This is DaveAtherton20's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following DaveAtherton20's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Recent Activity
What is not debatable is that Varenicline is directly linked to suicide and aggressive behaviour. What is most obnoxious about this case is that the following anti smoking smoking organisations have been silent: The Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids; The American Cancer Society; The American Heart Association; The American Lung Association; Action on Smoking and Health; The American Academy of Pediatrics; and The American Legacy Foundation. All receive payments from Pfizer.
@Nick Yes the SCOTH report which most politicians relied upon for passive smoking was written by a Trustee of ASH. It is a bit like Lord Mandelson writing a report on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Any excess in a passive smoking study can be put down to misclassification. Where smokers identify themselves as non smokers and also mislead researchers on how much they smoke and when they quit. That is why most of the evidence provided by ASH et al is junk science.
Here is a list of passive smoking studies and lung cancer. 10% suggest a risk, 5% suggest protection and 85% the null hypothesis. “There is also evidence of a dose-response relationship, with risk higher if the husband smokes more cigarettes per day or for a longer period of time. However, there are a number of reasons why this association and dose-response relationship cannot be interpreted as indicating a causal effect of ETS exposure including: • the association is weak and is not statistically significant in the great majority of studies: over 80% show no statistically significant association between smoking by the husband and the development of lung cancer; • the combined results vary over time, with the association being significantly weaker in the studies published from 1990 than in those published in the 1980s; • some of the very largest studies show no association, including four of the five studies involving over 400 lung cancer cases. One of these reported no statistically significant association between lung cancer and any index of ETS exposure, while another even reported a statistically significantly reduced risk of lung cancer for non-smoking women married to smokers;”
@Nick Here are some scientific studies done into how much non smokers breathe in. For example the worst figure is 0.009 cigarettes per hour, not even 1% of an active smoker. Explain to me why this is so dangerous. I should also add the UK government’s report into passive smoking published in November 2004 the Scientific Committee on Tobacco and Health (SCoTH). Written by Action on Smoking and Health’s (ASH) Trustee Dr. Martin Jarvis on page 8 (SCoTH) numbering he writes: The increased risk associated with exposure to SHS is about 25%, a substantial fraction of the risk from active smoking, although uptake of smoke by non-smokers is typically only about 1% of that by active smokers” “What I hope to do over the coming weeks is publish as much information on passive smoking that I have in my archives. Firstly what I want to consider is how much does a non smoker inhale from a smoker. The first paper is from 1975 and was published in the New England Journal of Medicine. Commuter train 0.004 Commuter bus 0.005 Bus waiting room 0.001 Airline waiting room 0.003 Restaurant 0.004 Cocktail lounge 0.009 Student lounge 0.002 The last figure is the the equivalent of cigarettes per hour based on the nicotine the machine picked up.”
Demonising second hand smoke, albeit scientifically inaccurate pales into insignificance when compared to the carnage caused by car pollution. Here is a summary from Parliament headed up by Tim Yeo. "air pollution could be contributing to as many as 50,000 deaths per year – as it makes asthma worse and exacerbates heart disease and respiratory illness. Averaged across the whole UK population it is estimated that poor air quality is shortening lives by 7-8 months.” “Air pollution on UK streets is contributing to tens of thousands of early deaths each year and the Government is not doing enough to tackle the problem, according to a report published today by the cross-party Environmental Audit Committee. Report: Air Quality Environmental Audit Committee Tim Yeo MP, Chair of the Environmental Audit Committee said: “Air pollution probably causes more deaths than passive smoking, traffic accidents or obesity, yet it receives very little attention from Government or the media.” “In the worst affected areas this invisible killer could be taking years off the lives of people most at risk, such as those with asthma. “Much more needs to be done to save lives and reduce the enormous burden air pollution is placing on the NHS.” According to evidence presented to the inquiry, air pollution could be contributing to as many as 50,000 deaths per year – as it makes asthma worse and exacerbates heart disease and respiratory illness. Averaged across the whole UK population it is estimated that poor air quality is shortening lives by 7-8 months. In pollution hotspots it could be cutting the most vulnerable people’s lives short by as much as nine years, the report says. Despite these considerable impacts on public health, very little effort is being put into reducing air pollution levels compared with efforts to tackle smoking, alcohol misuse and obesity, the report says. Air pollution from road vehicles causes the most damage to health, the MPs conclude. A dramatic shift in transport policy is required if air quality is to be improved, they add."
@Purlieu American owned poker sites were unaffected along with betting on the internet on the horses. Here is an American poker site you can download and deposit now.
This is ASH with their hands in the till. "Varenicline (trade name Champix) is a drug prescribed to assist smoking cessation. Clinical trials during drug development excluded patients with active psychiatric illnesses leaving the risks associated with varenicline use in this patient population unknown. A review of the evidence in Expert Opinion on Drug Safety 26 has concluded that although the risk of potential europsychiatric events is evident through voluntary reporting systems and reported cases in the literature, multiple studies and case reports support the use of Varenicline in the mental health population."
@Brian I have just read the rest of your intolerance. Smokers effectively cost the taxpayer nothing in treatment. The Dutch Health Ministry actuaries calculated that the lifetime costs of treating the healthy at Eu 281,000 while because smokers die 7 years younger than non smokers cost Eu 220,000. Smokers die at an average age of 73.5 they are less likely to go into expensive care homes for dementia and Alzheimers. We contribute £10 billion in direct taxation alone which since 1993 under the then Chancellor Ken Clarke has been ring fenced to go to the NHS. If we all gave up that would be 4p on income tax for you Brian. The tobacco industry employs 80,000 people in the UK directly and indirectly contributing another £2 billion in NI income and corporation taxes. Plus as we die earlier we save £0.5 billion a year in old age pensions etc, etc. I assume you drive a car Brian. Tim Yeo Chair of the Parliaments Environmental Committee car pollution causes five times more deaths than passive smoking. Both statements are junk science. The Parliamentary report says: “Air pollution probably causes more deaths than passive smoking, traffic accidents or obesity, yet it receives very little attention from Government or from the media.” Hypocrisy Brian? If you dislike the sight and the experience of smokers on the streets so much I guess you must support separate smoking rooms then
Toggle Commented Feb 16, 2011 on Common sense prevails in Bath at Big Brother Watch
@Brian here are a list of polls where pre and post smoking ban the public was asked its opinion. 52% against smoking ban in Edinburgh. Paid for by Nicotinel who would gain from people giving up. 58% of Tories want the ban amended for all pubs 73% of Tories want smoking ban relaxed in private members clubs. 28 Jul 2004 More than 80 percent of pub customers in Wales are opposed to a complete ban on smoking in pubs according to a survey carried out for leading independent brewer, pubs and drinks company SA Brain & Co Ltd. The independent survey of nearly 1,400 customers and staff found that only 19 percent of customers and 12 percent of staff support a total ban on smoking in pubs. There was, however, more widespread support for the provision of no smoking areas for eating and at the bar. Around 42 percent of customers agreed that no smoking should be the policy in eating areas of the pub. Twenty-two and a half percent support banning smoking at the bar at 22.5 percent and 23 percent of customers said that they would spend more time in the pub if changes to the smoking policy were made. Around 83 percent said that the level of smoke was not a problem in the pub in which they were interviewed. Of the total number of customers surveyed, 41 percent were smokers. Retail director for SA Brain & Co Ltd, Philip Lay, said Alas the information has been taken down but that is what it said. 74% want exemptions to the smoking ban "Three quarters of people in Scotland believe there should be exemptions to the smoking ban, a poll has suggested. The Populus survey, for the pro-smoking group Forest, revealed 74% of 1,004 people surveyed thought private clubs should be allowed smoking rooms.
Toggle Commented Feb 16, 2011 on Common sense prevails in Bath at Big Brother Watch
Doe Kerry McCarthy think the guilty person will sportingly stand in line to offer a sample?
Only if there was some evidence that 5 portions a day of fruit and vegetables had any positive effect on your health. A study by the World Health Organization came to this conclusion after studying 500,000 people. "The study of 500,000 Europeans joins a growing body of evidence undermining the high hopes that pushing "five-a-day" might slash Western cancer rates. "This latest study, which analysed recruits from 10 countries to the highly-regarded European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition, confirms that the association between fruit and vegetable intake and reduced cancer risk is indeed weak." "There are many things we can do to lower our chances of developing cancer such as not smoking, keeping a healthy weight, cutting down on alcohol, eating a healthy balanced diet, being physically active and staying safe in the sun." Apart from smoking and exercise this is junk science extraordinaire. The optimal level of alcohol is 30-40 units a week and especially in the UK we suffer from a lack of sun for the production of Vitamin D. For the first time since the Victorian era amongst the XBox generation ricketts has returned.
DaveAtherton20 is now following The Typepad Team
Jan 10, 2011