Thursday, October 25, 2012

So Much for Public Health

A report by the convention secretariat to the countries attending basically urges them to ban e-cigarettes, saying they are “products resembling cigarettes and could therefore undermine the denormalization of tobacco use…

Does anyone actually still believe that the WHO is about health? One thing is for certain though: They seem to fancy the idea of a worldwide dictatorship. Too harsh an assessment on my part? I hardly think so.

Let me get this straight: If the risk of partaking in the act of putting a nicotine stick to one's mouth is drastically or almost completely eliminated, the Neo Do Gooders of (Counter) Do Gooderism would still push for banning the act(s) of both smoking and vaping, merely due to prejudice? Apparently so.

Basically what they are saying is: 

We are not going to ALLOW the development and marketing of reduced risk tobacco products, no matter what form they may take either now or in the future. If you defy us by choosing to smoke, you deserve to DIE. Oh, and by the way, we are not going to give up on our little idea of getting our paws (ie., becoming the recipients/beneficiaries of) on that GLOBAL TOBACCO TAX that we have been greedily discussing with our member nation states around the world. Now, just how are we going to get our greedy little hands on all of that money if you tobacco harm reduction people actually succeed in eliminating all or most of the risk that's associated with smoking? Smoking must be kept as dangerous as possible to keep the cash flow going.

There is nothing democratic, moral, or "healthy" about this stance at all, which is why I believe that some of these people are actually dangerous to the very concept of freedom itself. ...and what of the nefarious effects on progress, innovation, as well as that of the very important and necessary field of science, without which the former cannot exist?

They are deathly (pun intended) afraid of "allowing" the continued proliferation of e-cigarettes into the marketplace, partially do to prejudice, but also due to the fact that they have the potential to open the door(s) for the development of a safer tobacco cigarette (..or for even that of several reduced risk cigarettes). They know that if the science is there (and it already is), that they will not be able to prevent the idea of tobacco harm reduction from going forward; therefore, they must squash, bury, and ban everything and anything that resembles the act of smoking itself, even if said product(s) pose no real threat to individual smokers or that of the public at large.

WHO takes aim at e-cigarettes - ACSH

9 comments:

  1. Neatly written and explained.Thanks for sharing.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Good health is very important and necessary for every one. This analysis report is very impressive and good for public health.
    Harshal Shah

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In that case ensuring that everyone has enough to eat, clean water to drink, access to healthcare, education, contraception and decent housing are all probably well above banning the e-cig on the list of things the public health industry should be worrying about.

      Marie

      Delete
  3. How is banning e-cigarettes simply because the "look" like the real thing good for public health?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I for one share the same sentiment as you do.. Though they say that they ban the use of products(like e-cigs) that imitate smoking because they don't want to imply to the public that smoking is okay, I find it difficult that they have no other ulterior motives to it. Though I think that organizations like WHO have their perspective on the matter, I think it's just an excuse for them to completely banning e-cigs.

      Kind Regards
      Mark

      Delete
  4. They only want Nicotine patches legal!

    Smells big pharma behind it like everything else.
    But then again the nazi Tobacco Control groups get their funding from taxes on the sales of real cigs not ecigs. Perhaps the Tobacco Control folks havent figured a way to get taxes to line their pockets yet!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe they're both behind it Harley. That's what I suspect anyway. Both stand to lose a lot of money if tobacco harm reduction becomes a reality.

      Delete
  5. This post is fabulous !!! thank you for spreading awareness !!

    ReplyDelete

Gadget

This content is not yet available over encrypted connections.