The Phantom smoke fingers from Health Canada

Eugenicists taught us in the early part of the last century an equation we too quickly forgot. When political bias is greater than moral bias the result is an abundance of mortalities. The elegance to health scare reform drew the partners of industry and political power brokers flocking to add their views to the process. The corruption of the process undermined what could have been a pretty good idea, if the consensus view of many with no training to support their opinions were negated. Eugenics is at the forefront once again in promoting population view over interactive communities which are being deliberately ignored. The consensus crowd who are abundantly aware of the advantages this offers in the inspiration of political will are slipping the bonds of ethics in search of protections in plausible deniability to promote political control at the expense of personal freedom. Population views ultimately lead to isolation and undue ethical violations. Biases of lower socioeconomic, gender, race and cultural groups are inevitable as health risks reside primarily defined within categorical groups more predominantly than in others. The authorities of moral turpitude are those of financial and political advantage who judge their own “normal” activities as a marker for excellence in all defined groups.

Doctors throughout their training for the past 50 years have been programmed throughout to believe nothing causes more harm in our environment than tobacco smoking despite the fact as the lobbies confirm less than half of those who smoke will die of smoking related diseases after decades of smoking. Other factors in our environment such as diesel exhaust and radon are largely ignored in support of the benefactors who’s funding of process needs to be protected. The vast majority of those who die in coined smoking related categories die after the age of 70. If taken in perspective the smokers actually in the exception of Lung Cancers which represents less than 1% of all mortality die very close to population averages even within smoking related categories. Within 25% of the population who smoke we see 25% of mortality associated more predominantly to age than to smoking .

The risk of smoking can be seen to be much higher than it truly needs to be in all disease categories and particularly among Lung cancers. The three most popular choices for smoking specific cancers are largely ignored from a standpoint of preventative medicine with the only allowable cure being cessation. Cessation of course would include political purchases of advertisements selling the approved varieties of cessation devices because the makers pay to play. The Who and the CDC know through their own research smoking could carry a lot less risk to smokers. Risk to non smokers as a result of second hand smoke could all but be eliminated with simple regulation. The advances in physical science from the stand point of chemoprevention although significant advancements are known. For over a decade politics has downplayed the health relevant information with the” no safe cigarette” message risk is set in stone to be defended and consistent with political self importance, in protecting the lies of the past and of those to come. God forbid smokers could be led to believe smoking could be safer. It is judged more ethically responsible to allow them to die in exaggerated numbers than allow such a premise. The popularity polls demand it and all who fail to celebrate the victories of industrial lobbies will pay dearly in the campaign of consensus. Health scare professionals made popular by fear and hatred dividing us upon ourselves..

The inadequacies of denormalization promotions by the former Liberal government of Paul Martin in the politicizing of Health Canada should be degusting to the current Government judged by their ethics; promotion of those same principles and expansion of support, defines them as fraudulent and self serving above all else. This government incredibly is more disgusting than the last. Did we not hear a call for change and renewal of ethics in politics? If this is as good as it gets we have some serious problems in the vision of the future or longevity of this country. True Conservative values of the past could never support the politics of tyranny and hate purchased with the pubic purse.

Eugenicists defined those at the top of industry and educational standing to be a result of genetic superiority a superiority which needed to be protected from the influences of non superior genes. The death of 10 million innocents as the result, was the price we paid last time for listening to these amoral despots. After the war because of protections of position and wealth few were punished for their crimes. In Ontario the castration of imbeciles continues to this day without apology to the victims of the past or conscience preventing their victims in the future. For the World Health Organization members to be legally contract bound to the same principles today with little public discussion among the involved populations, we see the potential for, as the pre war Germans found, an awakening one day to realize we are no longer in charge of our own destiny but bound to tyrannical bindings of fear and coercive activities. Unilateralist decries are allotting power to the media dispensing political correctness to keep us docile and in our place. Laws prohibiting free speech. Denouncing a right to assembly for smokers of late that right does not include a roof or walls. They soon may be refused medical treatment and all parental rights to their own children. This is supported by the decries “smokers are not a legal class” which affords the right to ignore their individuals rights in some twisted version of the rules of human rights perspectives. Gyrations from a legal standpoint in political speak as opposed to our civic duty to respect human rights laws and initiatives outside a courthouse out of the respect of our neighbors almost a quarter of the population base. What will they do to torment the obese or the alcoholics while we toy with decriminalization of pot smoking which has a much higher carcinogenic content than tobacco? Hypocrisy abounds in the amoral crusade to make us do as we are told for our own good. Is this an effort to promote health or the popularity and prestige of the tyrants of the new normal. Promotions of the demagoguery of those who currently can afford to be different as defined by wealth and birthright alone?

For your reading pleasure;

The new normal

Purveyors of the new globalist perspective

The Borg alliance; Tobacco Control, The Galtons and David Duke of the Clan working together and building our tomorrow

The sales department dedication to funding
96% of us are exhibiting risk potential and should be dealt with severely with shame taxation for our crimes

Proof they don’t know Jack although they are related to Adolph…

Reinventing the wheel A Likely source of the modern Lieberal Red Book

An ounce of prevention?

Poison is in the dose

Jumping from the 15th floor instead of the 20th

Amoral bias gone wild
Footnote; Pay special attention to the assessments of all toxins reviewed barely an instance is included with no reference to ETS. In assessment of ETS a long list of non definitive statements and cause associations to existence alone, the comprehensive study of all relevant research negates the inclusion of any value of alternatives to smoking bans in risk assessment or regulation of the product safety including the three references above which are down played in process. Incredibly even the assessment of diesel exhaust is blessed with the realization some of the included toxins are also found in ETS, despite the volumes which in fact are many times less and well below safe levels as opposed to the volumes in the much more deadly toxin being discussed and categorized with much less concern, despite the obviously unavoidable community risk. To date has any effort been expended to deal with the problem to the degree a barely significant risk assessment in ETS provides the means for billions in funding of community chaos?

Why Lobbies really focus on children; surveying RWJF and Johnson and Johnson stock market analysis of NRT sales They make great emotional props.

Excluded from the toxins list for obvious reasons

Consider the source

And follow the money

Gomery style investments in Liberal friendly media groups

Lessons in undermining political process and democracies through coercive methodology

Human Rights? Only if we say so

If any of you believe you ever had a choice in smoking ban votes,
The federal government promised to undermine Provincial authority, they even signed a contract
The fix was in bans at all costs were promised, prior to the half Billion dollar brain washing campaigns

Purchasing your fairy tales and making sure everyone believes you

Polar bears are dying of hypothermia? The ice caps are melting?
Global warming could happen, just not today
the wind chill in Resolute is minus 53, go figure…

The skinny on fat pandemonia

More of what they know but choose to ignore

Risk assessment, assessing the discovery process

Neil Coleslaw works advising the Canadian Government in Tobacco smoke issues.
Through his funded Lobby group, Fascists for a smoke free la la land, or something similar
in addition to an embarrassing attempt at a book sale, a third rate fiction piece
which indicates he wants to take over the tobacco industry with government funding.
In the past he spent millions of UN money trying to produce evidence of ETS harm, he left in shame
Undaunted he still pretends he did not understand what he found.
This is the self same opportunist who used a dying woman’s cancer as a tool to sell his wares, on the international stage

Who is being protected and who is believed to be dying?

Shooting the messenger

A little perspective please

Now you see it [For fun can you spot the lie in the first paragraph?]

And now you don’t?
(Researcher Stephen S, Hecht Ph D confirmed recently no carcinogens were found in non smokers exposed to ETS, toenails “the article is incorrect”
[The author to date, refuses to recant the political lie in the article despite being advised of the good Doctor’s honest opinion.]

This article is one of my all time favorites in a proactive as opposed to reactive perspective

Just for laughs a bunch more therapy to get your head straight

Disclaimer;
Any similarity of despots and trash described to real humans, is purely coincidental. Some names have been chamged to protect me, from any legal onslaught or death threats from the lawyers of the Guilty.