Duncan Bannatyne: A Threat To The Nation's Health

Oh dear. If you were a smug, self-declared health guru, I expect you'd feel rather uncomfortable reading things like this.

The fitness market was worth £682m in 1996, £1.6bn in 2001 and is now stable at £2.5bn (these are Mintel figures). In the UK, 5.2 million adults have membership of a private gym. That market penetration is phenomenal. I don't want to labour the point about how this correlates with obesity, because some people – myself, for instance – have membership and don't use it. But put it this way: whether we're using the gym or not, as a cohort, it's not making us any thinner.

One of the reasons for this is that vigorous exercise stimulates your appetite. So a 20-minute run might use up 200 calories, but your hunger won't necessarily – indeed, almost certainly won't – restrain itself to that amount of extra food.

So someone who promotes 60 fitness centres, for example, could be fuelling that there global 'obesity epidemic'?

Hmmm, kinda reminds me of this article I read yesterday.

Can regular exercise avert or undo some of the harm associated with binge drinking? Perhaps even better, could exercising beforehand pre-emptively reduce your urge to overindulge in alcohol later? Or does exercising actually drive you to drink?

[...]

Half of the rats were given access to running wheels for three weeks. The others were kept in cages without wheels. After three weeks, the running wheels were removed, and half of the animals from each group were allowed unlimited access to alcohol for 21 days. [...] the exercising animals turned to alcohol with significantly more enthusiasm than the sedentary rats, mainly during the first week of the experiment. “It was a bit of surprise,” Dr. Leasure said.

But the findings are right in line with those from a recent, large-scale national survey of human subjects published in The American Journal of Health Promotion.

What? You mean that those who profit from gyms are doing so, at the expense of the country's finances, by contributing to the binge-drinking epidemic, too?

The bastards!

No wonder Bannatyne drones on about smoking so much, it's - quite obviously - merely a diversionary tactic to disguise his own selfish disregard for the health of the nation. Innit.

Fixed That For Yahoo! ™

Articles on e-cigs are increasing in frequency all over the world. The latest to come to my attention sheds light on the situation in France, but Yahoo's journo appears to have got a lot wrong, so I've re-written it by striking out the inaccuracies and replacing or adding, as required, in bold text.

I think I've done a decent job, too.

PARIS (AFP) – Makers of electronic cigarettes are reporting strong growth in sales as anti-tobacco laws force European smokers into the cold streets, but campaigners government and pharma-funded interest groups say the device is undercutting health efforts nicotine replacement therapy sales.

Spain joined Sunday the ranks of countries that have outlawed smoking in enclosed public space after a wave of similar legislation illiberal social marketing measures across Europe.

For the makers of electronic cigarettes, which simulate the sensation of a cigarette and can contain nicotine, the traditionally heavy smoking nation marks a potentially lucrative market for their much-criticised, but perfectly safe, product.

"We have seen sales grow by 30 percent each year since 2007 when we launched our product," said a spokesman for EdSylver, one of the leading manufacturers of the product invented in China in 2004.

Manufacturers such as EdSylver say the plastic cigarette is not harmful for the smoker or people around them, but this claim is rejected by health experts those whose funding could be at risk.

At a World Health Organisation conference of vested interest rent-seekers in Uruguay in November, one of its leading anti-tobacco experts career prohibitionists Eduardo Bianco said electronic cigarettes "sabotaged smoking prevention profit maximisation efforts", which were designed to encourage people to quit buy their nicotine from Mr Bianco's paymasters and the conference sponsors.

The plastic cigarettes function as mini aerosols, releasing artificial smoke with or without nicotine.

"I am very happy with it, I want to repeat the feeling of smoking, without the harm of nicotine," said one Parisian user.

Professor Yves Martinet, head of the French National Committee Against Tobacco, said the electronic cigarette was a rip-off threat to his livelihood.

"This product offers no medical financial support for quitting smoking the pharmaceutical industry, there are some countries that have banned it on the back of our unsubstantiated scaremongering," he said.

"For the moment, this product has not been evaluated in a scientific way but we're working on studies, and politicians, which will make that irrelevant," he said.

The French national office for smoking prevention said the purpose of the electronic cigarette was "ambiguous" "enjoyable", and condemned its sale in pharmacies where it might be seen as a more attractive harm reduction method than nicotine patches.

The office said the products were presented by manufacturers both as "an aid to quitting and a product which would allow smoking in enclosed spaces., all of which is true but ruins our long term plans, goddamit!"

Tobacco sellers meanwhile reject manufacturers' claims that sales of the device are taking off.

"It doesn't sell at all, some of our members still have stocks from last year, I suppose the majority of sales are conducted online" said Gerard Bohelay, the head of an association of tobacco retailers in the French capital.

Laughing At The Righteous

Sometimes, the simplest way of showing up the health-obsessed is to just laugh at their idiocy. And, as such things go, this take down - by Emmy award-winning US prog, The Daily Show - of the prime mover behind San Francisco's ban on happy meals is truly masterful. Have a watch, and marvel at how such an astoundingly arrogant and hypocritical man can end up with power over an entire city.

Hasn't Appeasement Been Proven Not To Work?

McDonald's across the Atlantic have thought up the clever wheeze of leaving 'matchbooks' around late night bars and clubs to promote their new 24 hour opening hours.

Not that they're really matchbooks, of course. No, instead of chip-like matches to get their point across - which would be quite useful and more likely to be a lasting advert - they have dispensed with the matches entirely. It looks like a customary bar-room matchbook; it's intended to look like a customary bar-room matchbook; but matches being inside the matchbook would be to hint at an unhealthy product, and McDonald's certainly wouldn't dream of doing anything so irresponsible.

In fact, despite huge evidence to the contrary, the worldwide chain still sides with the health mafia as if they are still in their good books.

Who can forget the classic quote from the President of their Japanese operation back in August?

He also said the company has a responsibility to society as the nation's largest restaurant chain.

Funny, that. Because it's exactly such 'responsibility to society' which public health bodies are intent on using to batter the company into the history books.

McDonalds can continue kidding themselves by trying to appease righteous lunacy wherever the perverse condition presents itself, but it will make not a jot of difference ... they are the next target in the crosshair whether they play ball or not.

McDonalds may find that the sight of a few matches is strictly taboo these days but, however much the burger chain plays the saint, I can't envisage this delightful playset enjoying much of a future the way things are going, can you?

The Pursuit Of, Err, Happiness?

Via Ravengrim, we find that one of the world's newest democracies has gone all bonkers.

It’s a new year. And starting today, the Tobacco Control Act comes into effect. So if you cultivate or harvest, manufacture, supply or distribute tobacco and tobacco products, you’ll be jailed for at least three years and up to five years.

If you possess tobacco, and if you can’t prove that you’ve imported it for your own consumption, you’ll be jailed for at least one year and up to three years, but only if you reveal from where you got your tobacco. If you don’t reveal your source, you’ll receive an additional sentence, jailing you for least three more years and up to five more years.

This is Bhutan, and yes, it's a dot in the arse end of nowhere. OK, I can sense you're none the wiser, so let's explain cartographically.

So what on earth could be behind such hideous dictatorial lunacy? What kind of 'democratic' legislative ideology are they working from?

King Jigme Singye Wangchuck would go much further. With the self-confidence of a ruler whose country has never been conquered, he has tried to dictate the terms of Bhutan’s opening—and in the process redefine the very meaning of development. The felicitous phrase he invented to describe his approach: Gross National Happiness.

Phew! Lucky we haven't got anything like that here, isn't it?

Oh ... hang on.

Smoking Bans In Homes - A Clue To Their Implementation

I've mentioned here, on a number of occasions, that anti-smoking obsessives are actively working on how to implement smoking bans in our homes.

Government aren't resisting them either. The Department of Health's John Tilley said this on the matter in October 2009.

“Action on smoking in the home will be a necessary part of future strategy on tobacco control."

Don't think anything has changed since the election, by the way. A new government makes not a jot of difference and John Tilley is still in the same job, doing exactly the same as before.

Whenever I raise this issue, though, the general response is that it can't be enforced. "It's my home, Dick, what they gonna do? Peer through the windows?", they say, "My home, my rules", etc etc etc.

Well, via Reason, we get a glimpse of exactly how such bans will be achieved in the future.

Last week the Minnesota Supreme Court agreed to hear a case in which the Institute for Justice is challenging a local ordinance that lets housing inspectors roam people's apartments to make sure they're up to code. Red Wing, Minnesota, began requiring the inspections in 2006 as a condition of granting rental licenses to landlords. If a landlord or occupant does not agree to an inspection, the city can ask a judge for a warrant. But because the visits are classified as "administrative inspections," the city does not have to show there is any reason to suspect that a particular building is substandard. Armed with administrative warrants, inspectors can poke their noses into tenants' bedrooms, bathrooms, closets, and even, until a recent revision of the law, refrigerators and medicine cabinets. Although they are ostensibly looking for hazards that need to be corrected, they are expected to report evidence of certain crimes—including methamphetamine production, child abuse, elder abuse, and pet abuse—to the police. Inspectors thus can serve as proxies for the police, who would not be allowed to search people's homes without probable cause to support a criminal search warrant.

No warrant. No permission. Nothing. It's not an isolated case, either, such arrangements are becoming commonplace in the US.

Now, two things are required before this is to be applied over here in support of a smokefree homes law. The first one is easy, and is also very much on the anti-smoker radar. In fact, more than that, there are 827,000 matches on Google at time of writing for "smoking around kids child abuse". This wouldn't even require legislation, merely an addition to the list of recognised abuses that social services should be looking for.

The second is more problematic and would require legislation, and they will probably do so under the environmental banner.

The example in America is for rented accommodation and revolves around licensing - a tool of the state I've also mentioned before - for ensuring the safety of the property (thereby interfering in a contract between two mutually consenting parties, it should be noted), but could be equally applied anywhere really, and for private homes as well.

We've already seen the requirement for Energy Performance Certificates enforced by the EU and omitted from the abolishment of Home Information Packs for property vendors. Considering the fact that our dozy MPs are already scared witless at the absurd idea that they may drown in their offices, it's not a big step towards inspections of all properties for the sake of the planet, is it?

Oh, and while they're in there, they may as well keep an eye out for ... well, exactly what the inspectors in Minnesota are told to have a sneaky watch for, really.

Hell, why even stop there? While checking the environmental efficiency of the fridge freezer, the inspectors could make a mental note of alcohol contained therein, or the prevalence of unhealthy processed food. Once the state is inside your front door, don't ever think that it won't be tempted to take the 'next logical step' and pry into other areas.

If the current political mindset is intent on enforcing smoking bans in homes, they won't let a silly concept like private property get in the way.

Link Tank 01/01

Plink plink fizz, then get on with it for God's sake. New year, same drill.

London hosts the first annual boredom conference

The iPhone-controlled beer cannon - now you need never walk to the fridge again

Forcing restaurants to display calorific information has no effect on reducing fast food consumption

Maldives politician says "everyone including foreigners should respect the laws of the country" by not celebrating Christmas

A UK-based New Zealander's top 10 wishes for British politics in 2011

Now ex-smokers are banned from employment in Florida hospitals

Women: Get in the kitchen ... and drink some whiskey

Happy Christmas (global warming is over)

Fisking 'Gordon Brown The Hero'

Nigeria's first porn movie 'selling out fast'