Head Rambles

Grandad March 3rd, 2010

Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

These are probably the most famous words in the American Declaration of Independence.  I would consider them to be probably the most basic rights of any man on earth.

The Americans are always on about liberty, and make great play about how they are probably the freest society on the planet.  I would argue that, especially since they introduced their Homeland Security thing, but that’s not what I’m on about today.

I was browsing yesterday when I read a piece in The Rest of the Story.  Quite honestly I had to read it a couple of times before I could believe my eyes.

"To further our mission of building healthier communities, effective February, 1, 2010, Memorial Health Care System will no longer hire individuals who use tobacco or nicotine products in any form. Memorial Health Care System and its affiliates recognize the major importance of associates’ health and well being, and the responsibility of maintaining a healthy and safe environment for all associates, volunteers, patients and visitors. Therefore, all individuals who are offered a position with Memorial Health Care System or any of its affiliates, are screened for illegal drug, alcohol, and/or tobacco/nicotine use as part of the post-offer health screening. Individuals whose post-offer health screening results are verified positive for illegal drugs, alcohol, and/or tobacco/nicotine use, and/or whose reference and/or background checks are verified unsatisfactory, will be disqualified from employment, their job offer will be withdrawn, and they may be disqualified from applying for employment for six (6) months from the date of the post-offer health screening."

In the land of Freedom; the land of Liberty, an organisation is refusing to employ people who have contact with nicotine.  Now, the anti-tobacco crowd will see nothing wrong with this and maybe even some of you rational people may see no problem here, but I would ask you to stop and think.

I suppose it is within the realms of logic that a company could refuse to employ smokers.  There is a marginal argument that a company may not like their workers nipping outdoors for a fag break during working hours.  I would contend that if a company were so concerned, that they should fight to have the indoor smoking ban removed. 

However, when you examine this ‘mission statement’ above, you will find they are going do regular screening – presumably blood/urine tests? – and therefore a person who may smoke say two cigarettes a day over breakfast is ineligible for employment. 

However, this is not the ultimate farce.

A person who may be trying to give up smoking, with the aid of nicotine patches or an inhaler cannot be employed.

This drive against smoking is reaching new depths of depravity.  We are reaching a level where the mere mention of nicotine will be a crime.  Irrespective of the fact that there is no scientific proof whatsoever that nicotine causes to anyone [with the possible exception of the smoker, but I would even dispute that] there is a drive to criminalise a sizeable portion of society.  Not only that, but they are criminalising even those who are trying to quit smoking.  Smokers are now not only being treated as second class citizens, with no rights, but are actually being deemed unemployable.  Where is the liberty here?  Where is the right to the pursuit of happiness here?

This doesn’t just concern smokers.  This should concern every single right thinking person.

This is not about smoking.  This is about how a group of fanatics whose cause is based on hearsay, prejudice and irrational fear can inveigle their way so deeply into society that their twisted thinking becomes the norm.

Do we want a world where one group can discriminate so outrageously against another?

Do we want a world where, on the unsubstantiated claims of one group can turn another group into second class citizens?

Today, it’s smokers.  Tomorrow it will be drinkers, eaters, you name it.

Am I the only person who is terrified at the way the world is going?

• Smoking , The Nanny State
• Comments(19)

Grandad February 18th, 2010

Here we fucking go again.

The Irish Cancer Society want the government to invest more in anti smoking campaigns.

Why?

Why are these people so hell bent on criminalising smokers?

There is only one proven cause of cancer, and that is radiation.  Why are the ICS not screaming from the rooftops about Sellafield?  Why are they not campaigning vigorously against nuclear power?  Why are they totally ignoring radon gas which is at dangerously high levels in many parts of the country?  Why this obsession with smoking?

Smoking has never been proven to be a cause of cancer.  They have tried in numerous laboratory experiments to create tumours by forcing animals to smoke, and they have never succeeded.  In fact, they found that the smoking subject developed less cancers than the non-smoking.

And why are the ICS the self appointed guardians of the nation’s health? Are they going to claim that smokers cost the state billions in health care?  That is another lie that the Antis love to shout.  If you add up the cost to the nation of the number of people who have been hospitalised because of illnesses directly caused by smoking, then I could probably pay for it out of my pension.  You see, once you remove the people who have broken legs, who happen to smoke, or people with chest complaints caused by other reasons who happen to smoke then you are left with nothing.  Why?  Because there are no complaints that are directly and solely caused by smoking, unless you count the people who suffer from burns when they set their homes on fire.  Yet smokers contribute hundreds of millions, if not billions to the government coffers in taxes and excise, but that is conveniently forgotten.

Ireland has one of the toughest regimes in Europe when it comes to picking on the unfortunate smoker.  Yet since the ban was introduced, smoking rates have increased here, as they have in the U.K. and France.  What does that tell you?  It tells you that all the cash squandered on covering up tobacco displays, creating laws, employing smoking control officers and putting God knows how many pubs out of business has achieved sweet fuck all.  It has all been a massive waste of time, jobs and money.  The only thing it has achieved is to alienate a significant sector of society and to promote an atmosphere of divisiveness and apartheid.

The ICS say that 70% of smokers want to quit.  So fucking what?  If they are that keen on people quitting, why don’t they provide free nicotine patches?  Why don’t they promote the use of e-cigarettes?  Why don’t they help those who want to quit instead of forcing everyone into the underworld with their draconian measures?

That figure of 70% is a load of bollox anyway.  If someone asked me if I wanted to quit, I would probably yes simply because it is the answer expected of me, as would most [70%] of people.  What I would like to know is the actual number of people who, at this moment, are actively trying to quit.  I can guarantee that it is a lot less than their fucking 70%.  And even assuming the figures are correct, what about the other 30%?  They don’t want to quit, as is their legitimate right, yet the ICS want to impose their will on that 30%?  Is that just?  Is that democratic?

My message to the Irish Cancer Society is simple.

MIND YOUR OWN FUCKING BUSINESS.

Concentrate on finding a cure for cancer.  Concentrate on things that are positive.

And stop funding that shower of interfering, holier than thou wankers in ASH.

• Smoking
• Comments(16)

Grandad February 10th, 2010

A couple of my readers have been kind [or perverse] enough to point out an item of ‘news’ that is doing the rounds at the moment.

I say ‘news’ but this little nugget has been around since 2008.

I am referring to a rather alarming study regarding Third Hand Smoke.

We all know what smoking is, I presume?  There are still major questions hanging over the dangers of that one, but I will leave that aside for now.

Then there is Environmental Tobacco Smoke, or as some people like to call it – second hand smoke.  The dangers of ETS have never been proven.  We constantly hear expressions such as “the well known dangers of” and “is known to be” and vague airy expressions, but I have yet so find any authoritative and definitive study that proves any dangers.  In other words, the dangers of ETS lies only in rumour, popular belief and innuendo.

Back in 2008, a paediatrician by the name of Jonathan Winickoff made a solo run and decided to invent the concept now known as Third Hand Smoke.  Note that he is a paediatrician; not an oncologist or an environmentalist, but an expert on children’s health.  He took it on himself to investigate the effects of tobacco smoke in a room after the smoker has left.

Winickoff’s initial ‘research’ consisted of a survey of people’s opinions.  Yes.  He asked them if they thought that Third Hand Smoke could be dangerous.  When the majority expressed an opinion that, yes, they thought it could be harmful, then Winickhoff had his ‘proof’ that it was harmful!  By the same token, he could have asked them if they believed in Extra Terrestrials, and that would again have provided ‘conclusive scientific proof’?

Science is pretty advanced these days.  Equipment has become ever more sophisticated to the point where it is safe to say that if something exists, no matter how small the quantity, that it can be detected.  We are at the stage where individual molecules of an element or chemical can be detected in a sample of matter.  As a simple example, I can guarantee [and will stake anything you care to mention, up to and including my life] that tests will find traces of Zirconium-95 [which is highly radioactive] in every living person in the UK and Ireland as a result of the Chernobyl disaster.  There may only be a molecule or two, but it will be there.  In fact, I would suggest that just about anything could be found if one searched hard enough.  I would imagine that I would have several molecules of meteorite dust on my body, and probably a molecule or two that once passed through Napoleon.

Now here is the problem.  If I find my molecules of Zirconium-95, how do I describe the amount?  Do I say I have found one part per trillion, or do I say I have found a ‘significant’ amount?  Anti-smokers tend to choose the latter.

I have searched the Interweb looking for further studies, but all I can find are press reports announcing this ‘alarming new threat’.  I found one reference to a study that found that the bedrooms of non-smokers had concentrations of nicotine of 0.09 mcg/m³, while those of smokers had levels of 0.22 mcg/m³.  Two things I would point out here – the first is that nicotine was found in the bedrooms of non-smokers just goes to show that it’s a naturally occurring substance anyway [do you eat potatoes?] and the second is that while there appears to be an ‘alarming increase’, the safe level is considered to be 500 mcg/m³, so there is hardly a ‘significant threat’?

At the start, I stated that the studies were alarming.  I meant that for two reasons.  The first is that I find it alarming that anyone would take such a ‘study’ seriously.  If I produced a result like that in my primary school exams, I would be failed without hesitation.  The second reason for alarm is that the public are being duped by the whole farce.  This is a myth that has become fact purely through popular belief.

It has reached the stage now where ASH [good old ASH!] are now claiming that even if you smoke in your garden, the residue you bring back on your clothing is killing your children.  This is clearly an irrational and insane proposal, but this is the level to which the public is descending.  ASH are using their own theory now to propose that smoking be banned in private homes.

The zealots love to quote that there is no safe level of tobacco smoke.

I would contend that there is no safe level of anti-smoking zealots.

Severe Toxic Bullshit Warning

• Smoking , WANK
• Comments(26)

Grandad February 8th, 2010

For as long as I can remember, I have been searching for the perfect pipe.

I wanted a pipe that was comfortable and well balanced, and it must provide a cool dry smoke.

My first perfect pipe was the Ronson.  It was lovely, as it had a nice cooling system built in.  Unfortunately, it turned out to be not so perfect after all, as the bowl screwed into the stem, and after a while the threads in the wooden bowl wore, and the damn thing leaked.

I tried a Falcon.  Again, that had had exactly the same problem as the Ronson, and I gave up on that.  Tobacco juice is not pleasant stuff when it leaks everywhere.

I have a grand range of briars which I have smoked for years, but they all suffer from the same problem – the juice tends to make the tobacco at the bottom of the bowl soggy and towards the end, the smoke becomes somewhat acrid.  As a result, half my tobacco gets chucked away.

A couple of years ago, I found a great web site – Elie’s Freehand Pipes.  What attracted me was the sheer artistry of the pipes he produces.  They are all made by himself in his workshops.

Some time ago, I bought an Elie’s Comrade.  This was an excellent pipe.  It had a grand cooling and filter system, and had a series of interchangeable bowls.  It did suffer from a minor design flaw that meant that after a while, leakage started between the bowl and the stem.  Maybe it was just mine – I don’t know – but it meant I was having to cope with juice on my hands again.

A few weeks ago, I was browsing his site, and I noticed that he has developed a new range – his EKool range.  They looked great.  I wrote to Elie, who incidentally is the most helpful bloke you could meet and made enquiries.

To cut a long story short, I have found the Perfect Pipe.

So what is so special about it?

For a start, all joints are metal to metal, so there are no wooden threads to wear.  Then the mouthpiece extends down inside the stem with an ingenious cooling system to prevent goo or liquid reaching the mouth.  When liquid begins to condense and collect, it is a simple matter to quickly unscrew the plug at the end to drain it.  The tobacco remains dry and can be smoked to the last scrap.  The bowls are interchangeable too, and I got a lovely selection.  Last but not least, I think it looks great.  It’s different.  It also looks a little on the illegal side, which is a added bonus.

If there is anyone out there contemplating a pipe purchase, then I suggest you toddle over to Elie’s site.  There is something there for everyone.  Quite honestly, I would be tempted to buy some even if I didn’t smoke.

Incidentally, Elie doesn’t know I’m writing this.  He didn’t ask me to and I’m only doing it because I am so impressed.

Mind you, if he sees this, and feels he has to respond, I wouldn’t half mind a d’ElieSmoke.  Heh!

• Smoking
• Comments(19)

Grandad January 19th, 2010

This may seem like a silly question at first glance, but think about it.

Why is there a campaign against smoking?

Most people seem to think that it has something to do with health, but there are too many arguments against that.

If health is the concern, then why isn’t there a campaign against fatty food, alcohol, exhaust fumes, and a million and one other far more dangerous facets of modern life.   I know there is talk about them, but you must admit it is not in the same league.  There is also the simple fact that smoking is not unhealthy, nor is tobacco smoke.  People have been fed the lie for so long now that it is taken as unquestioned fact.  Are you aware that Richard Doll [whose studies are used as the basis for all the modern campaign] and the WHO have both found that smoking up to ten cigarettes a day prolongs life and promotes a healthier life.  That category of smoker is statistically healthier than a non smoker.  But because of this strange campaign, both studies were buried as they didn’t fit in with the required results.

If you are still concerned about the health issue, I would ask you if you enjoy a barbecue?  Do you burn wood in your fireplace?  Do you enjoy a flame grilled steak?  If so, you are ingesting all the carcinogens attributed to tobacco but in a greater quantity by a factor of many thousand. Are you aware that eating a simple portion of mashed potato gives you as much nicotine as spending four hours in a smoke filled bar?  You didn’t know that, did you?

So if health is not the issue, then what is?

Is the the smell of tobacco smoke?  If smell is the issue, why is there not a campaign against perfumes, bad hygiene and farting? 

Is it the sight of cigarettes?  That would be a strange reason for such a massive international campaign?  They would be legislating against soother/pacifiers then?  Or sticking a biro in one’s mouth?

Logically, there can be only one reason.  There is only one group to benefit from the bans and that is the pharmaceutical industry with its patches and gums.  Is it a coincidence that the vast amount [if not all] of the research into ‘the dangers of smoking’ is funded by that industry? 

Next time you see some poor sod standing freezing outside a pub or office having a quick smoke, just think about it.

Why should he or she be a victim?

• Smoking
• Comments(40)