Smoking

It is that time of year where all roads lead to a large, taxpayer-funded shindig of tobacco control troughers, hangers-on, activists and prodnoses. This time, the World Conference on Tobacco or Health (WCTOH) heads to Cape Town to discuss the latest “science”, policies, ideas and general authoritarian principles associated with tobacco control.

Interestingly, the UK felt it necessary to send 35 delegates to the conference, all funded by the taxpayer (natch) to the tune of £250,000. Naturally, the usual suspects are there to talk about the various policies that are considered to be “successful” in driving down the smoking rate.

As noted in 2006, ahead of the free vote to ban smoking in public spaces:

It is essential that campaigners create the impression of inevitable success. Campaigning of this kind is literally a confidence trick: the appearance of confidence both creates confidence and demoralises the opposition.

They “knew” they were going to win, and thus were confident in securing the votes for their “next logical step” in the war on smokers.

In somewhat of a surprising move, the American Cancer Society has quietly updated its position statement on electronic cigarettes. I say quietly because there is no mention of this update on any of the social media channels, nor was there any special press release or blog post on their website.

Naturally, doing that makes me a tad suspicious.

Considering that, earlier this year they issued a press release in response to the National Academies of Science Engineering and Medicine (NASEM) report - which I still need to write about. You would, therefore, think that, given that the report likely spurred this position update, they would issue something to herald it. But no.

Two surprising pieces of news appeared in my timeline this week. First, the Czech Republic are planning to reverse parts, if not all of the smoking ban. Secondly, Austria are planning to do the exact same thing.

Naturally, this has prompted a lot of screaming from the usual suspects, labelling the proposed reversals as “a public health disaster”.

Smoking has been banned indoors in restaurants and pubs, as well as many other enclosed spaces, since May 31, 2017. Similar laws are common across the European Union.

Isn’t that the saying? Instead, the Mayor of Greater Manchester; one Andy Burnham, is looking to make Greater Manchester “the first City Region in Europe to make smoking history.”.

Not sure how well that is going to work sunshine.

Y’see, on the eve of the ten-year anniversary of the most illiberal and damaging legislation which saw an accelerated decline of the British Pub, Mr Burnham wanted to drive down the smoking rates in Greater Manchester ‘faster and further than achieved anywhere else’:

Or in the words of Simon Clark, creeping prohibition. Which is exactly what it is.

Bexleyheath town centre could become the first London Borough to implement smokefree zone

Time, and time again we see councils doing mad stunts like this. Bristol, of course, did it with voluntary bans in two town squares. Wales then banned smoking on a series of beaches. Swansea held a consultation (subsequently ignored, natch), Sheffield has done it, and of course, various NHS hospitals are banning smoking anywhere on their grounds, and finally, Birmingham Children’s Hospital proposed enforcing a smoke-free zone for nearby roads outside their grounds.

Following on from the “Evidence Update” in September 2015, Public Health England has done it again. In fact, they have gone as far as repeating the same mistakes as last time, by mentioning the word “prescription”, and/or “NHS” in the press release.

Via the BBC:

E-cigarettes should be available on prescription, according to Public Health England (PHE).

The agency wants them to be prescribed on the NHS within the next few years because of how successful they have been in helping people give up smoking.

Remember when anti-smoking campaigners just wanted no smoking zones in restaurants? Or how smoking was banned on flights - for various reasons, the overriding one being “public health” - the biggest lie ever told?

Over the years, puritanical anti-smokers have insisted on the ever-increasing prohibition on where smokers can enjoy their legal habit. Culminating, of course, in the 2006/2007 nationwide smoking bans in all public places.

Naturally, as the graph shows, that didn’t have the substantial benefit that the scum-sucking knuckle draggers had clearly stated it would; it was all a “confidence trick” by the Puritans to get their way.

It’s been about a month since the announcement of a lot of cash being spent (transparently mind, unlike tobacco control) to further support research into harm reduction products which caused quite a stir within the tobacco control industry. Much to mine, and several others, delight.

As far as it is understood, Phillip Morris - who right now is trying to cosy up to public health (and failing miserably - take note vapers) - are going to be shovelling a rather large amount of cash into this initiative. Rather large equating to approximately 80M US Greenback.

I know. I borrowed the title from jewel robber extraordinaire Dick Puddlecote. He won’t mind. It is, in fact, thanks to the illustrious Puddlecote that I became aware of another pile of utter rubbish.

A quick glance at the PubMed abstract piqued my (slightly addled) science brain. I’ve written about the very low nicotine cigarette debacle before, and that (at the time) Ms Cramer of RSPH had given a talk at the E-Cigarette Summit (2015) on the idea of “de-nicotinised” e-cigs and how, by some miracle, that led to fewer cigarettes being smoked but more vaping (the ol’ self-titration theory being proven once again).