TPG Paper: Anti-smoking Zealots are Bullies II

Everyone knows what bullying is: it is on the top of the social “Stop It!” list. Picking on some one in a weaker position and causing them harm is horrific. However, it is okay to be a social bully. The majority of smokers are poor and the lobbyists pushing the anti-smoking revolution are let us say, relatively better off. My main objection is the way these soldiers of the anti smoking cause treat people, who happen to enjoy tobacco. These bullies, under the guise of concern for public health, are making good peoples’ lives miserable. The anti-smoking movement is mean, hurtful and misinformed!

I would never argue that smoking is good for you; however, I really do not see it at as the cause of all human illness and death. According to the anti-smoking lobbyists, smoking causes everything from haemorrhoids to herpes. There are enough small studies done now days that it is very easy to pick and choose research that can be used to support almost anything - truth or opinion. My complaint is antismoking lobbyists use these questionable techniques with zealous self-righteousness.

First, the statement on cigarette packages that, “Cigarettes Cause Cancer” is wrong. Real social scientists never use the word cause. Why, because as scientists, they look at ALL factors associated with a problem, not just the politically incorrect ones. Second, “A small town dies every year” and the supporting graphs depicting cigarettes alone kill more people than anything else, are at best contrived. These research claims are false and misleading. Nothing is more sinister to public interest than research quoted by a social movement with an agenda.

Yes, we all hate cancer and we would love to have something or someone to blame for our losses. Unfortunately, people like to see things simply and this is what has happened - you hate cancer, Smoking Causes Cancer therefore, you hate smokers - not much of a leap. It is incredibly easy to make smokers the representatives of this disease. Unfortunately, it is not that simple of a disease and not that simple a solution. Over half my immediate family has died from cancer - none of them ever smoked. Could it be genetic?

Good research looks further. Good research searches for the truth. People lobbying in the name of public health should look for the truth. There are so many variables in life that it is impossible to examine them all at the same time, at the same place, or with the same people. Good quality research on health looks at more than smoking or non-smoking. Maybe there are other causes of poor health. Good research looks at genetics, location, diet, exercise and stress. Moreover, good research looks at health and longevity in terms of socio-economic status defined by income, education and social status.

The Public Broadcasting (PBS) channel presented an excellent-quality comprehensive study on the determinants of health. Unnatural Causes: In Sickness and in Wealth details and compiles many well respected studies on health in North America. Most of these studies were long term and had large numbers of subjects. According this award winning presentation, the biggest health determinant hands-down over smoking, drinking/drugs etc. is low socio-economic status.

In North America, people get sick because they are poor and less educated. Poor people cannot afford to eat well and, are less able or likely to lobby for their own health care. More importantly, they have little control over their lives. Independence takes money, education or social status. Minimum wage employment rarely comes with perks, and your behaviour is controlled by a corporate manual. You think that sucks, now you can’t even enjoy tobacco to make yourself feel better.

In recent years, people who enjoy tobacco have been subject to degrading advertising, social stigma and now, total social isolation. Neuroscientist Kathleen Taylor studies social cruelty and states that the abuse of others is much easier after the process of ‘other’-ization gets under way. This is when a social group of strength dehumanizes their targets by social campaigns before attack. This is similar to that of the anti-smoking lobbyists. Their ads portray smokers as smelly, dirty, unattractive scum bags with bad teeth, who probably have a bad ‘life’ attitude. Now that the target is dehumanized, we can hurt them without guilt.

Smokers are not welcome ANYWHERE! At the beginning of this movement when lobbyists were weak and smoking was popular, people agreed to make compromises. As the movement gained strength, smokers moved slowly from smoking sections to smoking lounges to permanent banishment from any social situation. Heck, you can’t even get a place to live if you enjoy tobacco. If they did this to any other segment of society, there would be hell to pay.

Smokers are weak and cannot fund opposing research on benefits of smoking or actively question the lack of research on second-hand smoke, because most are from the poorer end of the social scale. I would bet that if questioned casually, most anti-smoking zealots are more offended by the smell of cigarette smoke than its long-term health risks. Poor people smell bad. Reminds me of the playground in elementary school.

How can such lofty people, struggling in the fight for public health be so mean and lacking compassion for other human beings. Smokers do not represent cancer the disease; smokers represent nice, honest, hard working humans with a vice that has been around for centuries. Of course, the social isolation, social stigma and humiliation is okay, now that the target is dehumanized.

I object to the methods used by anti-smoking zealots. Their evidence is suspect and their intentions mean spirited. Please compromise just a bit! At least allow private clubs a smoking room with a cutting edge air purification system. We have the technology. It is not fair to pay a 100% tax on a package of smokes to a society that won’t let you inside…


e-mail: xntrkpublishing@gmail.com