Orwell propaganda on cigarette packs: Do the authorities lie?

[Ansel]

:-/

http://www.180grader.dk/Videnskab/or...ighederne-lyve

Orwell propaganda on cigarette packs: Do the authorities lie?

Published 6 hours and 1 minute ago in Science

Added 20/06 15:29 to Boblere of Klaus K

Source: dr.dk
0

0
Email
2



Orwell propaganda on cigarette packages: - Do the authorities lie?

Zealots in the anti-smoking lobby - the so-called "tobacco scientists" - and their sponsors in the pharmaceutical industry after intense lobbying prompted the EU to require new warnings on cigarette packets.

There should now read: "Smoking causes 9 out of 10 cases of lung cancer" ... even though everyone knows it is not true. Again, the question arises: Is it OK that the authorities are lying?

Anyone who has read the medical literature in that it is impossible to determine whether a single case of lung cancer caused by smoking. No doctor in the world can do it, the method simply does not exist. So how could one say about 9 out of 10 cases caused by smoking? It can not.

And even if we could, so there are lots of causes of lung toe, which invalidates the allegation. Here, for example. three causes of lung cancer & their percentage of all lung cancer:

* 13-29% of the hazardous substances in the working environment: - http://tinyurl.dk/33823

* 15-20% due to air pollution (table 10): - http://tinyurl.dk/33825

* 17-25% caused by HPV virus: - http://tinyurl.dk/33826

Average: - 60% of all lung cancer independent of smoking

In addition: Twin studies show that about. 40% of all illnesses in fact caused by inherited genetic factors and not lifestyle factors like smoking: http://tinyurl.dk/33827

In many studies, one sees for example. That identical twins (with identical genes) to develop the same diseases, although they were separated at birth and had different lifestyles and different environment.

There is not much left to smoking ... So why the authorities claim it this propaganda-like shape?

Is it really necessary to stoop so low for the large pharmaceutical sponsors at the expense of truth?

See also Klaus K blog

Read the full article here.

or try...

http://translate.google.co.uk/transl...ed=0CEwQ7gEwAA

[Frosted]

I totally understand what you're getting at here but there's a host of other diseases associated with smoking. Basically the odds of leading a healthy later life as a direct result of a lifetime of smoking are very poor.

[Ansel]

I totally understand what you're getting at here but there's a host of other diseases associated with smoking. Basically the odds of leading a healthy later life as a direct result of a lifetime of smoking are very poor.

I know sure but it shows how the powers that be can tell porkies.

[Frosted]

I know sure but it shows how the powers that be can tell porkies.

Definately.

[Darwin]

The U.S. Constitution says in its preamble that one of the purposes of the federal government is to "promote the general welfare". This relatively innocent phrase is used as justification for the ever increasing constriction of citizen behavior in the pursuit of the general welfare to the current point of micromanaging seemingly every facet of the lives of the citizenry. The old English law maxim that "Everything that is not forbidden is allowed" has over the years morphed into "Everything that is not forbidden is allowed, until we can get around to forbidding it."

[Ainkor]

The government is suspect at best. They say it's bad for you yet tax the hell out of it and spend the money. If they really felt it was so bad for you, then try and ban the shit and let tobacco users get their day in court with legit science used to rebut their shameless lies.

[GN Tobacco Sweden AB]

I totally understand what you're getting at here but there's a host of other diseases associated with smoking. Basically the odds of leading a healthy later life as a direct result of a lifetime of smoking are very poor.

I agree with Ansel part of shit we getting on snus is because of govermant lies