The U.S. Surgeon General has come out with yet another condemnation of "smoking" (of what, exactly, who knows?) and "tobacco." Here's her "fact" sheet.
A game can be played with that review. Substitute the terms "pesticides," "chlorine," and "dioxin" in mentions of "smoking," "tobacco," or "tobacco smoke," You'll think it's a Greenpeace leaflet.
As anyone familiar with dioxin (Agent Orange, DDT, Love Canal, etc.) knows, if there's one thing that provides No Safe Dose, it is dioxin. The phrase "No Safe Dose" has been, even beyond plutonium, almost exclusively dioxin-relevant for a long time. Now it's co-opted and used regarding tobacco, a natural plant that can produce no dioxin -- unless it's been contaminated with industrial chlorine. Top dioxin-producing chlorine interests find "no safe dose" of tobacco. Corporate PR at its best.
To say "There's No Safe Dose of Dioxin-Contaminated Tobacco Smoke" would be accurate. To omit the inconvenient presence of dioxin-producing chlorine compounds in highly-adulterated, pesticide-drenched tobacco is a lie of omission. To say that tobacco itself does the same damage as dioxin or chlorine-contaminated tobacco is an insult to science and an outright lie -- one that would constitute perjury if uttered under oath.
Ten points to consider:
(1) The Surgeon General says there are "7000 chemicals and compounds" in tobacco smoke, but there's no list of those "chemicals and compounds" to check to see which ones are natural to tobacco or its smoke, and which are from pesticides, chlorine, and other non-tobacco sources. It's not "tobacco smoke" when it's Contaminated Tobacco Smoke.
Also, it's important that it's not "Well Water" when it's Contaminated Well Water. The distinction between
"chemicals" and "industrial chemicals" is crucial as well.
(2) An organic banana may contain thousands of "chemicals and compounds." The Surgeon General is pandering to the public's fear of "chemicals" as if all are toxic. Don't like chemicals? Stop eating, for starters.
(3) The Surgeon General pretends not to know that the USA classifies dioxin as a Known Human Carcinogen, and that the USA signed the Stockholm Convention (POPs Treaty) to phase dioxin and 11 other worst-of-the-worst industrial pollutants off the earth. That the U.S. still allows it in cigarette smoke is a question of WikiLeaks levels of importance.
(4) The Surgeon General also pretends to not know that even the EPA (Dioxin Re-Assessment) found dioxin in cigarette smoke, that it is "anthropogenic" (man-industry made), and that it is "unlikely in nature." That is, it cannot be from tobacco. No matter, to protect the "good name" of the chlorine and pesticide cartels, to protect the cigarette industry from massive liabilities, and to protect public officials who have enabled this mass consumer poisoning for many decades, she has ignored dioxin in cigarette smoke. She also ignores the welfare of untold millions of still-guinea-pigged victims.
(5) News reports say "7000 chemicals," leaving out the "compounds" whatever they may be. In any case, what are the chances of there being such a perfectly round number? Is this rounded-up, or rounded-down, from some actual figure? They don't say "nearly 7000" or "roughly..." or anything.
(6) The Surgeon General knows about ammonia added, with no tests
for safety in this use, to speed up nicotine delivery. She must have seen "big tobacco whistleblower" Jeffrey Weigand on 60 Minutes a while back "blowing the whistle" on one, out of well over 1,000 untested, toxic, carcinogenic non-tobacco cig adulterants. But she makes no demand
to prohibit, or even label that ammonia. Nor
does she express concern about ammonia mixed with chlorine, the dangers of that
combo being well-noted on common kitchen and bathroom cleansers. A typical motel room attendant knows better than the Surgeon General of the United States.
(7) The Surgeon General, who perhaps ought to return to general surgery and leave research to others -- preferably independent scientists -- pretends to not know of the GAO condemnation of Lax Government Oversight of pesticide residues on tobacco...or that the GAO noted that tobacco is the sixth most pesticide intensive crop.
(8) Her medical expertise, and that of her staff, obviously, does not extend to knowing that inhalation of those pesticide residues and the dioxins is the worst possible exposure route due to the high efficiency of the lungs to get the toxins and carcinogens into the body where they bio-accumulate and cause exactly the results she blames on tobacco smoke.
(9) This report says not a word about cigarettes that contain no tobacco at all but, instead, nicotine-spiked fake tobacco made in patented ways from all sorts of industrial waste cellulose, none of it likely organic. One cannot get tobacco smoke from that. If the waste stuffing is chlorine-contaminated, and if the paper is chlorine-bleached, one will, however, still get no-safe-dose dioxins. The report does not say "by the way, the fake tobacco hasn't been studied yet." Like plain tobacco, it is to be convicted, so to speak, without a trial. The "American way," all too often.
(10) If plain tobacco has been studied, the results are probably buried at Fort Knox, under armed guard. Imagine if the results showed minimal, acceptable risks or harms from use of plain tobacco. That would open floodgates of liability suits against makers of typical Pesticide Pegs, the suppliers of all their untested, toxic, carcinogenic, and otherwise harmful ingredients, their insurers and investors, and the AWOL public officials that enabled the whole atrocity for many decades. Those officials' current hypocritical pretense of being "concerned anti-smokers" does not make up for that. They should not be allowed to cover it up either. What industries' money is in their pockets?
1 | 2