...continuing with present measures alone will not be sufficient to contain the epidemic. Thus, the idea of planning for an endgame has recently gained traction in the global public health community
Here it is, the End Game all spelled out in an easy to understand language.
For anyone who was under the impression that smoking bans were (ever) about protecting non-smokers, I give to you some rather interesting quotes straight from the dark cabals of the TC enterprise itself:
...it is necessary to move beyond a focus on tobacco control (and its concomitant assumptions that tobacco is here to stay and that regulating the time, place and manner of its use is the policy objective) toward a focus on planning how to reach a tobacco-free future.
Not a smoke-free future (as if that were even possible) mind you, but a tobacco-free future.
...some countries regarded as tobacco control leaders are instituting endgame planning.
....we define tobacco endgame thinking as follows: Initiatives designed to change/eliminate permanently the structural, political and social dynamics that sustain the tobacco epidemic, in order to achieve within a specific time an endpoint for the tobacco epidemic.
Change/eliminate social dynamics? What ever are they alluding to? Anyone who does not find this beyond creepy is not paying attention.
No wonder they want to close down many of (most) the clubs and bars in the U.K., the U.S., and beyond. People talk and enjoy themselves in those places. Some of them even have live music! ...and many musicians smoke/vape. They (especially those from a "certain" demographic) must be eliminated!
Who are these people that would like to eliminate me from public view, and thus from having any kind of social life? I don't recall ever giving them permission to denormalize me, my family, or my friends.
Major advances in tobacco control have been achieved in recent years, particularly in countries signing and ratifying the World Health Organization (WHO) Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), adopted in 2003 and ratified as of this writing by more than 170 countries, including the UK in 2004.
Endgame proposals currently under discussion focus on the product, the user, the retail level, and the market system...
Product-centred ideas include regulating nicotine levels to make cigarettes non- or less addictive, redesigning the cigarette to make it unappealing to smoke, banning the commercial sale of combustible tobacco...
....Other options thought worth considering included banning menthol or other flavourings, reducing nicotine content in cigarettes, and banning filters.
..But menthol has been proven to be less risky than it's non -menthol counterpart. Why in the world would they want to make smoking more risky than it already is? ..and how would reducing nicotine in combustible cigarettes equate to a desirable outcome for those who choose to continue on smoking?
Wasn't anti's entire argument against light cigarettes based on the theory that smokers tend to inhale light cigarettes more deeply (thus increasing the risk) to compensate for the lack of nicotine absorption to the lungs and thus, the brain?
Shouldn't they instead be arguing on behalf of a higher nicotine cigarette that produces little to no tar at all? Better yet, how about arguing in favor of the more modern HnB technology that is finally set to emerge in the 2nd decade of the 21st century? I also find it quite disturbing (and insulting) that they'd suggest that banning filters as an "option". Did they even bother to ask any smokers on how they would feel about that? I'm beginning to think that they want many of my friends and family (myself included) to just up and DIE!!!!
..and not very democratic.
...and I'm only on page 5 of 79!!
There's more... a lot more.. Here are some of the short and long-term recommendations put forth by the neo-prohibitionists of peace, love, and joy:
Develop, test, and fund a phased, and sustained mass media-campaign....
Lucy Gaston lives!!!
That equates to the further "denormalization" of smokers and non-smokers who vape and use any form tobacco.
..and enhanced tobacco industry monitoring and surveillance programs...
Isn't it (or shouldn't it..) illegal to spy on people without their consent?
Basically, what they are suggesting in this report is the eradication of all forms of tobacco, smoked and not smoked, from the earth!
Not very pragmatic...
I don't know about you, but I don't fancy being labeled a criminal in my old age simply because I like to vape tobacco and e-cigarettes; and I certainly am not ok with the very real possibility of being spied on by extremists simply because I have a blog about smokers'/vapers' rights and harm reduction.
I am already sick and tired of wasting my tax dollars on the failed (world-wide) drug war that we have been waging for over four decades now; expanding on that war is not an option. I vote and I will vote against anybody who threatens to take my life and freedom away.
Make no mistake: the end game is all about making room for more prisoners.
Read on, if you can stomach it:
Tobacco Control Endgames: Global Initiatives and Implications for the UK. Written by Ruth Malone, and colleagues from the University of California, San Francisco-