn up?

So just imagine the carnage if people are exposed not only to those toxic fumes from burning tobacco, but simultaneously to saturated (or whatever) fats too! It would be carnage! people would be dropping like flies! We would see a resurgence of those hand carts pushed by a bloke with a bell, crying out: "Bring out yer dead".

So jolly good show to those nice people in Public Health. They may destroy the whole entertainment industry, but it's all in a good cause, eh? Think of all those lives they're saving. And of course, we mustn't forget ... the cheeldren! Just think how many cheeldren will be saved by this legislation.

Anyway, that'll do for now - I can feel a severe case of self-righteousness coming on...

Elementary said...

A few points.

Food is not permitted in smoking areas because those engaged in smoking must not be allowed to feel “normal” while so engaged; it’s further
denormalization. Smoking is to be barely tolerated if it occurs around
dumpsters in alleyways or areas open to the harsh elements. It is entirely
unacceptable to the prohibitionist mindset that a person could have a meal and then a cigarette at the same table. And those who smoke should not be afforded even the act of sitting while having a coffee and a cigarette – even outdoors. Smokers, depicted only as “addicts”, must not be afforded the rights/privileges of “normal” people. Those engaged in smoking must be made to feel as uncomfortable as possible in “helping” them to quit.

The situation in NSW has thrown up an immediate problem. In these “smoking-permitted” areas people are allowed to consume alcohol but not
permitted to eat. This promotes intoxication issues with people drinking on an empty stomach. It’s another “situation” created by prohibitionists and their lap-dog politicians. But not to worry. The minister involved indicated that those smoking will be allowed to consume peanuts and potato
crisps [that promote thirst/drinking]. He used the word “allowed”. Ain’t that
dandy. Smokers will be “allowed” to eat peanuts and potato crisps. They’re all heart.

The situation in NSW (and many other States/countries) has provided an[other] opportunity to question the hysterical, inflammatory claims of the petty dictator Public Health clique, in this instance regarding quickly diluting smoke outdoors. But there has been no questioning/resistance. It doesn’t
exist….. at all. Thirty years into this current antismoking crusade and the
bulk of the populace, to its shame, is still oblivious to the fact that it’s a moralizing prohibition crusade [that looks very much like the prohibition crusades of early last century in America and Germany]. Prohibition crusades don’t rely on facts. They rely on inflammatory, divisive rhetoric. They rely on “whatever will get the job done”. We seem to have leant absolutely nothing from painful lessons of only the recent past.

If that wasn’t bad enough, one of the handful of articles on this latest baseless smoking ban has come from a “vapist” [is that the word?]. This vapist doesn’t question the ban at all. Rather, he makes sure that he gets
in as many antismoking slogans as possible, followed by a chorus of
[antismoking] vapist comments highlighting how they have been “saved” from smoking by the miraculous e-gizmo:

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/tougher-smoking-bans-are-here-20150705-gi5d1l

gray cooper said...

A brilliant article.

truckerlyn said...

Absolutely!


Before long there won't be ANYTHING that is safe to eat, drink or inhale! In which case, perhaps we should save all those lovely nannying, interfering bigots the trouble and dig our own 6 x 6 now and jump in - after all, there won't be any point in staying around if nothing is safe and it seems that NOTHING that is anywhere close to be enjoyable will be safe, so no point in living really.

truckerlyn said...

Ahh, smokers will be allowed to eat peanuts and potato crisps - that are normally drenched in salt! Perhaps the idea there is to hasten our demise through overdosing on salt?

Vinny Gracchus said...

More proof that smoking bans are designed to cause division and stimulate denormalization of smokers not address health risks (especially since none have ever been proven for second hand smoke--indoors or out).