Thursday, December 8, 2011

Mental fitness down to “lots and lots of cigarettes”

The former German chancellor, Helmut Schmidt, who is 92, has attributed his mental fitness to “lots and lots of cigarettes”, according to a Hollywood Reporter story.

How is it that some smokers live to such a ripe, old age, whilst being wholly cognizant? Perhaps the chancellor is onto something. Maybe some scientist somewhere should go study this phenomena/paradox; this would increase the likelihood of finding out why so many smokers DO in fact perish from "smoking-related" diseases.

Maybe Mr. Schmidt eats right, or maybe he just doesn't carry the cancer gene. Wouldn't it be nice to know the difference, so that people would be able to make choices, based on individual risk(s)? Oh, but that would require a plethora of investment(s) into a little something called SCIENCE that's free of any and all political intrusions.

One thing is for certain: If a smoker can live to be 92 years old, it most likely would take CENTURIES to truthfully attribute a single death to 2nd-hand smoke.

Here is the link the the Hollywood Reporter article:

On-Air Smoking by Ex-German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt Leads to Complaints

Tobacco Reporter Magazine - News


  1. I've long understood that tobacco smoking is used to mask many other actual causes of death. Avoids paying compo if it can be demonstrated that the individual brought about their own demise.

    Just found your blog. Nice one.

  2. You make a strong point Bollixed, one that most likely has some truth to it. Thanks for stopping by!

  3. Study: live to 100 by defying all health advice

    Einstein College recently studied folks who lived past age 95. The reluctantly reported result: "People who live to 95 or older are no more virtuous than the rest of us in terms of their diet, exercise routine or smoking and drinking habits."

    Einstein College press release: ... 78&pt=news

    Did you notice in link above that they just state that the very old smoked about as much as did people who died younger, with no detail given, although detail is given regarding eating, boozing, exercise, and so on? Well, when it came to publishing the abstract with the National Institutes of Health, they ignore smoking results entirely! They do say that smoking was studied, but make no mention whatsoever that smoking was not shown to impair longevity: again, as with the press release, precise detail is given regarding other studied factors, but when it came to smoking -- the holy taboo of all holy taboos -- they simply couldn't bear even to mention their own finding!

    Here it is: the official NIH abstract:

    You'd probably have to pay about $50 to buy the full study from the Wiley service where it's posted. But you don't have to. A reporter for an independent publication who read the study tells us that about 74% of 70-year old men smoked and that smokers still made up the majority of over-95 men at 60%, while 26% of 70-year-old women smoked and a greater proportion of about 30% of over-95 women smoked, and that, all-in-all, the oldest folks did not particularly follow any of the Healthist advice to exercise, eat "healthy", or avoid booze and tobacco.

    The news article: ... pectations

    Did you note the researcher's conclusion: "Although this study demonstrates that centenarians can be obese, smoke and avoid exercise ... We should watch our weight, avoid smoking and be sure to exercise, since these activities have been shown to have great health benefits for the general population, including a longer lifespan."

  4. Thanks for the links. I have not had the chance/time to read them yet, but plan on doing so shortly:-)

    "..but when it came to smoking -- the holy taboo of all holy taboos -- they simply couldn't bear even to mention their own finding!"

    Lol...When it comes to the issue of smoking, this is the one area where the anti-smoking establishment manages to remain consistent. No one is allowed to challenge the relativism of the day, even when absolute truths glare at them/us directly in the face.

  5. "You'd probably have to pay about $50 to buy the full study from the Wiley service where it's posted. But you don't have to."

    That's a good thing, lol..because I don't get paid for this, therefore, I have no $$$ to pay for access to such studies...beyond the abstract.

  6. This comment has been removed by the author.

  7. Anonymous-

    The 1st and 3rd links that you have provided are incomplete. Do you have the proper links? Thanks-


There was an error in this gadget