Thursday, September 18, 2008

The idiots are winning

Dear God, surely this can't be true...

Smokers will be stopped in the street and asked to take a carbon monoxide test in London's most hard-hitting anti-smoking campaign.
'Smoking police' will target people at betting shops, bus stops and shopping centres to shock them into giving up cigarettes.

Oh sweet Jesus.
Ealing Primary Care Trust, which is funding the £75,000 scheme, said it could help 2,400 people to give up.
A team of 11 young people have been employed to approach smokers, in a similar way to charity fund-raisers - nicknamed 'chuggers' - who ask passers-by for donations.
Project spokeswoman Fran Pearce admitted: "They will have to be careful when approaching smokers in case they become aggressive."

Do you think?!

They will be asked to breathe into a monitor to show how much carbon monoxide is in their bodies, and could then be signed up to local stop-smoking services and given access to counsellors.
This can't be real, can it? Nobody could propose such a thing could they?

No. I see it all now. I'm asleep and this is all just a dream. Soon I'm going to wake up and find that the last few years haven't happened. It's all been a very vivid, very scary dream but none of it's real.

It going to be alright. Everything's going to be alright.

UPDATE! As has been pointed out by Ambush Predator, - quoting the Beeb's glowing report - Stephen Pound MP is four square behind this bullshit:
But prize comment of the article goes to, you guessed it, a reformed smoker and Nu Labour mouthpiece:
The local Labour MP in Ealing, Stephen Pound, famously kicked his cigarette habit of 40 years after voting to back the ban on smoking in enclosed public places.

He is all for going after smokers on the street.

"You've now got this new phenomenon. These self-affirming groups of outlaws huddled around, outside buildings, and what they do is reinforcing their addiction more and more.

"So I think we need to confront - which is not too harsh a word.

"People are happier having given up smoking, therefore lets spread a bit of happiness and make a bit of a nuisance of ourselves on the highways and byways of west London."
Nice use of language there...
I'm reminded of an Orwell quote:
Many people genuinely do not want to be saints, and it is probable that some who achieve or aspire to sainthood have never felt much temptation to be human beings.

It's not just that these scumfucks don't care about overstepping the mark. They simply do not accept that there is any mark to overstep.

And, unless you have been living on another planet for the last few years, you will be well aware that they're not stopping with smokers...
Last week some of these workers were out in another part of London talking to teenagers about chlamydia and asking them for urine samples for screening.

These people are, quite literally, taking the piss.


Dave said...

Whay don't they just give them all the £30 and tell them to fuck off?

There's worse

Winston said...

"Fuck off you Nazi!" Is surely the only appropriate response to being approached by one of these goons.

leg-iron said...

Every result is a guaranteed positive because of the places the tests are to be done. At bus stops, in the street... where they'll be inhaling traffic fumes.

There's no control group in the study, no non-smokers are to be tested, so the only measurement they have is of carbon monoxide content in the lungs of people standing beside traffic. It means nothing, it's pseudoscience, it's just a way to sign people up to these stop-smoking classes and another excuse to send out some more intimidators.

If you're stopped, insist that the tester take the test themselves first. They'll be horrified because they'll think they have CO in their lungs from passive smoking, even though the amount of CO pumped out by traffic far overshadows anything a cigarette could produce.

That's why there's no control group, I suppose. The difference between non-smokers and smokers might show if the test was carried out in rural areas, but on city streets it would be next to impossible to show a significant difference.

If you did this, you can guarantee a positive CO result from every non-smoker, every baby in a pram, every dog and cat you test. Heck, test the seagulls. They'll be positive too.

The fake science in these studies is even more infuriating than the intimidation and victimisation they are used to promote.

I look forward to meeting one of these idiots.

Anonymous said...

Unless they are going to recruit only gorgeous birds with lion taming skills then I see the gutters of Ealing awash with blood.

Old Holborn said...

Bring it on I say.

If they intend to "shock" me into not smoking then I intend to "shock" them into never leaving their houses again.

The next logical step is booze police patrolling pubs with breathalizers, telling you how much your liver and your fellow citizens hate you.

I'd pay money to watch that.

Mike said...

Onward the purity youth brigades! Next: caffeine!

Mark Wadsworth said...

Why is this post titled "The idiots are winning"? What's new?

Leg-Iron, good call. Altho' if they employ gorgeous birds, I might be tempted to stop and chat.

Guthrum said...

I will stub my cheroot out on their face

Anonymous said...


the a&e charge nurse said...

An ingratiating bod brandishing a mickey mouse device, or a barrel chest because of COPD ?
I know which one I'd be most worried about.

Have I got this right ?
Medics should keep schtum while the general populace gorge themselves on ready meals, set fire to rolled up leaves stuffed in their gobs, or glug enough lager to fill several reservoirs ?

If so, perhaps it partially explains the never ending increase in ambulance call outs, visits to WICs, A&E, or GP surgeries, not to mention the millions seeking aegis at the local factory, sorry hospital.

The demand for services provided by the likes of the A&E Charge Nurse are unlikely to recede any time soon ?

Henry Crun said...

leg-iron, fake science is what goernments do best...see also Global Warming

Anonymous said...

Once again, A&E nurse assumes that it;s the government's job to be our mother'

Guess what? It's not your damn job. Our health is ours. Butt out, for once, for your own sake.

Rory Meakin said...

I hate chuggers intensely. Their irritating grins and base social trickery while they beg on behalf of their paymasters really sickens me and does nothing but earn them a scowl and the charity some badwill. Poor smokers - you'll have to suffer the government equivalent too. Well, at least you know why you pay so much for your cigarettes...

leg-iron said...

A&E Charge nurse.

I have no wish to denigrate you or your profession. I am aware of what you have to put up with and how little you are paid for it.

However, I have to take issue with some of your points.

An ingratiating bod brandishing a mickey mouse device, or a barrel chest because of COPD ?
I know which one I'd be most worried about.

People who are worried about smoking-related illnesses don't smoke. People who smoke (and yes, they are people too, despite the best efforts of government to convince everyone otherwise) also know the risks, but choose to take the risk. Just as a mountain climber or a race driver knows the risks but chooses to take those risks to do something they enjoy. Should everything risky be banned?

You are not exposed to passive smoke anywhere now. Smokers are banned from any enclosed public space and from many non-enclosed spaces. For you, there is no risk, and no need to worry at all. You won't get smoking related diseases and you won't be approached by these people. Your stated choice between COPD and a bod is fallacious: you have no choice. Neither will happen to you.

For the Righteous, throwing us into the street is not enough. They now want to harass us in the only place left. The street. Doesn't that twang a single neuron, or have you accepted that we are subhuman and must be eradicated for our own good?

Have I got this right ?
Medics should keep schtum while the general populace gorge themselves on ready meals, ...etc

Who says medics should keep quiet? Where there is a risk, tell us about it and we will make decisions for ourselves based on known risks. Information is good. Making decisions for someone else is not.

The assessment of CO in the lungs of people on the street tells us nothing. It does not inform, it only terrorises, it only persuades people to pay for stop-smoking classes with a low success rate, and when they go back out on the street their CO levels are the same as before. The won't be detectably lowered by the absence of a cigarette.

Medics aren't doing this. The government are, and the governemt should certainly keep quiet.

If so, perhaps it partially explains the never ending increase in ambulance call outs, ...etc

Increase? But I thought the smoking ban was a great success? Wasn't it? What about those laws stopping kids getting hold of cigarettes and booze, making it all more expensive and harder to buy for everyone? What about all that food labelling? Are you saying that all those measures have increased the rate of ambulance callouts?

The demand for services provided by the likes of the A&E Charge Nurse are unlikely to recede any time soon ?

The demand is going to increase precisely because of all these measures. Government meddling and pseudoscience results in people scared of a slight cough or a mild headache. People with a slight paunch think they have diabetes. People who walked past a smoker think they have cancer. People who tasted a pie think their bowels are going to fall out. Anyone with a hangover thinks they have liver failure.

I'm afraid a lot more of your time is going to be wasted in future, with a lot more people terrified by Government campaigns like this one, all calling you and insisting on ambulances because they think they're going to die any minute.

I can't see why you'd want that.

Rory Meakin said...

Most of all I hate the sad twats who really believe the pretty young unemployed actress is flirting with them because she actually likes them rather than just because it's her job.

Roger Thornhill said...

This is what happens with state medicine. When we have no choice but pay for the NHS, we cease to be a customer and instead become a cost, a cost that needs to be reduced.

Just as GPs are being forced to work where they are told and to work for some faceless corporation (polyclinics), not in a partnership, so we are treated like an inconvenience to be reduced.

A big yes to information, advice and transparency. A big V to any attempts by the State to coerce, pester or single out. Individuals can shun, criticise and condemn, for that is freedom of speech and expression. It is NOT the role or remit of the State.

It is so obvious that those who dreamt it up think we are all as moronic as they are. No we are not. As a base-line I think most people are, or could be, at least as sensible, self-reliant, rational and decent as I am, and often more so. That is the Libertarian position. The Socialist position is the former and this farce is an outcome.

I am in Ealing. I am going to complain.

the a&e charge nurse said...

Great stuff leg iron - I have never called for a ban, I have never lectured anybody about smoking, even when they turn up in A&E because their venous leg ulcers are infected yet they still prefer to keep tabbing.

Neither have I ever claimed that passive smoking is a significant health issue [leaving aside in-utero concerns].

But the plain fact is health services are now OVERWHELMED because of the insatiable demand for GPs, ambulances and the like [as mentioned on another recent thread ambulance call outs have doubled over a 10 year period].

Needless to say it is often the front line NHS staff who become targets for a great deal of the frustration because so many patients with smoking related, food related, or alcohol related problems are competing AGAINST EACH OTHER when they really do need to see a doc.

Common sense dictates that there is a finite ratio between the number of staff and the number of health complaints they are expected to deal with - that's the big concern in my mind, not a few chuggers with a low tech gizmo.

Sir Henry Morgan said...

Chuggers ... ooooh yes - chuggers.

I was in the town centre once with my youngest brother, going to the bank. A young man with a clip-board approached us "Hello, I'm from Children in Need ..." That was as far as he got before I rounded on him, my brother looking on and saying not a word (my brother is actually a quite senior practising psychiatrist, but looks like the Krays' no.1 enforcer).

Ten minutes later, on our way back from the bank, he wasn't there any more.


the a&e charge nurse said...

Sorry, Roger - I have to disagree with you when you imply that there are no 'morons'.

People can, and often do make the most ludicrous choices - such as running away from A&E to inject street heroin into a venflon sited to enable the treatment of endocarditis [to cite a fairly recent example].

It's exactly the same dilemma Burgess agonised over in 'Clockwork Orange' - if we accept that people are 'free' [to make their own choices], then we have to recognise that a significant % will make very foolish choices indeed [such as those smokers who still want to light up despite struggling for breath].

Address this problem and you would go much further to improving health than trotting out irrelevant anti-socialist sentiments.

Robin said...

Confound them. Surreptisously slip charcoal between your lips and the mouthpiece and show pure oxygen being breathed out.

Anonymous said...

a&3 nurse, if you don't like your job, exercise your prerogative to get a new one, perhaps one where you aren't stuck sucking on the taxpayer's tit.

the a&e charge nurse said...

Anonymous - I suspect you have been smoking something slightly stronger than tobacco judging by your puerile observations.

May I respectfully suggest hi-flow oxygen to ameliorate the brain hypoxia you seem to be suffering from.

Perhaps you would like to rejoin the debate once your GCS climbs above 8.

Old Holborn said...

A&E, the people you delightfully deem unable to make "the right choices" because they are too stupid, are also the ones who pay you for your service

When I go to the tailor because my girth has bust the zip on my suit, he doesn't tell me to go on a diet. He calls me Sir, stitches in a new zip, wishes me a good day and hopes to see me again.

Your job is to mend people. So shut your trap and mend people.

Roger, don't complain. I'll come round and we can burn the townhall down.

hsld said...

He's right though. All you are is a Kwikfit fitter who works on human machines instead of ones made by Ford or Nissan.
Not very well either, if my experience of the NHS doing it's level best to kill me is anything to go by.

Rob said...

a&e nurse:

"health services are now OVERWHELMED because of the insatiable demand for GPs"

An insatiable demand for a completely free service, who would have thought it? No penalties for fucking about with it.

My hat is off to the person who wrote the long post about state campaigns terrifying people into believing they have a serious illness when they do not, and overwhelming health services as a result. My 'favourite' is a campaign over the winter this year, which was certainly prevalent in London. It featured a middle-aged man with a belt tightly squeezing his bare chest. The message of the advertisement is that any male with chest pain should seek medical treatment immediately.

So, fella with chest pains, no doubt just an anxiety attack brought on by viewing aggressive health advertisement, goes to A&E, where he is patronised by an exasperated doctor or nurse with a comment like "it's only indigestion/anxiety. Typical men! Blah blah".

Rob said...

'Chuggers' - when they approach me I usually smile and say something loudly in German, perhaps shrugging as well. Confuses the fuck out of them. Unless they are German, of course...but that would be bucking the odds.

As for Kettering Borough Gauleiters, we have a situation there where the council can make money by prosecuting citizens with NO evidence except their own hardly disinterested contribution. I mean, what could possibly go wrong?

Old Holborn said...

The sooner BUPA open a pay and stitch A&E, the better.

I'm sick of sitting for six hours in a vomit/blood covered waiting room whilst the Nigerian cleaners play cards, the Indian doctors shuffle past looking important and some poof male nurse with his lovers shit under his fingernails and tattoos on his neck asks my 11 year old daughter with a fractured ankle "did Daddy do this? Did anyone else see it happen?

JuliaM said...

Don't think it's going to end with smoking (it started in Scotland with fatties). Check out this BBC article:

See who is doing the stopping (marketing researchers!) and the enthusiastic support by none other ex smoker.

And there will be plenty of people like a&ecn who will support it wholeheartedly. There always are.

It is, after all, how facist movements get started...

JuliaM said...

"'Chuggers' - when they approach me I usually smile and say something loudly in German.."

They don't approach me at all. Word must have got out.. ;)

the a&e charge nurse said...

You surprise me, OH.

Many people make no financial contribution at all - you, more than most, expend a conspicuous amount of energy pointing the finger [rather like one of the characters in "Invasion of the body snatchers"] at those trapped in transgenerational patterns of welfare dependence, or those who arrive here from beyond these shores.

Be that as it may I am but a humble nurse and can only ever play the hand that is dealt in A&E on any given day.

The point that I am trying to make, yet you fail to apprehend my darkly humerous friend, is that the queue of punters clamoring for medical attention grows longer by the hour.
Look at rates of childhood obesity.
Look at rates of diabetes.
Look at ambulance call outs.
Look at A&E visits.
Look at GP visits.

Are any of theses %'s going down - of course not.
Not when we have so many self abusing Brits competing for finite resources.
Anybody at the coal face will tell you that the state vs private sector argument is little more than a side show under the weight of such expectations.

I am not telling anybody what to do [a message that is invariably lost on the clever libertarians]- but I can't help noticing the near hysteria that seems to be creeping in when a howling mob yells with one voice "but I pay you wages........".

It's as if this mystical incantation will enable a few more doctors to be pulled rabbit like from a harried receptionists arse to make everything better.

the a&e charge nurse said...

Err, Juliam - can you remind me at which point I said I supported these activities ?

Ahh, you just imagined it.......thought so.

xelent said...


Many times have i been polite about your machinations within the health service... But frankly your sanctimony is something best left to the prolls in govt...

In my opinion do away with the NHS completely and let the smoker pay for his health care throught the taxation he/she pays on the cigarettes...

So let’s end the bickering and accept people have no choice to choose for their own personal health plan... because most of them are being regular monetarily shafted by socialist twits such as yourself...

the a&e charge nurse said...

rob - if "fellas with chest pain" are patronised in A&E then why has there been such a SPECTACULAR improvement in pain to thrombolysis or angioplasty for acute MI's ?

You must have spent many days hiding in A&E taking furtive notes each time a male with chest pain was triaged, or perhaps YOU would like to tell us what evidence you have for making such a facile [and grossly inaccurate] comment ?

whoops said...

A&E nurse, (and one of my best friends is also an A&E nurse, a friend I might add that smokes and drinks and... WOOOOOOO also ENJOYS A JOINT OR TWO when he gets home from his shift, but i digress) has it not occurred to you that them money spent on these low-tech gizmos and their human operators is coming from exactly the same pot as the money spent on front-line care staff? Which do you think is a better use of public money?

Anonymous said...

>> A&E, the people you delightfully deem unable to make "the right choices" because they are too stupid, are also the ones who pay you for your service

what, so the people who never get ill don't pay for the nhs??

so if taxes weren't spent on health then we wouldn't have a health system at all?

healthcare is a utility and its the government's job to improve everyone's health (of course the government in this country is totally clueless).

>> let the smoker pay for his health care throught the taxation he/she pays on the cigarettes...

exactly. but no govt will be able to do this. while the nhs exists, better accept that it's gonna want to reduce its costs by (!!) stopping smoking.

Anonymous said...

Healthcare is a governments job?

That's a whole fucking debate in itself.
Don't take state healthcare for granted.

xelent said...


With all due respect, its not relevant what the money could have been spent on.. As it all choked out of our wallet each month anyway...

The fact is we are all forced to pay for this behemoth monstrosity... Not only that, but we have to listen to the machinations of statist twats complaining not enough money is spent on the bloody thing....

Frankly Im sick to death of hearing about this bloody institution and its frustrations and inability to provide good care... It makes me want to puke... If the NHS was a physical tangible object (with no people in it mind) I would blow the bloody thing up...

This is not a slight on them that work for it... Just the bleeders, leeches and sanctimonious hangers on that wish to further their careers using force with no choice at all...

Ahh... I feel better now.. No offense meant by the way Whoops... :-)

The Filthy Smoker said...

JuliaM - thanks for the link. It's always the bastard ex-smokers, isn't it? I've added an update to reflect the BBC's report (and don't they think it's a jolly bit of fun?)

Leg Iron - absolutely spot on. A test for COhb is meaningless, especially on a busy city street.

A & E - is there anything these anti-smoking people could do that would overstep the mark in your book?

the a&e charge nurse said...

It's a fair question whoops.

The scheme is priced at £75,000.

Lets imagine it saves just one person from dying from lung cancer.

From that persons perspective it might seem like money well spent.

Alternatively lets say it acts as a tipping point for a COPD who packs in - this gives him/her 2 more years of life.

Turn the question around - do you think this is money well spent ?

JuliaM said...

"Err, Juliam - can you remind me at which point I said I supported these activities ?"

Ahem:"Have I got this right ?
Medics should keep schtum while the general populace gorge themselves on ready meals, set fire to rolled up leaves stuffed in their gobs, or glug enough lager to fill several reservoirs ?"

It's not 'I'll sign up!', but it isn't 'No! This will not stand!' either, is it..?

xelent said...

£75,000 to save one life.. now theirs a NHS market initiative... probably the tax cost to the average smoker over a lifetime... could go a long way to providing their OWN personal care...But hey when the state just takes and spend the cash on a myriad of stupid schemes like this?... Then the fucking NHS and its cronies deserve to go broke... fuckers...

bernard said...

I don't understand this at all.
Smoking is good for you.
My great uncle smoked on 'till his 90s, while his non-smoking wife died of dementia in her late 60s.

whoops said...

The NHS in its current form is certainly an inefficient behemoth, but i dont see a credible alternative (although I'm VERY willing to hear of one!) Any private system would still need to be interlinked, if there were local insurance systems would I be covered if i had an accident in yorkshire, when i normally lived in london? If I chose to be a mamber of friendly society A, and the hospital I was near happened to be affiliated with society B, would I be turned away at the door? Or would the hospitals be run as seperate businesses from the insurance schemes? Or as a pay-as-you're-sick system (when you are least able, possibly, to pay)? I personally think a slimmed-down healthcare system should be one of the few remits of a small state alongside things like defence, although I'm happy to be enlightened on this point...

xelent said...


'interlinked'?.. please explain..

Why should an insurance scheme be just local?.. Goodness me, my glasses are insured for 3 years against damage and loss and full replacement within 48 hours in 30 different countries worldwide for £18.. Boy they even threw in a 10% discount... which in real terms meant I bought the glasses for less with insurance than without it...

However, I am aware that this isn’t anything like full medical care etc... And I'm certainly not comparing the statist intervention within medical insurance such as the States... Where part of your costs go towards paying for the uninsured... But there are most probably a myriad of ways the free market can provide affordable medical care, anywhere you want...

The trouble is, that we pay so much in taxes and indeed pay so much of other peoples taxes through purchasing cost.. That to imagine a hypothetical world where parasites DONT exist is a rather troublesome one.. However I am quite sure that the free market knows how to shave cost without compromising quality... Unless of course you don’t mind the compromise and you pay less accordingly...

I will be honest I don’t have all the answers, as the only thing we've ever known is the NHS monolith that people repeat ably remark is never up to scratch..

So frankly you’re probably right, in the current statist climate where most of our wealth is robbed off us... we will never be able to afford our own personal health care...

the a&e charge nurse said...

TFS - anybody who has been round a hospital, or GP practice long enough generally agrees that prevention [whenever this is possible] is better than cure.

Obviously I have a distorted view because of the sick people I've looked after - many have had a weary and complex relationships with cigarettes, but eventually, as the effects of disease really begin to take hold, many often say they wish they had never started.

I appreciate that goons with gizmos are unlikely to affect smoking patterns [certainly amongst teenagers], and the argument here has always been that if I want to end up with throat cancer [a particularly horrifying consequence of smoking], then this is my inaliable right as a sentient human being.

I understand and totally accept this position - all I've ever pointed out is that there is growing mob of sick people which increasingly affects the standards the NHS is able to deliver.

This is merely a statement of fact, and I do not think it is likely to be substantially affected irrespective of whether NuLab, the Tories, or dare I say the Libertarians are at the till.

Nor will it matter if Richard Branson & Co get a bigger foot hold in the market.
One only has to look at the vast amounts squandered in the USA [17% of GDP] to realise that high tech interventions cost a great deal of money, money that is more likely to be curtailed given the current economic climate.

whoops said...

xelent:, it is pretty summed up with the example of glasses, the only point i would make is that were i to lose my glasses, it wouldn't bother me phoning up to claim on the insurance or whatever but if I'd just broken my leg or something the last thing I would want to be doing is on hold to a telephonist in Dehli waiting for them to process the claim... I was envisioning something where I would still be able to walk (oh hop!) into A&E and get treated... which then leads to the question of how those without insurance would be stopped from abusing the system? Unless if their claim wasn't honoured the nurses broke their legs again... And from my experience of insurance compaines they seem to spend more of their time thinking of reasons why I'm NOT covered than they do actually processing claims! I don't believe that the mammoth state is a good idea, but nor do i believe that mammoth multinationals have my best interests at heart either! That's why I was envisioning smaller local concerns. I'm sure there IS a perfect soloution but I'm sure I don't have the answer.
A&E nurse: Perhaps an insurance based system WOULD work better in your examples, as surely those of us that endanger our health would pay higher premiums, just as people who dont have chubb locks do on their home insurance. Couple that with a cull of all those useless clipboard-wielding people i saw on my last visit to casualty and there should be enough to hire as many nurses as needed! Except... probably what would happen is that you would still have the same number of nurses and all the cash saved would be given in the shareholder's dividend.
Sorry if this post seems rambling, I'm in the mifddle of cooking and it's not very good for my train of thought!

Anonymous said...

Prevention is only better than cure when the prevention isn't fucking fascism.

archduke said...

i'll just inhale on my ciggie and blow it in their nazi fucking faces.

always cracks me up that smoking is banned on train platforms - as the massive diesel fume spewing trains whizz by....

the world has gone seriously fucking mad, hasnt it?

whoops said...

I still can't fathom the reasoning on open air train platforms... they dont have the staff to enforce it and it just leads to unfortunate incidents with stick-beak do-gooders getting pushed onto the tracks by teenagers.
Besides the fact that it doesn't actually cause ANY problems whatsoever, it's not like they dont have to sweep the floor anymore or anything.

Anonymous said...

@ a&e nurse, Wow. Nice comeback. Was that your work or did mommy help you with it?

Take your pay, do your job and shut your mouth. When I, your employer, want your opinion, I'll beat it out of you.

xelent said...


I say you give those lazy platform staff a broom.. They hardly offer any use to mankind apart from blowing whistles in your ear and screaming at you to 'STAND BACK!'..

As to your earlier point regarding a broken leg in Delhi... Given that this country has had nothing but state intervention and regulation for years.. Is no surprise it cannot offer medical provision to its on citizens, let alone them from overseas.. without high costs...

But in a world where the state is either completely removed or hugely curtailed and we had a mixture of different companies offering us services and hoping for our voluntary custom... You will see prices fall and services improve... Why be worried by being served by a number of companies than beng run by the monopoly that is the state?... A much better situation IMO...

The parasites that A&E talk of wouldnt exist, because they wouldnt be served... However, human nature will no doubt create medical centres available for them that werent covered.. Voluntarily supported by people who wanted to help of course...

Vicola said...

Instead of blowing into the little device that the interfering little scrote is holding, can you not just blow your Marlboro Light smoke inti his face and tell him to guess how much carbon monoxide is in it?

It won't fucking work anyway, when i smoked I was repeatedly given sheets of paper listing the chemicals in cigarettes every time I went for my sodding pill check with the nurse. They were taken home, put next to the phone and used as scribbling pads for my other half when he was taking phone messages. No one who smokes is thick enough to think that cigs only contain leaves and paper, if they are smoking outside the pub then they don't give a shit so leave them the fuck alone.

Anonymous said...

……………,-*lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll lllll.\……………………………

Vicola said...

Asking a bunch of inner city teens for a urine sample is going to lead to a whole raft of do gooders getting pissed on by youths while their friends stand around laughing.

Michael J. McFadden said...

Filthy, I like the way ya think! :> I spread your last rant about the Antis around to some of my lists with a Buddhist-flavored intro about its delicate softness... LOL!

In any event, I was inspired by this just yesterday and also picked up on the Orwell thing... helped along a bit by some other Orwellian Antis lately...


Antismokers justify including private clubs in their bans by saying "they have employees."

But when they run into problems with places that simply have no employees, where it’s all volunteer, they simply redefine the word "employee" to mean anyone who provides a service with or WITHOUT pay. Under Antismoking NewSpeak, Gandhi and Mother Theresa, Jesus Christ and Buddha, even Hitler and Stalin were nothing but mere "employees" to be protected from secondhand smoke.

Think I'm kidding?

Check this out: “ ‘Employee’ means any person, including but not limited to, independent contractors and volunteers, who performs services for an Employer, with or without compensation. ‘Employer’ means a person, business… corporation... which utilizes the services of one or more Employees at an Enclosed Place of Employment.“

That quote is from "Public Peace Morals and Welfare, Smoking In Public Places" of the City of Shawnee, Kansas. Note the wonderful circularity regarding employee, employer & place of employment, & the Orwellian redefinition of the base word itself.

OK, maybe you think I just pulled an oddball law from a tiny town filled with tornados & little dogs named Toto & made a big thing about it.


This is standard boilerplate from antismokiing lobby groups. You can find it in ban laws from Shawnee KS to Somerville MA, from the entire State of Oklahoma to the entire state of Ohio.

Smoking bans are bad laws based upon lies. They tortuously twist our language with the classic Orwellian intent of making it almost impossible to even *think* in ways counter to the desired outcome without running into a stone wall.

Another, from two days ago in a North Kentucky push for a ban:

"This is not a smoking ban," said Shawn Cox of the American Cancer Society. "People can use the product that they have a right to use, but they should use it in a manner that does not affect other people's health."

Amazing. A smoking ban that is not a ban because people are still allowed to cower in their homes and perhaps sneak a smoke behind a dumpster somewhere. Using that kind of weasel-wording I guess Prohibition never happened. Americans could still make their own beer and wine, they could still bring a few bottles back for personal consumption from Canada, and they were more than welcome to drink as much as they wanted of what they'd bought before 1918. Prohibition is just a figment of our imagination.

"This is not a smoking ban, said Shawn Cox..."

Would you buy a used car from this guy?


And finally, here in PA, the State University has taken the "Clean Indoor Air Act" and told its students that the law requires them to ban smoking throughout all the hundreds of acres of the grounds and parking lots and roads of its 14 state campuses.

Orwell is more alive today than he ever was in life.

Michael J. McFadden

Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"

leg-iron said...

Michael -

All correct. If plumber visits my house, it becomes his place of employment and I can't smoke in it. If I do, or if I allow him to, or if he smells a trace of smoke because I had a quick one before he arrived, then as the employer I am liable to be fined.

Isn't it soooo fair and equitable, this law?

Michael J. McFadden said...

LegIron, Filthy's opening comment:

"Dear God, surely this can't be true..."

echoed my reaction yesterday when I visited:

I started reading it with a bit of a sardonic chuckle... and then began realizing it might NOT be a satire on the Mao-gangs going after smokers... and then clicked on the link to the original article at:

and realized it was indeed true.

I've maintained for a long time that we've opened the doors to the insane asylums. The crazies have come prancing out and are dancing wildly in the daisy fields.... and somehow... somehow... they've managed to pull a good bit of the sane population into the dance as well. Their early demands were validated by acquiescence and as any social-psych worker will tell you, you NEVER allow that to happen with the mentally ill: it just makes them crazier.

It was that realization that crystalized the direction of my writing once I sat down seriously and began pulling "Brains" together. We're dealing with something that has become nothing less than a mass social psychosis, an artificially created one that's basically been bought and paid for with tax money... and is VERY frightening in its long term implications for social control by governments.

We've already got Winston Smiths out there airbrushing out cigarettes from John Lennon and Franklin Roosevelt and snipping chapters out of Tom Sawyer and clips from classic movies. How long before we see Oceania's history rewritten to be our enemies while Asiana is rewritten to be our friends?

Michael J. McFadden
Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"

Michael J. McFadden
Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"