Big Tobacco's Conspiracy To Hide Health Risks & Deceive, They Knew & Documents Show They Knew - Here

[Peter Lemkin]

As for the claim that "the Tobacco Industry, the USG regulators, the NIH and many others knew the dangers of tobacco for over a century and hid it," upon what science was that based, or do you consider science unnecessary? The NIH didn't even exist as such until it was built up by the Lasker Lobby after World War II, simultaneously with its abuse for the persecution of tobacco. Perhaps this is what you consider science: In 1851, in the absence of anything resembling a database, Rev. Trask proclaimed, "It is computed that 20,000 persons every year, in America, go to their grave from the use of tobacco." (Temperance. Weekly Eagle, Brattleboro, Vt., Jun. 23, 1851.) "Rev. George Trask asserts that sleeping with a tobacco consumer actually affects the health of a person who does not use the article. The Boston Medical and Surgical Journal so far endorses his opinion as the say, 'This had not before occurred to us, but on examination of the facts [sic], there appears some reason in the statement." (Kenosha Telegraph, Nov. 19, 1852.) And "proving" the correctness of Rev. Trask's religion-based assertions has been the unstated goal of the Harvard School of Public Health, just like "creation science."

http://www.smokershistory.com/theorder.h...orge_Trask

The lead document you cite is merely a mish-mash of PR proposals. Where's the scientific fraud? They didn't even try to expose the anti-smokers' frauds. Where's the "concealment?" These were intended to counter the anti-smokers' lies about the health risks of tobacco, which clearly would have been unnecessary if these had been concealed as you pretend! Evidently you also believe that those whom you accuse have no right to defend themselves.

Meanwhile, I'm still waiting for you to defend the anti-smokers' flagrant scientific fraud of ignoring more than 50 studies which implicate human papillomaviruses as the cause of over ten times more non-small cell lung cancers than you pretend are caused by secondhand smoke, which their mass media propaganda machine has obediently concealed from the public.

Sorry, IMO, you are a 'flat Earth advocate'.....and giving you even the 'energy' of a reply gives some credence to the Earth being flat. My self, I think you have the wrong Forum.....but each to his own. The majority of all scientifically accurate and peer reviewed studies overwhelmingly show [as do empirical non-scientific evidence] that tobacco smoke contains about ten thousand carcinogens, teratogens, and other nasty substances, including radioactive Polonium...and it causes emphysema, cancers of the the lung and other organs, increases in heart attack, ischemic heart disease, atherosclerosis/stroke/angina and other circulatory diseases and is synergenic with other diseases [the classic being that miners of asbestos who have a manifold increased chance of cancer who also smoke have not an additive, but an logarithmic increased chance of cancer. What planet are your from? Planet Phillip Morris or Planet Camel? Only the scientists paid by those who who stand to benefit from the sale of cigarettes and other tobacco products would agree with you. Sorry. You didn't answer if you had a hidden interest in this matter....I wonder why..... Did Len Colby send you here?