View previous topic | View next topic

DEATH RATES

Page 2 of 4
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

MatC
64846.  Tue Apr 11, 2006 8:45 am Reply with quote

Just in case it wasnít clear, my post above was in support of garrick - but, like him, I have found that this is the One Unspeakable Truth in our culture today, on which no debate is allowable, which is why I donít think itís worth discussing: people will only get angry.

 
DELETED
64848.  Tue Apr 11, 2006 8:46 am Reply with quote

DELETED

 
MatC
69702.  Sat May 13, 2006 10:06 am Reply with quote

More undermining of that great superstition of the 20th century, the ďsmoking-related disease,Ē comes from a study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, which shows that people in the US are much unhealthier than people in England (sic; not UK), despite smoking the same amount (and drinking less, incidentally).

The richest people in the US have the same disease rates as the poorest people in England. The diseases covered include lung cancer, diabetes, heart disease, and high blood pressure - and the differences are gigantic. Heart disease was 50 per cent higher in the US.

ďSmoking rates were similar.Ē

S: Daily Telegraph 2 May 2006
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/05/02/nhealth02.xml

 
MatC
151073.  Sat Feb 24, 2007 6:01 am Reply with quote

I have written a pamphlet, in which I argue that the antismoking crusade is based on religion, rather than science. Iíve been writing it for well over 20 years, and am quite surprised to find that Iíve now finished it.

What I want to do is to somehow put it up on the internet, so that anyone who wants to can read it for free. But Iíve no idea how to do that, or even if itís possible. Any helpful suggestions would be gratefully received. The pamphlet is about 44,000 words and 536KB.

 
grizzly
151080.  Sat Feb 24, 2007 6:22 am Reply with quote

Is this a pamphlet or a book?

 
MatC
151091.  Sat Feb 24, 2007 7:05 am Reply with quote

Well, it's sort of a quite big pamphlet ... !

 
suze
151092.  Sat Feb 24, 2007 7:10 am Reply with quote

I'm guessing that it either is, or could be made to be, in PDF format.

In that case, pretty much any DIY free website would be able to hold it so that people can download it.

 
violetriga
151111.  Sat Feb 24, 2007 9:53 am Reply with quote

suze wrote:
I'm guessing that it either is, or could be made to be, in PDF format.

In that case, pretty much any DIY free website would be able to hold it so that people can download it.


Indeed, or even in the web space provided by your ISP (but then it doesn't have a nice URI).

 
Flash
151132.  Sat Feb 24, 2007 10:52 am Reply with quote

Mat - this short essay may help:
http://www.egrindstone.co.uk/techWebmanagesite.htm

AOL give you 14MB of web space, if they are your ISP.

 
smiley_face
151199.  Sat Feb 24, 2007 3:17 pm Reply with quote

Mat - why don't you try using freewebs, which is free to use. You have to put up with a banner at the top, but other than that there is no intrusive advertising.

If you want to use a proper web-hosting service, 34sp.com are very good in my experience, and are based in Manchester, so you just phone them up if you have a problem (or alternatively you can visit them in person if you give them a bit of notice).

For the lowest capacity hosting, it costs £17.95 a year, which allows you 200MB of space and 2000MB per month of traffic. If you do exceed that, you just pay them a couple of quid more.

 
Bunter
151231.  Sat Feb 24, 2007 7:17 pm Reply with quote

Do you smoke Mat?

 
Bunter
151237.  Sat Feb 24, 2007 7:40 pm Reply with quote

Quote:
I have written a pamphlet, in which I argue that the antismoking crusade is based on religion


I've got a problem with your argument btw which is that I don't think there is actually an antismoking crusade. It's merely perceived.

Sure, the government is banning it in public, but that is merely a smoke screen (excuse the pun, but it's not intended) for keeping the highly lucratvie (tax dollar) business going.

We're merely made to believe that there is an antismoking crusade because it makes governments look like they care about the welfare of their citizens.

Until more than one country bans cigarettes in entirety (Bhutan), the antismoking 'crusade' consists merely of a bit of spin-doctoring from global governments and a few piss-poorly funded action groups such as ASH.

 
Flash
151244.  Sat Feb 24, 2007 8:33 pm Reply with quote

I watched a TV documentary made in '60s yesterday; almost everybody in it was smoking, on the phone, in the street, on the train, on the Tube. In the '70s they used to advertise pipe tobacco on the TV on the basis that it made you attractive to women. Now there is no advertising of tobacco on any poster, TV screen or magazine page in the UK. Ten years ago, smoking in my office in London was the norm. Seven years ago, it was restricted to one smoking room. Six years ago, you had to smoke outside. Five years ago, you weren't allowed to smoke outside. Today in Italy, Ireland, New York, California and Scotland (and probably in other places I don't happen to have visited) it is actually illegal to smoke in public buildings and places of work.

This begins to look like an anti-smoking movement to me, I must say.

 
copperbottom
151255.  Sun Feb 25, 2007 4:17 am Reply with quote

Can I suggest another way of looking at this?

Nobody's death certificate says 'died of smoking'. Likewise, no death certificate gives the immediate cause of death as 'old age' or 'AIDS' (at least not in the UK, with some very rare exceptions). Given roughly equal mortality rates between countries, the mere fact there are less deaths from lung cancer and heart disease in Portugal and Japan assumes greater incidences in other 'immediate' causes of death or different reporting requirements. Who can say whether, in those countries, a combination of diet and genetics doesn't result in smoking triggering something else just as fatal?

All we know is that in those countries where there has been a significant drop in smoking there has been a matched drop in heart and lung disease.

We don't need better statistics, we need different statistics, and better ways of collecting them.

 
Bunter
151256.  Sun Feb 25, 2007 4:19 am Reply with quote

Quote:
This begins to look like an anti-smoking movement to me, I must say


Imagine you were a kid at school and the teacher said you couldn't eat sweets in class or on the sports pitch, but you could eat them in the common room...would you think there was a 'crusade' against sweets? Surely not.

As I said, you have been so exposed to multi-trillion pound pro-smoking brainwashing that not being able to smoke in your office or in a hospital ward seems like losing a liberty.

And don't forget, by the way, that teacher herself was paid by the sweetie companies to make you think this:

Quote:
In July 1992, Margaret Thatcher was hired by tobacco company Philip Morris Companies, now the Altria Group, as a "geopolitical consultant" for US$250,000 per year and an annual contribution of US$250,000 to her Foundation.

(Source: Wiki)

And what do you think teacher advised for her $0.5million?

"Ban sweeties from the sports pitch but not the common room. The teachers will be happy and the students won't mind either. And, best of all, we can still sell lots of sweeties."

 

Page 2 of 4
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group