They simply can't back it up!

And so it all began in 1975, but where has it got to now? We now know that the smoking ban was brought in on the back of lies, fabrications, manipulated statistics & utter junk science-in fact I am surprised that Jamrozik's name and science still be held in the same sentence such was the estimated garbage he gave the world!

We have already seen where AGE UK have totally shirked the issue of loneliness & solitude for our elderly-because they smoke. We already have it cast in stone that as far as 'they' are concerned at least 4 million of our smokers can die in resplendant isolation for if they smoke then sorting out some form of social contact is now a thing of the past! Just another government funded sock puppet no doubt!

We have been having some fun with a Mr Ken Armstrong, Complaints manager @ Tayside NHS, who has been extolling the virtues of his "Smoking Liaison Officer" who patrols the grounds of Ninewells (Dundee) hospital after it has been declared "considers smoking to be the most serious threat to the health of the people of Tayside."  

 

According to Dr Gabriella Segura a wisp or two of SHS is right at the bottom of the list of things NOT to inhale! I am no scientist but even my humble brain would lead me toward removing all vehicular emissions on the grounds of Tayside Hospitals-wouldn't yours? 

 

The full response to my enquiry is here and there are a few questions that needed to be asked! So I sent the following back:

(Thanks to Belinda)     I thank you for your response to my original query re your policies regarding smoking & NHS Tayside. You state: "NHS Tayside, along with other Health Boards in Scotland, considers smoking to be the most serious threat to the health of the people of Tayside" Is that so Kenneth? Then please explain to me how Scotland has received these warnings from the EU concerning air pollution yet you think the humble cigarette far outwieghs all else! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-16333155
I quote from the article: "WWF Scotland has analysed Scottish Air Quality data on nitrogen dioxide (NO2) levels in parts of Aberdeen, Dundee, Edinburgh, Glasgow and Perth. The group said they were in breach of EU targets designed to protect health." Looks to me like Tayside has a much larger problem than a smoker!
If air pollution is NOT a problem, then why is Cameron moving the goalposts everytime the EU threaten to impose fines on our little island? They don't want to impose pollution fines on those who choose to smoke!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/mar/11/britain-300m-fine-london-air-pollution

In your second sentence you actually say what you truly mean when you say  "In accordance with this view we believe that, as a public health organisation, it should contribute, in every way possible. to continuing de-normalising smoking."

As non smokers yourselves, and in the vast majority of people nowadays of course, you feel empowered to bully those of a less significant number into doing what you would like them to do! You have decided that you abhor smoking, therefore smoking/smokers should be eradicated. In effect, being of the 75% that no longer smoke, you can dictate what the other 25% must do in order to please you. What happened to freedom of choice along the way, or freedom of expression? It is already proven that SHS is harmless, especially outside in the open air so what you are trying to enforce is through sheer 'bloody mindedness' and nothing else. I would also ask you a very simple question Kenneth-"which is the more lethal, 20 minutes in an air tight container with cigarettes or exhaust fumes being pumped in?" Don't you think your statement ".... considers smoking to be the most serious threat to the health of the people of Tayside" is somewhat put to bed? Is it any wonder people in general mock those who quote such rubbish?
Quote: "A key component of this is Taysides Policy which bans smoking in its grounds".  Very good indeed, I applaud your resolve Kenneth but there is one small problem my friend-you have no legal power to do so because the law does not ban smoking in an outside area. Indeed, you may ban anyone smoking in a doorway etc but once twelve inches away from that doorway the law renders you powerless! Fact.
Now I come to the hilarious part of your response: "Our Liaison officer is trained to persuade those NHS staff and visitors who smoke in our grounds to put out their cigarettes and signpost them to support services to help them quit smoking permanently". Kenneth, my mirth shows no sign of abatement ten minutes after reading this for if a smoker simply says, "Bugger off and keep your nose outta ma business" then there is absolutely nothing your trained monkey liaison officer chappy can do! If a smoker enjoys his/her cigarettes as they obviously do then no amount of cajoling by this flatfootted buffoon is going to make them change their minds-he might as well talk to the polluted air that is all around Scottish people-smoker & non smoker alike.
The latter part of your Liaison Officers 'powers' are particularly insidious "In the case of staff, he can also report smokers to their line managers for potential disciplinary action". How absolutely disgraceful that you may have fully qualified Dr's & Nurses working in Tayside hospitals for years, doing exemplary work yet now, because of one idealogical law they are reported for enjoying that which they may have enjoyed for 30-50 years. just how despicable has this sad, sad nation of ours become.
Couple this with the fact that it is proven beyond all doubt that  non smokers & drinkers are a complete drain on the Welfare State because they have the audacity to live longer and it rather defeats the object of the exercise does it not? Add to that the simple fact that people are more concerned with their quality of life (enjoyment), not longevity and it renders this entire ideology baseless!
I have no doubt that some of your staff have taken the opportunity to give up smoking, good for them, but this is not about those that are willing to try, this is about absolute bullyboy tactics on those who DO NOT wish to give up as they enjoy their cigarettes, pipes, roll ups, joints etc too much.
Very kind of you to actually have ONE smoking shelter for 'in-patients' to use. I don't suppose it has occurred to you that the elderly and/or infirm will not bother to totter from one end of the hospital to the other to utilise this wondrous gift as it is easier for them to stand outside-where ever there is a door! You say that when you had more shelters 'visitors saw this as an excuse to smoke anywhere they liked'. Newsflash Kenneth - they still can, providing they are outside the building!
Do you seriously think that your Smoking Policy will eventually lead to a smoke-free Scotland. I am a non smoker Kenneth and I can tell you now that this is never going to happen. It is so sad that the anti tobacco funded lunatics (that lobby government-which is wrong!) such as ASH (England, Wales & Scotland) have drummed up this message because this is never going to happen. Too many people enjoy a cigarette, or a pipe, or a roll up or smoking pot for smoking to be wiped out-you have to be realistic man and not blinded by the jihadists like Duffy, Robison, Arnott, Sandford et al.
You are part of an idealogical law brought in on the back of lies, fabrications, manipulated statistics & utter junk science-if you would like me to detail each one please don't hesitate to ask> I will give you one clue Kenneth-Jill Pell and her now infamous Heart Attack study (17% reduction I believe) which was debunked within 24 hrs and later caused a public apology on the BBC. Would you like more?
Whilst I have no doubt that you feel you are on the winning side in this prohibitionary era (just remember America in the 1920's) [remember the bloodshed over puritanism!] I would warn you to look back seventy years to 1935. You will find that one Adolf Hitler instigated similar public warfare & propaganda in those times and look what happened!
I look forward to your comments on all the above and have no worries Kenneth, I can reference everything if need be

Yours expectantly

 Note that his attention is drawn to the comparison between a humble cigarette & Scotlands obviously major problem with general air pollution.
Note that he then states: "... should contribute, in every way possible. to continuing de-normalising smoking." Err, why? Isn't this denying people their freedom of choice I ask?
Note, I asked: "I would also ask you a very simple question Kenneth-"which is the more lethal, 20 minutes in an air tight container with cigarettes or exhaust fumes being pumped in?"
 Note he quotes 'their' policy of "No smoking on hospital grounds...", the only problem being of course, that the pratt has no power to enforce 'their policy'. In fact, if you read my response to this dyed in the wool smoker hater you will see that we pointed out a considerable number of wrongs in his reply; I awaited his detailed response to that lot with bated breath (not really, but it sounds good ). Today was the day and today it all became crystal clear, well as clear as mud!

a)... NHS Tayside, on the basis of health improvement, health protection and policy compliance (national & local), wish to stop staff smoking on-site and at the same time influence the behaviours of visitors, carers and patients accordingly.
b)... It is early days with the new initiative launched only 3 months ago but the signs are positive with significant reductions of on-site smoking by staff and some positive feedback from visitors.

So, we can clearly see that Mr Kenneth Armstrong cannot (or does not want to) answer any of my questions proving that the pollution argument is simply cobblers!  
He doesn't want to take me on over the 'bullying' charge afforded to the 'policy treatment' of staff, carers or visitors!  
He doesn't really wish to argue the point that exhaust emissions might be deadlier than a few wisps of SHS (how strange!). 
He refuses to acknowlege that he (nor any of his like minded souls) have any legal power to physically 'stop' a smoker smoking on the grounds! 
He seems to revel in the fact that, as employess, staff can face disciplinary action for doing that which they have probably done for thirty years-serves them right if they have a staff shortage in coming years! 

 

He also seems to follow the path of the extremely righteous in refusing to accept that Scotland will NOT be smoke-free within 20 years!
In fact his reply to me was basically a waste of time and effort for all the effort involved on his part was in avoiding all the questions posed to him! I know he cannot answer the questions for he has pointed me in the direction of the "Scottish Public Services Ombudsman", knowing full well that all he/she will do is point me at the date this law was implemented. 
I have replied once more asking him how they justify the immense expenditure of £22m on a programme that has yielded a 2% decrease in smokers-I doubt the answer will be all that interesting, if I even get one! 
Meanwhile, in another anti tobacco lunatic asylum, the Philippine Department of Health has now declared that e-cigs should be avoided as they WILL NOT assist quitting smoking! I find that to be an incredibly naive statement as e-cigs are already being hailed as the greatest aid to quitting smoking! Question: how much was involved and who has paid off the impoverished Philippines Government? And here's a newbie to the advertising ranks as e-cigs will soon be clearly advertised!
As I've mentioned before the Bulgarians are not very happy bunnies at the prospect of the total ban and many cafe owners have been fined for ignoring the law.  In fact, so angry are many of the 40% smokers that they have sworn to set up their own political party so as to defeat the present ruling party! 

 

And who can blame them for this ban will have a disastrous effect on an already impoverished population where 33% live below the poverty line, where the local cafe is the center of social activity and worse still, the tourism rate (a major source of income) is already falling! Frank Davis has a fair bit to say about it here. Supported by the EU directive on tobacco control, this will put even more strain on the financial demise of the totally ruptured EU! 

Can you have any sympathy for these numbskulls who seek to enforce a law through stigmatisation, denormalisation and bullying those who choose to smoke?-I don't think so. No matter how much they spend (see above), they still demand more & more to defeat the evil cigarette-absolutely barmy as we totter toward financial obscurity.
There is some good news however as the Missouri House panel voted against imposing office smoking bans, much to the chagrin of State Rep. Kimberly Gardner, D-St. Louis, who had implored colleagues to adopt her amendment by citing statistics about the health risks associated with smoking and breathing in the others' tobacco smoke (same old garbage then!). Talking of garbage (not to mention double standards) our EU MPs dictate smoking policies yet still light up in Brussels. Of course it was banned there but then the EuroMPs overturned their own ruling as "they do a very stressful job" - oh bless!

John Humphreys wrote a delightful piece stating that "It was time to stand up for smokers rights" but it seems (as that was written eighteen months ago) no one is prepared to stand up for smokers-well, very few of us at any rate! 
And to better thae above we have a marvellous article from DR Gabriella Segura describes the present situation perfectly in a piece entitled "About why doctors lie, and how to deal with it - We live in a very dark age..."..... oh indeed we do, indeed we do. However, there is always a bright spot somewhere and this gem comes form a Spanish (Madrid) unemployment office. Spain is seeing unemployment rise at an alarming rate, especially the under 25's, thanks mainly to EU policies, rules & regulations but THIS is absolutely brilliant and simply turns the clock back 50 years in such a simplistic way. Oh joy! Watch, listen & enjoy.