It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Big Tobacco, Obama, the FDA, and Collusion

page: 1
11
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 12:26 AM
link   
Big Tobacco, Obama, the FDA, and Collusion—Profiteering off Induced Diseases, Cancers and Mass Murder

• Who governs and regulates healthcare in the United States? Who decides on what is safe? Who decides what is harmful? Who oversees the health of the public? Of the individual? Who governs what is healthily and what is safe for the public?

• Why does the U.S. government not promote healthy medicines, consumables and food stuffs? Do lawmakers and regulators care about health of the people or do they care about something else—something completely sinister and evil?


Profiteering off Mass Murder—How the Government and Big Tobacco Colluded Together and Protected Their Interests of Profiteering off Inducing Diseases and Cancers Caused by Tobacco Products

Let me make it clear that I do not believe that the tobacco plant is responsible for this. It is numerous carcinogens that are introduced into the products that cause the tobacco related cancers and diseases. It is how the tobacco products are made, not the tobacco plant. IMO.


• Altria Group Inc.
—One of the largest tobacco and cigarette companies in the world.

—Owns the subsidiaries Phillip Morris USA and Phillip Morris International

Contains two specific board members of Altria: Gerald Baliles and George Muñoz

• Gerald Baliles
—Gerald Baliles is a former Governor of Virginia, an attorney, and has worked directly with the government, specifically former president Bill Clinton

—Became a Board of Director at Altria in 2008

• George Muñoz
—George Muñoz was the Assistant Secretary and CFO of the US Treasury Department from 1993-1997

—George Muñoz was appointed to the President's Commission on White House Fellows by former president Barack Obama in 2009

—Became a Board of Director for Altria in 2004

• The FDA
—Laws set forth by the United States government regarding the FDA and tobacco regulation was first granted on June 22, 2009

—The White House released a press release on June 17, 2009, and George Muñoz was one of the 28 people appointed to the President’s Commission on White House Fellowships by Barack Obama

• How This is Significant
—A board member of one of the largest tobacco and cigarette companies in the world just so happened to be appointed to the President's Commission on White House Fellowships the same year, and actually, just days prior to when The Tobacco Control Act was set into law, which put special restrictions on the FDA that prevents them from banning cigarettes or any tobacco product, and prevented them from actually having any regulatory powers that could actually be of benefit to citizens.

—The Tobacco Control Act placed these restrictions on the FDA's regulatory powers:

1. Require prescriptions to purchase tobacco products.
2. Require the reduction of nicotine yields to zero.
3. Ban face-to-face sales in a particular category of retail outlets.
4. Ban certain classes of tobacco products.

• What the FDA Has to Say About Tobacco


Tobacco use is the single largest preventable cause of disease and death in the United States. Since 2009, FDA has regulated cigarettes, smokeless, and roll-your-own tobacco. FDA finalized a rule, effective August 8, 2016, to regulate all tobacco products.


• What Altria Has to Say About Tobacco and Public Health


Despite efforts to persuade people never to start or to quit once they do, millions of adults will continue using tobacco products. For these consumers, lower-risk products offer a promising opportunity to reduce the harm associated with tobacco use, particularly cigarette smoking. Making reduced-harm products available to these consumers is a critical part of our broader Tobacco Harm Reduction strategy – which also includes supporting cessation and preventing underage tobacco use .



This "Tobacco Harm Reduction" approach to public health has gained momentum in recent years.

 

A strong public health consensus has formed that not all tobacco products present the same risk. In fact, public health authorities agree that there is a broad continuum of risk among tobacco products, with conventional, combustible cigarettes at the highest end of that spectrum.


• What Altria Plans to Do About it


Over the next several years, our companies intend to pursue FDA authorization of superior branded products that offer reduced risk alternatives to adult tobacco consumers.
For example, we're supporting Philip Morris International's (PMI) efforts to submit FDA applications on an electronically-heated tobacco product. We have entered an agreement with PMI that gives Philip Morris USA the exclusive rights to market and distribute this product in the U.S. if the FDA grants PMI’s Modified Risk Tobacco Product application, which is now pending with the agency.


—Wait! Isn't Philip Morris USA a subsidiary owned by Altria? Yes, yes it is.

—But wait! Isn't Philip Morris International a spinout company of Altria (via 2008)? Yes, yes it is.


Connecting the Dots and Using Common Sense and Logic

• In 2008 Altria relocated its headquarters to Richmond, Virginia.

• If you remember from earlier, our friend, Gerald Baliles, was a former Governor of Virginia (Democrat) and it was also in fact the year 2008 when he became a Board of Director at Altria.

In 2009, Phillip Morris USA, a subsidiary owned by Altria, consolidated its state of the art HQ in Richmond, Virginia

• And, if you also remember from earlier, our other friend George Muñoz, the former Assistant Secretary and CFO of the US Treasury Department from 1993-1997 was appointed to the President's Commission on White House Fellows by former president Barack Obama in 2009. He became a Board of Director for Altria in 2004 and he is also principal of the firm, Muñoz Investment Banking Group, LLC.

2009 is also the year in which the Tobacco Control Act was implemented that put specific restrictions on the FDA's regulatory powers over tobacco. This Act actually protected Big Tobacco's interests. Obviously.


Appointed by president Barack Obama ’91, the 28-member commission also included HLS graduates George Muñoz ’77, co-founder of Muñoz Group Investment Banking, and Paul Sarbanes ’60, former U.S. senator from Maryland. “The men and women of this commission embody what makes the White House Fellows program so special,” said President Obama. “These leaders are diverse, non-partisan, and committed to mentoring our next generation of public servants.”


today.law.harvard.edu...


It appears, at least in my mind, that things are far more sinister than one could possibly imagine.


Sources:
www.altria.com...

www.munoz-group.net...

www.fda.gov...

www.fda.gov...

My own common sense and logic
edit on 28-3-2017 by M4ngo because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-3-2017 by M4ngo because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-3-2017 by M4ngo because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-3-2017 by M4ngo because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-3-2017 by M4ngo because: Edit some words




posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 01:01 AM
link   
Blaming everything on Tobacco is steering science away from finding the real causes of these diseases. Nicotine is one of the major medical classes of medicines in the world. so are some of the other chemicals in tobacco. They have made lots of medicines out of tobacco chemistry.

If you notice, Tobacco use has dropped severely in this country while cancer instances have risen at an opposite rate. Nicotinic acid, which is produced when nicotine hits the lungs, is a medicine. Also since tobacco use has fallen, instances of influenza have risen. Why? Tobacco smoke contains some nitric oxide and nitric oxide is formed in a metabolic process involving methyl from coffee as it turns to uric acid in the blood. One of our main defenses against viruses and many microbes is nitric oxide in the body, our body produces it when it senses a pathogen.

Smoking over a pack a day is not good for anyone, in fact a half a pack has beneficial properties. Lots of people smoke two packs a day and that is not healthy, it can lead to problems when too much is consumed. I have read some very technical articles on tobacco and it is definitely a medicine but overconsumption and not consuming other niacin chemistry because of the nicotine in cigarettes can also led to problems. Tobacco is a short term solution, it disappears in a short time while consuming the nicotinic acid, niacinamide, or n-acetylcyseine in food is a better option for long lasting effect.

I think they made people look the wrong way, something else is causing cancer. Cigarettes do cause cancer in some people who lack the enzyme to detox the nitrosamines. According to the class I took, it is the carbon product, tar, that is causing the most problems and from other articles it appears that the carbon monoxide can cause some issues too, but this is not by far the main reason so many people are getting cancer.



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 01:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: rickymouse
Blaming everything on Tobacco is steering science away from finding the real causes of these diseases. Nicotine is one of the major medical classes of medicines in the world. so are some of the other chemicals in tobacco. They have made lots of medicines out of tobacco chemistry.

If you notice, Tobacco use has dropped severely in this country while cancer instances have risen at an opposite rate. Nicotinic acid, which is produced when nicotine hits the lungs, is a medicine. Also since tobacco use has fallen, instances of influenza have risen. Why? Tobacco smoke contains some nitric oxide and nitric oxide is formed in a metabolic process involving methyl from coffee as it turns to uric acid in the blood. One of our main defenses against viruses and many microbes is nitric oxide in the body, our body produces it when it senses a pathogen.

Smoking over a pack a day is not good for anyone, in fact a half a pack has beneficial properties. Lots of people smoke two packs a day and that is not healthy, it can lead to problems when too much is consumed. I have read some very technical articles on tobacco and it is definitely a medicine but overconsumption and not consuming other niacin chemistry because of the nicotine in cigarettes can also led to problems. Tobacco is a short term solution, it disappears in a short time while consuming the nicotinic acid, niacinamide, or n-acetylcyseine in food is a better option for long lasting effect.

I think they made people look the wrong way, something else is causing cancer. Cigarettes do cause cancer in some people who lack the enzyme to detox the nitrosamines. According to the class I took, it is the carbon product, tar, that is causing the most problems and from other articles it appears that the carbon monoxide can cause some issues too, but this is not by far the main reason so many people are getting cancer.


I specifically stated in the opening that I am not targeting the tobacco plant. And I am not suggesting, nor imply, the rise of cancers are a result of tobacco. The thread is not even about these things.

And to suggest that majority of the users of tobacco products that have/had cancers, but actually didn't aquire their cancer from said tobacco products, but from some other "unknown source" is rather ridiculous.

Also,

Tobacco smoke is made up of more than 7,000 chemicals, including over 70 known to cause cancer (carcinogens).


www.cancer.org...



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 01:41 AM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

Since you asked for it,

The alpha-particle-emitting radioactive element, Polonium-210, is present not only in cigarettes but smokeless tobacco. It was reported to be a constituent in tobacco smoke in 1964.


Lung cancers have been induced in 9 to 53 percent of hamsters given multiple intratracheal instillations of polonium-210 in amounts yielding lifetime exposures of 15 to 300 rads to the lungs. Cigarette smokers have previously been estimated to receive 20 rads to areas of the bronchial epithelium from deposited polonium-210. This finding thus supports the hypothesis that alpha radiation resulting from the polonium-210 or lead-210 present in cigarette smoke may be a significant causative factor in human lung cancer.


science.sciencemag.org...

A simple reading of the thread before tossing in your derailing opinion would alert you to this:


Said by M4ngo
Let me make it clear that I do not believe that the tobacco plant is responsible for this.

edit on 28-3-2017 by M4ngo because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 04:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: rickymouse
Blaming everything on Tobacco is steering science away from finding the real causes of these diseases. Nicotine is one of the major medical classes of medicines in the world. so are some of the other chemicals in tobacco. They have made lots of medicines out of tobacco chemistry.

If you notice, Tobacco use has dropped severely in this country while cancer instances have risen at an opposite rate. Nicotinic acid, which is produced when nicotine hits the lungs, is a medicine. Also since tobacco use has fallen, instances of influenza have risen. Why? Tobacco smoke contains some nitric oxide and nitric oxide is formed in a metabolic process involving methyl from coffee as it turns to uric acid in the blood. One of our main defenses against viruses and many microbes is nitric oxide in the body, our body produces it when it senses a pathogen.

Smoking over a pack a day is not good for anyone, in fact a half a pack has beneficial properties. Lots of people smoke two packs a day and that is not healthy, it can lead to problems when too much is consumed. I have read some very technical articles on tobacco and it is definitely a medicine but overconsumption and not consuming other niacin chemistry because of the nicotine in cigarettes can also led to problems. Tobacco is a short term solution, it disappears in a short time while consuming the nicotinic acid, niacinamide, or n-acetylcyseine in food is a better option for long lasting effect.

I think they made people look the wrong way, something else is causing cancer. Cigarettes do cause cancer in some people who lack the enzyme to detox the nitrosamines. According to the class I took, it is the carbon product, tar, that is causing the most problems and from other articles it appears that the carbon monoxide can cause some issues too, but this is not by far the main reason so many people are getting cancer.


I think you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. How is science being steered away, when the science shows tobacco products contain numerous toxins and carcinogens? Please explain that to me, because one of us is wrong, and I guarantee you it is not me.

I smoke cigarettes, I have been addicted for 11 years. Almost my entire family is addicted to cigarettes. The basis for your claims are pathetic, and hold absolutely zero value. Where is something of substance and not your opinion? Tobacco product contain, as far as we know because tobacco companies have lacked any real sound oversight and regulation, specifically, what the hell is in their products—I hope your class taught you that up until 2009, when the Tobacco Control Act was implemented, tobacco companies did not have to disclose the additives they use in their products because they all claimed they were trade secrets. Do you know what a trade secret is? Tobacco companies fail the requirements to meet trade secret protection, hence, why they eventually had to cough up some truth. Are you trying to suggest to me that you actually think fake scientific studies are being published on carcinogens, and really it is Big Tobacco we should trust? That is not how I think, sorry.

I can look on PubMed right this very moment, infact I did years before I created this thread, and read the science. Any fool can look up a damn science publication on tobacco products. It is a fact that they contain additives and they also either cause cancers, or are precursors to cancers. Do you have any idea how things work on a cellular level?
How in the world anyone can logically, much less scientifically, come to any conclusion that Big Tobacco sells us products with therapeutic benefits that outweigh the negative side effects and risks is just plain ignorance.

Cough up the science to back your claims.

edit on 28-3-2017 by M4ngo because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-3-2017 by M4ngo because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-3-2017 by M4ngo because: Misspelling



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 05:16 AM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

If you truly knew what you claimed you did, then you would have known that Nicotine exerts its effects on the main neurotransmitters that the endocannabinoid system regulates—glutamate and GABA. The endocannabinoid system mediates the retrograde signaling process at the synapse of glutamate and GABA neurons. This is a scientific fact, and I have posted about it ad nauseam already.

Again, show me some of the science you speak of, and prove this science wrong.


In the ventral tegmental area (VTA), nicotine binds to nAChRs located on nerve terminals of GABAergic and glutamate neurons projecting on the dopaminergic neurons



Endocannabinoids mediate presynaptic inhibition of glutamatergic transmission in rat ventral tegmental area dopamine neurons through activation of CB1 receptors.



Cannabinoid-1 receptors (CB(1)) have an important role in nicotine reward and their function is disrupted by chronic nicotine exposure, suggesting nicotine-induced alterations in endocannabinoid (eCB) signaling.


www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

www.jneurosci.org...

edit on 28-3-2017 by M4ngo because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 05:55 AM
link   
a reply to: M4ngo




I specifically stated in the opening that I am not targeting the tobacco plant. And I am not suggesting, nor imply, the rise of cancers are a result of tobacco. The thread is not even about these things.


But you went ahead on the attack anyway...sheeeesshh.....
Good thread BTW



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 06:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: M4ngo




I specifically stated in the opening that I am not targeting the tobacco plant. And I am not suggesting, nor imply, the rise of cancers are a result of tobacco. The thread is not even about these things.


But you went ahead on the attack anyway...sheeeesshh.....
Good thread BTW


The attack was induced. And again, I am not, and have not, targeted the tobacco plant. Tobacco companies have been known to extract their nicotine from contaminated tobacco materials (you can guess what fertilizers and insecticides etc that might have been used), and they simply spray a nicotine extract onto the "puffed" dried up sheets of tobacco containing material. These products are called products for a reason and not medicines. I do know certain tobacco plant(s) actually have anti-cancer properties, among other things, but again, not discussing the plant—discussing the products containing tobacco. Hopefully that make sense.
edit on 28-3-2017 by M4ngo because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 06:03 AM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

Inhaling combusted material is carcinogenic. There's not really much more to it than that.
edit on 28-3-2017 by GetHyped because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 06:48 AM
link   
The carcinogenics come from the fertilizers and pesticides.
And are released during the burning. ( imagine that, a controlled action. )
Monsanto is also in the cancer cure business.

Buck



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 08:59 AM
link   
a reply to: GetHyped

goodness me, however did mankind survive living in small houses heated by wood fires for millions of eons.



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 09:02 AM
link   
a reply to: M4ngo

The majority of problems with tobacco is from the environment it is grown in and in additives added to it to keep it fresh and to enhance flavor. Yes, Tobacco has some bad problems but it also has some benefits for many people. It is a medicine and if utilized correctly it can keep some people from needing medicine. It is one of the best skitzo meds around. Most drugs used for treating mental illness also have severe side effects.

I was not trying to derail your thread, I was trying to add content to it to endorse it.

Tobacco is an antidote for many things too, it was used in WW11 to protect soldiers from certain gasses. Although it does not cure the poison, it keeps you alive long enough to get treatment. It temporarily binds to the nicotine/acetylcholine receptors to keep the permanent effects of the gas from killing you. It also keeps you alive if you are exposed to pesticides. That is why lots of farmers used to smoke.

Yes, tobacco has some bad effects, but I know just as many people who have had lung cancer that never smoked and avoided smoke as I do that smoked. They blame it on second hand smoke, and third hand smoke, but they are getting to the point of ridicule.

Also, Tobacco contains some chemicals that are anticancer too. But they do little good if the tobacco is full of added chemistry that offsets the balance. I am not saying that tobacco is good for you, it is just a medicine and if you took too much antipsychotic medicine, it would also be really bad for you. Also, depending on your epigenetic ability to break down the nitrosamines and carbon based molecules, you could be more or less susceptable to the bad effect of tobacco.

Tobacco has some of the same medical benefits as cannabis if smoked, but not near as much of certain ones. It is a different medicine. Cannabis can actually make around ten percent or so of people irrational and argumentative. It can be a bad choice for some people.

I am just saying that Tobacco has been used as a scapegoat and because of that they tried to blame the increase of cancer, after less people are using it, on tobacco. When people go through all the work of quitting, they want to believe they did the right thing and will try to find evidence to back their beliefs. I look at it with an open mind and have definitely read many hundred articles on this subject, actually articles written by researchers. I tried to read an even amount by both sides. I know that the biggest customer of tobacco is now the Pharma industry. The biggest stock holders are Big Pharma in the Tobacco industry. Many medicines are derived from nicotine chemistry. They can modify nicotine to make drugs easier than trying to create them themselves from scratch. There are a lot of meds based on the nightshade chemistry.

Tobacco is a medicine just like cannabis, they both have good and bad problems. Cannabis is a medicine and if you do not have a deficiency of endocannabinoids, it will not help you with that. I have no symptoms of endocannabinoid deficiency, in fact I may make too much naturally. If I drink coffee I smoke a cigarette, if I drink alcohol I smoke. It helps to detox some of the chemistry of both of those if you metabolically cannot detox them well. But you can also eat some other food in the nightshade family, basically have a little hot sauce and it will do the same thing if you drink coffee and alcohol. If the caffeine is not properly metabolized it can cause some problems too in your body.

I can apply my knowledge in multiple ways, I am not limited to just thinking one way, the way consensus of the time says I must think. I eat more natural and do not have symptoms where cannabis will help me so I will not smoke it. I have epilepsy from scar tissue on my temporal lobe, cannabis will not help my form of epilepsy. Beef and chicken soup do though with only moderate side effects.



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 09:29 AM
link   
a reply to: M4ngo

The true collusion is a 2 billion dollars a year trade in nicotene replacement products (patches, gummies, gum etc) for Big Pharma. This market was created by blaming every disease known to man on smoking.

The market is pretty much collapsed now by e-cigarrettes but watch how e-cigs are demonized to try and keep the market going.



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 10:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: TiredofControlFreaks
a reply to: M4ngo

The true collusion is a 2 billion dollars a year trade in nicotene replacement products (patches, gummies, gum etc) for Big Pharma. This market was created by blaming every disease known to man on smoking.

The market is pretty much collapsed now by e-cigarrettes but watch how e-cigs are demonized to try and keep the market going.


Look at this. en.wikipedia.org...

Now calculate how much Pharma boost in income is created by proving that Tobacco is bad for you.

Tobacco does have many bad things associated with it, but it is a medicine too. The additives and the stuff they add or put on it can really make Tobacco negative effects worse though.



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 01:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: TiredofControlFreaks
a reply to: GetHyped

goodness me, however did mankind survive living in small houses heated by wood fires for millions of eons.


They died younger. But hey, we don't need to go back in time to know that, it's still happening now:


The world's deadliest pollution does not come from factories billowing smoke, industries tainting water supplies or chemicals seeping into farm land. It comes from within people's own homes. Smoke from domestic fires kills nearly two million people each year and sickens millions more, according to the World Health Organisation (WHO).

A new UN project has now been set up to try to reduce this appalling toll. It aims, over the next nine years, to put 100 million clean cooking stoves into homes in the developing world.

The WHO ranks the problem as one of the worst health risks facing the poor. In low-income countries, such as those in Africa and Asia, indoor smoke from cooking has become the sixth biggest killer. Globally, it kills more people than malaria, and nearly as many as Aids – and far more insidiously than either.

The problem is partly the fuels used, partly the lack of ventilation. Cooking on open fires and stoves without chimneys, using basic fuels such as wood, animal dung, crop waste and coal, emits hazardous smoke that causes irreversible ill health and killer diseases. Small soot or dust particles penetrate deep into the lungs, causing lung cancer, child pneumonia and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Women and children, whose traditional place is in the kitchen, are the the most common victims.

Stoves and open fires are the primary means of cooking and heating for nearly three billion people. In India, some 400,000 people die each year from the toxic fumes. In Africa, 500,000 children under the age of five die from pneumonia attributable to indoor air pollution, according to the WHO. And in Afghanistan, smoke from cooking and heating fires killed 20 times as many people in 2010 as did the ongoing conflict.


www.independent.co.uk...
edit on 28-3-2017 by GetHyped because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 01:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: flatbush71
The carcinogenics come from the fertilizers and pesticides.
And are released during the burning. ( imagine that, a controlled action. )
Monsanto is also in the cancer cure business.

Buck


The carcinogens come from burning stuff. WTF you're bringing fertilizers, pesticides and monsanto into this for I don't know.
edit on 28-3-2017 by GetHyped because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 01:31 PM
link   
Do you not understand basic chemistry ??
The toxins are in they plant ( from field application ) and are released when the tobacco is smoked.
As well, as mentioned above other additives, preservatives and other various flavorings with negative effects are also released.

Buck


edit on 28-3-2017 by flatbush71 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 01:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: flatbush71
Do you not understand basic chemistry ??
The toxins are in they plant ( from field application ) and are released when the tobacco is smoked.
As well, as mentioned above other additives, preservatives and other various flavorings with negative effects are also released.

Buck



You said:


The carcinogenics come from the fertilizers and pesticides.


...which, had you gazed not one post above mine, would see that the carcinogens come from burning stuff.

You really think, say, Indians living in poverty are spraying trees and dung with fertilizers and pesticides??



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 02:53 PM
link   
a reply to: GetHyped

Wrong wrong wrong

In the "olden days" children died of infectious disease which affected the calculation of population longevity. Seriously, a 1 year old children dying seriously lowers expected lifespans.

However, If you could reach adulthood, you had just as much expection of reaching 80 or 90 as we do today (if you didn't die in childbirth, again, by infectious disease)

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...



Analysis of the mid-Victorian period in the U.K. reveals that life expectancy at age 5 was as good or better than exists today, and the incidence of degenerative disease was 10% of ours. Their levels of physical activity and hence calorific intakes were approximately twice ours. They had relatively little access to alcohol and tobacco; and due to their correspondingly high intake of fruits, whole grains, oily fish and vegetables, they consumed levels of micro- and phytonutrients at approximately ten times the levels considered normal today. This paper relates the nutritional status of the mid-Victorians to their freedom from degenerative disease; and extrapolates recommendations for the cost-effective improvement of public health today.


Are you seriously, and I do mean seriously, going to compare the inhalation of smoke from the burning of 19 g. of dried leaves with the inhalation of the smoke from burning logs to heat a house and cook food all day long???? Like, put away the research that you don't understand and try using plain old common sense.

life expectancy by country

en.wikipedia.org...

and what would that first country be???? why its Japan. Biggest smokers in the world. Now how did they get to be #1 in life expectancy

like I say....a little common sense would not hurt if discerning truth from propaganda and marketing.

Notice that both bit tobacco and big pharmacy stocks have increased in value since the harassment of smokers started in about 2000.



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 03:02 PM
link   
a reply to: flatbush71

There are no toxins released from plants when a cigarette is smoked. The tobacco is completely combusted, including nicotine. smokers are not eating the plant, they are inhaling the smoke of plant combustion. The same smoke you inhale from a wood burning fire

Smokers do not inhale nicotine. Nicotine is combusted along with the rest of the plant. Smokers inhale the products of combustion of nicotine. That is nicotinic acid, otherwise known as niacin (vitamin B). Can you be addicted to a vitamin.

Learn your chemistry. There are indeed 7000 products of combustion contained in cigarette smoke but almost all of these products are present in amounts that are measured in parts per trillion (equal to 1 second every 30,000 years) or are present in amounts too small to be measured and are ASSUMED to be present.

There only 5 substances thought to be carinogenic in tobacco smoke. There 9 substances in your morning coffee that are also thought to be carcinogenic!! Give some careful common sense thought to that little known fact

Carcinogens are endemic to our environment, including Polonium 210 radiation!




top topics



 
11
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join