Many Farang Smoke In Thailand.

[sdanielmcev]

More likely a reflection of the type of Thais you associate with.

Good girls would never dream of smoking, nor touching alcohol.

By my definition anyway, definitely even one whiff of either's a total deal-breaker for me.

Sorry, utter <deleted>.

My company recruits about 150 to 200 graduates a year from the top Thai universities ( Chula, Thammasat, Kasetsart etc), you should see the girls go for it on the Company outing.

Don't waste your time, funster. All this guy ever posts is nonsense.

[speedtripler]

People smoke because they enjoy smoking. It has many benefits. It is both a stimulant and a relaxant, and yet does not diminish any faculties. It gives greater endurance and better concentration. It aids the thinking process. And it is enjoyable.

http://opishposh.com/the-surprising-benefits-of-smoking-cigarettes/

endurance for what exactly ? like how does clogging your airways and bloodstream with tar

improve your performance ?

id like to know because im a lifelong heavy smoker whos quit and now i can breath better

when im drnking whisky with a pile smokers il still smoke but i regret it the next day .....100000000%

[Ulysses G.]

You've obviously been paying close attention to the propaganda. Before the zealots started with their campaigns, nobody even noticed smoke or smokers.

If you really believe this, you are delusional. I remember how offensive I found cigarette smoke as a child and the disgusting stench in the air and on smokers breath and clothes. They smoked everywhere, including around food and in elevators. Non-smokers put up with it, because they had to. Thankfully, that is not true anymore.

Edited March 4, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[Digitalbanana]

"Besides the fact it's smelly dirty and disgusting to be anywhere near a smoker."

You've obviously been paying close attention to the propaganda. Before the zealots started with their campaigns, nobody even noticed smoke or smokers. Well done - consider yourself successfully indoctrinated. The zealots would be proud of you.

This comment is so full of crap, but the smokers lost of taste and smell obscures it.

[nisakiman]

People smoke because they enjoy smoking. It has many benefits. It is both a stimulant and a relaxant, and yet does not diminish any faculties. It gives greater endurance and better concentration. It aids the thinking process. And it is enjoyable.

http://opishposh.com/the-surprising-benefits-of-smoking-cigarettes/

endurance for what exactly ? like how does clogging your airways and bloodstream with tar

improve your performance ?

id like to know because im a lifelong heavy smoker whos quit and now i can breath better

when im drnking whisky with a pile smokers il still smoke but i regret it the next day .....100000000%

http://dengulenegl.dk/English/Nicotine.html

[Ace of Pop]

As a Non Smoker im all in favor of Smokers, it keeps the Control Freaks from getting around buggering up any other pleasures they dont approve of.

[speedtripler]

People smoke because they enjoy smoking. It has many benefits. It is both a stimulant and a relaxant, and yet does not diminish any faculties. It gives greater endurance and better concentration. It aids the thinking process. And it is enjoyable.

http://opishposh.com/the-surprising-benefits-of-smoking-cigarettes/

endurance for what exactly ? like how does clogging your airways and bloodstream with tar

improve your performance ?

id like to know because im a lifelong heavy smoker whos quit and now i can breath better

when im drnking whisky with a pile smokers il still smoke but i regret it the next day .....100000000%

http://dengulenegl.dk/English/Nicotine.html

From someones blog ............

GTFO .......

[wym]

Besides the fact it's smelly dirty and disgusting to be anywhere near a smoker.

Work in a health care institutional setting with the elderly for a while and talk to health professionals about what they see every day directly resulting from the nasty habit.

I completely understand current addicts being defensive - it's harder to kick nicotine than crack and heroin - but I think it's worth spending whatever it takes to try to discourage the next generations from taking it up.

Most especially in a developing nation where most will end up having to choose between their ciggies and better food for their family.

You've obviously been paying close attention to the propaganda. Before the zealots started with their campaigns, nobody even noticed smoke or smokers. Well done - consider yourself successfully indoctrinated. The zealots would be proud of you.

Sorry you're completely delusional.

If I step foot in a room that's been occupied any length of time by a smoker I completely gag, my eyes tear up and I have to leave or I'm gonna spew.

If I'm actually in the room where they're currently smoking I get instantly dizzy and very nauseous.

I've seen lung tissue removed from a dead smoker, and put side by side with a normal person's lungs - even a five-year-old can see why smoking kills.

Maybe you're being paid by some PR firm for the tobacco interests I don't know, can't believe anyone would actually believe that cr^p you're spouting.

[nisakiman]

People smoke because they enjoy smoking. It has many benefits. It is both a stimulant and a relaxant, and yet does not diminish any faculties. It gives greater endurance and better concentration. It aids the thinking process. And it is enjoyable.

http://opishposh.com/the-surprising-benefits-of-smoking-cigarettes/

endurance for what exactly ? like how does clogging your airways and bloodstream with tar

improve your performance ?

id like to know because im a lifelong heavy smoker whos quit and now i can breath better

when im drnking whisky with a pile smokers il still smoke but i regret it the next day .....100000000%

http://dengulenegl.dk/English/Nicotine.html

From someones blog ............

GTFO .......

...Sigh...

I'm sorry, I assumed you'd know how to pick links out of a blog overview. I was obviously mistaken, so I've done it for you for one of them. It's not very difficult once you get the hang of it.

http://dengulenegl.dk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/meta-analysis-acute-effects-of-nicotine-and-smoking-on-human-performance.pdf

That's one of the early links. If you read the original (blog) link I gave you, you will notice throughout the text little numbers in brackets in a different colour to the script. If you click on those little numbers, just like magic, another page, usually the original research papers, will appear! Amazing, eh? I'm sure even you will be able to manage that if you try really hard.

[speedtripler]

...Sigh...

I'm sorry, I assumed you'd know how to pick links out of a blog overview. I was obviously mistaken, so I've done it for you for one of them. It's not very difficult once you get the hang of it.

http://dengulenegl.dk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/meta-analysis-acute-effects-of-nicotine-and-smoking-on-human-performance.pdf

That's one of the early links. If you read the original (blog) link I gave you, you will notice throughout the text little numbers in brackets in a different colour to the script. If you click on those little numbers, just like magic, another page, usually the original research papers, will appear! Amazing, eh? I'm sure even you will be able to manage that if you try really hard.

again ,you will not convince me that smoking is " healthy " or " performance enhancing "

GTFO....

[nisakiman]

Besides the fact it's smelly dirty and disgusting to be anywhere near a smoker.

Work in a health care institutional setting with the elderly for a while and talk to health professionals about what they see every day directly resulting from the nasty habit.

I completely understand current addicts being defensive - it's harder to kick nicotine than crack and heroin - but I think it's worth spending whatever it takes to try to discourage the next generations from taking it up.

Most especially in a developing nation where most will end up having to choose between their ciggies and better food for their family.

You've obviously been paying close attention to the propaganda. Before the zealots started with their campaigns, nobody even noticed smoke or smokers. Well done - consider yourself successfully indoctrinated. The zealots would be proud of you.

Sorry you're completely delusional.

If I step foot in a room that's been occupied any length of time by a smoker I completely gag, my eyes tear up and I have to leave or I'm gonna spew.

If I'm actually in the room where they're currently smoking I get instantly dizzy and very nauseous.

I've seen lung tissue removed from a dead smoker, and put side by side with a normal person's lungs - even a five-year-old can see why smoking kills.

Maybe you're being paid by some PR firm for the tobacco interests I don't know, can't believe anyone would actually believe that cr^p you're spouting.

I don't disbelieve you if you say you have an extreme reaction to tobacco smoke - some people do. What I'm saying is that until the zealots started planting in peoples minds that tobacco smoke stinks, the vast majority of people didn't think so. Like where I live, in winter the air is heavy with wood smoke, as that is the preferred fuel in the sticks. It's everywhere, but it's an ambient smell - nobody notices it. There could well be a few who say "God, I hate the stench of wood smoke!", but they are few and far between. However, if some environmental group spent a few years and a lot of money telling people that wood smoke 'stinks', sure as eggs is eggs, you'd start seeing comments under articles about it saying things like "Those filthy, stinking wood burners should be compelled to give up their wood burning habit, because I don't like the smell. It gets in my hair, and if I go to a bar with a wood stove my eyes sting and I completely gag and I feel like I'm gonna spew and I have to put all my clothes in the wash....."

People are very easy to indoctrinate. Everybody (or most people, anyway) want to be part of the majority, the groupthink, so they change their beliefs to suit the prevailing orthodoxy. It's a well tried and tested technique, and has been used by governments for years.

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

Joseph Goebbels - Hitler's Propaganda Minister

"I've seen lung tissue removed from a dead smoker, and put side by side with a normal person's lungs - even a five-year-old can see why smoking kills."

WHO: Millions Dying of Urban Air Pollution

“GENEVA, Switzerland, September 30, 2011 (ENS) – “Across the world, city air is often thick with exhaust fumes, factory smoke or soot from coal burning power plants,” says Dr. Maria Neira of the World Health Organization. “In many countries there are no air quality regulations and, where they do exist, national standards and their enforcement vary markedly.”

“PM10 particles, measuring 10 micrometers or less, are an important indicator of urban air pollution and the health risks associated with the complex mixtures of pollutants typically found in cities.”

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/sep2011/2011-09-30-01.html

Michael Abramson: “The lungs of city dwellers are much dirtier than the lungs of rural dwellers. So that if a post mortem examination is performed, you actually see the black deposits on the outside of the lungs of city dwellers and also in the lymph glands in the middle of the chest.

And this is true, even in people who haven’t worked in a coal mine or haven’t smoked. It’s simply the effect of breathing in fine particles over the years of a lifetime.”

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/8.30/helthrpt/stories/s838424.htm

“Dr. Victor Buhler, Pathologist at St. Joseph Hospital in Kansas City: “I have examined thousands of lungs both grossly and microscopically. I cannot tell you from examining a lung whether or not its former host had smoked.”

Dr. Sheldon Sommers, Pathologist and Director of Laboratories at Lenox Hill Hospital, in New York: “…it is not possible grossly or microscopically, or in any other way known to me, to distinguish between the lung of a smoker or a nonsmoker. Blackening of lungs is from carbon particles, and smoking tobacco does not intorduce carbon particles into the lung.”

The whole question was summed up well by Dr. Irving Zeidman, Professor of Pathology at the University of Pennsylvania, when he was asked in Congress whether it was possible to tell which of two lungs was the lung of a smoker. He said: “I would estimate that of a thousand pathologists in this country 998 would say, ‘I could not tell,’ and the other two would say, ‘I could tell,’ and those two who could tell either had some divine intuition or were not telling the truth.”

http://www.health.gov.bc.ca/guildford/pdf/075/00007569.pdf

Don't believe anything the anti-smoking zealots tell you Wym - they lie through their teeth. I understand you want to feel you are 'on message', but that message is wrong, and the people who are pushing that message will eventually be exposed for the frauds they are. Meanwhile, billions are being hosed at the pointless demonisation of smokers while research into the real causes and possible cures for lung cancer are grossly underfunded. It really is criminal.

[nisakiman]

...Sigh...

I'm sorry, I assumed you'd know how to pick links out of a blog overview. I was obviously mistaken, so I've done it for you for one of them. It's not very difficult once you get the hang of it.

http://dengulenegl.dk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/meta-analysis-acute-effects-of-nicotine-and-smoking-on-human-performance.pdf

That's one of the early links. If you read the original (blog) link I gave you, you will notice throughout the text little numbers in brackets in a different colour to the script. If you click on those little numbers, just like magic, another page, usually the original research papers, will appear! Amazing, eh? I'm sure even you will be able to manage that if you try really hard.

again ,you will not convince me that smoking is " healthy " or " performance enhancing "

GTFO....

I'm not trying to convince you or anyone else that smoking is 'healthy'. Of course it's not. Nor is drinking beer. Nor is eating Big Macs. But smoking has been amply shown to significantly enhance cognitive ability, which is what I meant by enhancing (mental) performance.

[wolfmuc]

OP: ‘ but even in Pattaya, Hua Hin etc.., I see a disproportionate farang smokers ’

I think because it’s Pattaya, Hua Hin etc… - Or do you doubt about it?

You told us about e-cigarettes. I don’t have any experience and I do not want any experience

with that too. Already post #2 asked: Advertising? – What’s the OP’s answer?

Post #12 ‘Thai females also smoke in Thailand i have noticed, and long may it continue…’

That’s really upsetting. Maybe you’re not talking about cigarettes but it’s strange in any case.

And just one more sentence to Ace of Pop, #66: Not all non smokers (as you) are Control Freaks.

I deprecate such a statement for myself and all the people I know.

And I could ask nisakiman: ‘What stuff are you smoking?’ - but better not.

I feel free to ignore your post # 71. Just ignore.

Have a good evening, with or without smoke.

Some info ‘smoke and PM10 and fires’:

http://aqicn.org/map/thailand/

http://aqmthai.com/public_report.php

https://firms.modaps.eosdis.nasa.gov/firemap/

[wym]

Don't believe anything the anti-smoking zealots tell you Wym - they lie through their teeth. I understand you want to feel you are 'on message', but that message is wrong, and the people who are pushing that message will eventually be exposed for the frauds they are. Meanwhile, billions are being hosed at the pointless demonisation of smokers while research into the real causes and possible cures for lung cancer are grossly underfunded. It really is criminal.

I'm afraid you're the one brainwashed by commercially-interested propaganda efforts. Or IMO more likely actually paid to spread this nonsense. I'd much rather see sob-story crooks panhandling for their website "business ventures", at least they aren't killing millions with their lies.

A 10-second googling with your sources brought up this:

The "scientific" Hall of Shame - a list of scientists funded by the Tobacco industry to fake scientific results

The CRT is the Council of Tobacco Research -- essentially a scientific front group that was set up to attempt to invoke "science" to "prove" that cigarettes were not bad for your health.

This list just proves how easily scientists sell out to corporate interests when given grant money. Remember: What Big Tobacco pulled off with fake science in the 20th century, Big Biotech is pulling off yet again today.

Source http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCOURTS-dcd-1_99-cv-02496/pdf/USCOURTS-dcd-1_99-cv-02496-4.pdf

Documents reflect that, at a minimum, the following individuals and organizations received funding through Special Account No. 4 beginning in the 1960s and ending in the 1990s:

Able-Lands, Inc.; Lauren Ackerman; ACVA Atlantic Inc.; George Albee; Aleph Foundation; Arthur D. Little, Inc.; Aspen Conference; Atmospheric Health Sciences; Domingo Aviado; James Ballenger; Alvan L. Barach; Walter Barker; Broda 0. Barnes; Battelle Columbus Laboratories; Battelle Memorial Institute; Walter Becker; Peter Berger; Rodger L. Bick; Billings & Gussman, Inc.; Richard Bing; BioResearch Laboratories; Theodore Blau; Irvin Blose; Walter Booker; Evelyn J. Bowers; Thomas H. Brem; Lyman A. Brewer, III; Brigham Young University; Oliver Brooke; Richard Brotman; Barbara B. Brown; K. Alexander Brownlee; Katherine Bryant; Victor B. Buhler; Thomas Burford; J. Harold Burn; Marie Burnett; Maurice Campbell; Carney Enterprises, Inc.; Duane Carr; Rune Cederlof; Domenic V. Cicchetti; Martin Cline; Code Consultants Inc.; Cohen, Coleghety Foundation, Inc.; Colucci, & Associates, Inc.; Computerland; W. Clark Cooper; A. Cosentino; Daniel Cox; Gertrude Cox; CTR; Geza De Takato; Bertram D. Dimmens; Charles Dunlap; Henry W. Elliott; Engineered Energy Mgt. Inc.; Environmental Policy Institute; J. Earle Estes; Frederick J. Evans; William Evans; Expenses related to Congressional Hearings in Washington D.C.; Hans J. Eysenck; Eysenck Institute of Psychiatry; Jack M. Farris; Sherwin J. Feinhandler; Alvan R. Feinstein; Herman Feldman; Edward Fickes; T. Finley; Melvin First; Edwin Fisher; R. Fisher; Merritt W. Foster; Richard Freedman; Herbert Freudenberger; Fudenberg; Arthur Furst; Nicholas Gerber; Menard M. Gertler; Jean Gibbons; Carl Glasser; Donald Goodwin; B. Greenberg; Alan Griffen; F. Gyntelberg; Harvard Medical School; Hearings-Kennedy-Hart Bill; William Heavlin; Norman Heimstra; Joseph Herkson; Richard J. Hickey; Carlos Hilado; Charles H. Hine; Hine, Inc.; Harold C. Hodge; Gary Huber; Wilhelm C. Hueper; Darrell Huff; Duncan Hutcheon; Industry Research Liaison Committee; Information Intersciences, Inc.; International Consultancy; International Technology Corporation; International Information Institute, Inc.; J.B. Spalding Statistical Service; J.F. Smith Research Account; Jacob, Medinger & Finnegan; Joseph Janis; Roger Jenkins; Marvin Kastenbaum; Leo Katz; Marti Kirschbaum; Kravetz Levine & Spotnitz; Lawrence L. Kuper; Mariano La Via; H. Langston; William G. Leaman; Michael Lebowitz; Samuel B. Lehrer; William Lerner; Edward Raynar Levine; G.J. Lieberman; S.C. Littlechild; Eleanor Macdonald; Thomas Mancuso; Nathan Mantel; R. McFarland; Meckler Engineering Group; Milton Meckler; Nancy Mello; Jack Mendelson; Michigan State University; Marc Micozzi; Irvin Miller; K. Moser; Albert Niden; Judith O'Fallon; John O'Lane; William Ober; J.H. Ogura; Ronald Okun; Ingram Olkin; Thomas Osdene (Philip Morris); Peat, Marwick Main & Co.; Thomas L. Petty; Pitney, Hardin & Kipp; Leslie Preger; Walter J. Priest; R. Proctor; Terrence P. Pshler; Public Smoking Research Group; R.W. Andersohn & Assoc.; L.G.S. Rao; Herbert L. Ratcliffe; Attilio Renzetti; Response Analysis Project; Response Analysis Consultation; R.H. Rigdon; Jay Roberts; Milton B. Rosenblatt; John Rosencrans; Walter Rosenkrantz; Ray H. Rosenman; Linda Russek; Henry Russek; Ragnar Rylander; George L. Saiger; D.E. Sailagyi; I. Richard Savage; Richard S. Schilling; Schirmer Engineering Corp.; S. Schor; G.N. Schrauzer; Charles Schultz; John Schwab; Carl L. Seltzer; Murray Senkus (Reynolds); Paul Shalmy; R. Shilling; Shook, Hardy & Bacon; Henry Shotwell; Allen Silberberg; N. Skolnik; JF Smith; Louis A. Soloff; Sheldon C. Sommers (CTR); JB Spalding; Charles Spielberg; Charles Spielberger; Lawrence Spielvogel; St. George Hospital & Medical School; Stanford Research Institution Project; Russell Stedman; Arthur Stein; Elia Sterling; Theodor Sterling; Thomas Szasz; The Foundation for Research in Bronchial Asthma and Related Diseases; The Futures Group; Paul Toannidis; Trenton, New Jersey Hearings; Chris P. Tsokos; University of South Florida; Helmut Valentin; Richard Wagner; Norman Wall; Wayne State University; Weinberg Consulting Group; Roger Wilson; Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation; Jack Wiseman; George Wright; John P. Wyatt; J. Yerushalmy; and Irving Zeidman.

Ctrl-F and you'll find your "incredible" sources.

Edited March 4, 2014 by wym

[nisakiman]

Don't believe anything the anti-smoking zealots tell you Wym - they lie through their teeth. I understand you want to feel you are 'on message', but that message is wrong, and the people who are pushing that message will eventually be exposed for the frauds they are. Meanwhile, billions are being hosed at the pointless demonisation of smokers while research into the real causes and possible cures for lung cancer are grossly underfunded. It really is criminal.

I'm afraid you're the one brainwashed by commercially-interested propaganda efforts. Or IMO more likely actually paid to spread this nonsense. I'd much rather see sob-story crooks panhandling for their website "business ventures", at least they aren't killing millions with their lies.



A 10-second googling with your sources brought up this:

The "scientific" Hall of Shame - a list of scientists funded by the Tobacco industry to fake scientific results

The CRT is the Council of Tobacco Research -- essentially a scientific front group that was set up to attempt to invoke "science" to "prove" that cigarettes were not bad for your health.

This list just proves how easily scientists sell out to corporate interests when given grant money. Remember: What Big Tobacco pulled off with fake science in the 20th century, Big Biotech is pulling off yet again today.

Source http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCOURTS-dcd-1_99-cv-02496/pdf/USCOURTS-dcd-1_99-cv-02496-4.pdf

Documents reflect that, at a minimum, the following individuals and organizations received funding through Special Account No. 4 beginning in the 1960s and ending in the 1990s:

Able-Lands, Inc.; Lauren Ackerman; ACVA Atlantic Inc.; George Albee; Aleph Foundation; Arthur D. Little, Inc.; Aspen Conference; Atmospheric Health Sciences; Domingo Aviado; James Ballenger; Alvan L. Barach; Walter Barker; Broda 0. Barnes; Battelle Columbus Laboratories; Battelle Memorial Institute; Walter Becker; Peter Berger; Rodger L. Bick; Billings & Gussman, Inc.; Richard Bing; BioResearch Laboratories; Theodore Blau; Irvin Blose; Walter Booker; Evelyn J. Bowers; Thomas H. Brem; Lyman A. Brewer, III; Brigham Young University; Oliver Brooke; Richard Brotman; Barbara B. Brown; K. Alexander Brownlee; Katherine Bryant; Victor B. Buhler; Thomas Burford; J. Harold Burn; Marie Burnett; Maurice Campbell; Carney Enterprises, Inc.; Duane Carr; Rune Cederlof; Domenic V. Cicchetti; Martin Cline; Code Consultants Inc.; Cohen, Coleghety Foundation, Inc.; Colucci, & Associates, Inc.; Computerland; W. Clark Cooper; A. Cosentino; Daniel Cox; Gertrude Cox; CTR; Geza De Takato; Bertram D. Dimmens; Charles Dunlap; Henry W. Elliott; Engineered Energy Mgt. Inc.; Environmental Policy Institute; J. Earle Estes; Frederick J. Evans; William Evans; Expenses related to Congressional Hearings in Washington D.C.; Hans J. Eysenck; Eysenck Institute of Psychiatry; Jack M. Farris; Sherwin J. Feinhandler; Alvan R. Feinstein; Herman Feldman; Edward Fickes; T. Finley; Melvin First; Edwin Fisher; R. Fisher; Merritt W. Foster; Richard Freedman; Herbert Freudenberger; Fudenberg; Arthur Furst; Nicholas Gerber; Menard M. Gertler; Jean Gibbons; Carl Glasser; Donald Goodwin; B. Greenberg; Alan Griffen; F. Gyntelberg; Harvard Medical School; Hearings-Kennedy-Hart Bill; William Heavlin; Norman Heimstra; Joseph Herkson; Richard J. Hickey; Carlos Hilado; Charles H. Hine; Hine, Inc.; Harold C. Hodge; Gary Huber; Wilhelm C. Hueper; Darrell Huff; Duncan Hutcheon; Industry Research Liaison Committee; Information Intersciences, Inc.; International Consultancy; International Technology Corporation; International Information Institute, Inc.; J.B. Spalding Statistical Service; J.F. Smith Research Account; Jacob, Medinger & Finnegan; Joseph Janis; Roger Jenkins; Marvin Kastenbaum; Leo Katz; Marti Kirschbaum; Kravetz Levine & Spotnitz; Lawrence L. Kuper; Mariano La Via; H. Langston; William G. Leaman; Michael Lebowitz; Samuel B. Lehrer; William Lerner; Edward Raynar Levine; G.J. Lieberman; S.C. Littlechild; Eleanor Macdonald; Thomas Mancuso; Nathan Mantel; R. McFarland; Meckler Engineering Group; Milton Meckler; Nancy Mello; Jack Mendelson; Michigan State University; Marc Micozzi; Irvin Miller; K. Moser; Albert Niden; Judith O'Fallon; John O'Lane; William Ober; J.H. Ogura; Ronald Okun; Ingram Olkin; Thomas Osdene (Philip Morris); Peat, Marwick Main & Co.; Thomas L. Petty; Pitney, Hardin & Kipp; Leslie Preger; Walter J. Priest; R. Proctor; Terrence P. Pshler; Public Smoking Research Group; R.W. Andersohn & Assoc.; L.G.S. Rao; Herbert L. Ratcliffe; Attilio Renzetti; Response Analysis Project; Response Analysis Consultation; R.H. Rigdon; Jay Roberts; Milton B. Rosenblatt; John Rosencrans; Walter Rosenkrantz; Ray H. Rosenman; Linda Russek; Henry Russek; Ragnar Rylander; George L. Saiger; D.E. Sailagyi; I. Richard Savage; Richard S. Schilling; Schirmer Engineering Corp.; S. Schor; G.N. Schrauzer; Charles Schultz; John Schwab; Carl L. Seltzer; Murray Senkus (Reynolds); Paul Shalmy; R. Shilling; Shook, Hardy & Bacon; Henry Shotwell; Allen Silberberg; N. Skolnik; JF Smith; Louis A. Soloff; Sheldon C. Sommers (CTR); JB Spalding; Charles Spielberg; Charles Spielberger; Lawrence Spielvogel; St. George Hospital & Medical School; Stanford Research Institution Project; Russell Stedman; Arthur Stein; Elia Sterling; Theodor Sterling; Thomas Szasz; The Foundation for Research in Bronchial Asthma and Related Diseases; The Futures Group; Paul Toannidis; Trenton, New Jersey Hearings; Chris P. Tsokos; University of South Florida; Helmut Valentin; Richard Wagner; Norman Wall; Wayne State University; Weinberg Consulting Group; Roger Wilson; Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation; Jack Wiseman; George Wright; John P. Wyatt; J. Yerushalmy; and Irving Zeidman.

Ctrl-F and you'll find your "incredible" sources.

Have you ever enquired into the funding sources of the anti-tobacco lobby groups? No, thought not.

... At the meetings held at the MHRA’s London headquarters in May 2011 and January this year, the chairman asked the expert panel to declare any interests. Minutes of the meeting in 2011 obtained by The Times under the Freedom of Information Act show that “no interests were declared by members”. However, some members of the panel worked as consultants for big pharmaceuticals companies and advised on nicotine.

... Paul Aveyard, Professor of Behavioural Medicine at the University of Oxford, is a consultant to McNeil and Pfizer on nicotine replacement therapy and nicotine vaccines, respectively. Professor Aveyard, who helped to produce guidance for doctors on prescribing licensed nicotine products, is also a for-mer consultant to Xenova, which developed vaccines for nicotine addiction.

Martin Jarvis, a Professor Emeritus of Health Psychology, University College London, and vice-chairman of the board of trustees of the anti-smoking charity Action on Smoking and Health, is a paid consultant to Pfizer. He has advised on an ingredient of Pfizer’s drug Chantix, treating nicotine addiction.

Christopher Marriott, formerly Emeritus Professor of Pharmaceutics, King’s College London, holds shares in three pharmaceuticals companies. One is Vectura Limited, part of Vectura plc, a FTSE 250-listed company whose inhalation products help to combat chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, better known as smoker’s lungs.

The WHO it seems, are quite happy to openly admit their unhealthy association with the pharmaceutical industry too. This is the industry that is arguably the current main beneficiary of the anti-smoker agenda and therefore this represents an obvious and serious conflict of interest to the WHO. It is anyone’s guess how much money has exchanged hands between these two and the rest of the tobacco CONTROL industry for their mutual benefit or how much it has improved profits for the pharmaceuticals, but the sums appear to be vast. This is win win win situation for everyone involved, including tax hungry governments. The only losers are individuals, scientific integrity and civil society in general.

However, upon some preliminary investigation it is clear that these NGO's are backed by $446,000,000.00 from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) which has direct ties to the Johnson & Johnson Company, and J & J is the manufacturer of Nicoderm & Nicoderm CQ via its wholly owned subsidiary ALZA. Recently, the buyout of Pfizer Consumer Health(see page 4 or 61) means J & J profits even more from the passage of smoking bans thru additional sales of Nicotrol, Nicorette, Commit, (see pgs 32,33,56) and any other over the counter smoking cessation drugs once manufactured by Pfizer Consumer Health division.

25th January 2008
By PBR Staff Writer

Although many smokers are keen to kick their habit, will power by itself is often not sufficient and smoking cessation aids are often needed. The prescription nicotine dependence market is set to grow strongly at a compound annual growth rate of 16% to reach $4.6 billion by 2016, driven by two promising pipeline nicotine vaccines and Pfizer's popular nicotine receptor agonist Chantix.

The author does not mention that worldwide smoking bans are the real impetus for such an ambitious prediction, nor the fact that Johnson & Johnson Company merged with the Chantix drug maker Pfizer.

Also left out of the article is the fact that Johnson & Johnson Company's private political wing, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF), provided hundreds of millions of dollars to make this high-reaching marketing plan a very real possibility.

Even as these rent seeking smoking ban laws (funded by pharmaceutical interests) are being implemented by local governments to "protect the health of workers"; new air quality testing proves that secondhand smoke is actually 2.6 - 25,000 times SAFER than occupational (OSHA) workplace regulations

[nisakiman]

1999

WHO LAUNCHES PARTNERSHIP WITH THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY TO HELP SMOKERS QUIT

http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/documentStore/p/m/w/pmw63a99/Spmw63a99.pdf

Is it a coincidence that only a few short years later, around 2003, the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) appeared? It was signed, sealed and delivered as a fait accompli, before most people were even aware of its existence? Most relevant is Article 5.3 of the FCTC that effectively legitimizes the exclusion of any science that does not support the tobacco CONTROL consensus. Tobacco CONTROL science has been reduced to an advocacy tool, while genuine, unbiased, ethical medical science relating to smoking has been neutralized. It leaves scientists in no doubt as to what is expected from them and the inferred consequences of failure to do so.

[wym]

Have you ever enquired into the funding sources of the anti-tobacco lobby groups? No, thought not.

... At the meetings held at the MHRAs London headquarters in May 2011 and January this year, the chairman asked the expert panel to declare any interests. Minutes of the meeting in 2011 obtained by The Times under the Freedom of Information Act show that no interests were declared by members. However, some members of the panel worked as consultants for big pharmaceuticals companies and advised on nicotine.

... Paul Aveyard, Professor of Behavioural Medicine at the University of Oxford, is a consultant to McNeil and Pfizer on nicotine replacement therapy and nicotine vaccines, respectively. Professor Aveyard, who helped to produce guidance for doctors on prescribing licensed nicotine products, is also a for-mer consultant to Xenova, which developed vaccines for nicotine addiction.

Martin Jarvis, a Professor Emeritus of Health Psychology, University College London, and vice-chairman of the board of trustees of the anti-smoking charity Action on Smoking and Health, is a paid consultant to Pfizer. He has advised on an ingredient of Pfizers drug Chantix, treating nicotine addiction.

Christopher Marriott, formerly Emeritus Professor of Pharmaceutics, Kings College London, holds shares in three pharmaceuticals companies. One is Vectura Limited, part of Vectura plc, a FTSE 250-listed company whose inhalation products help to combat chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, better known as smokers lungs.

The WHO it seems, are quite happy to openly admit their unhealthy association with the pharmaceutical industry too. This is the industry that is arguably the current main beneficiary of the anti-smoker agenda

-----

Believe me I'm the first to decry the fact that Big Pharma has a pretty effective lock on scientific research - other than the only slightly more evil military-industrial complex.

However in this case, I'd say the main beneficiary is the general public.

That is if you value human life - since the tobacco industry has killed far more humans than war ever did. But then that's a good thing from our Mother Earth's POV - so carry on I guess. . .

[Aussieroaming]

I thought that Poms loved smoking, but that's just an uninformed observation like this thread was. I've seen many farang non smokers.

[chris2004]

Cigarettes in the UK $15 a packet.

Cigarettes in Thailand $1 a packet.

QED.

[Bernard Flint]

What a ridiculous post, you need to get out more and meet proper guys lol lol.

btw, i have 2 millionaire friends in Thailand, one smokes one doesnt,name dropping also hahahahaha

[robblok]

I dont smoke and dont care if others do as long as they dont light up in bars and other closed areas.

Let them be they know the risks and take them. That is how it should be with all drugs use them at your own risk and not bother others with it.

[smokie36]

All the smokers were sent to Thailand for £10.

[arunsakda]

Yes more than not smoke it appears. In most countries prevalance of adult smoking is closely correlated with lower educational achievement. Here though it seems most long term expats are highly educated quite successful types, at least here in CM.

With a cigarette hanging out of their gob they don't look so smart to me, and they don't smell that great either.

Edited November 13, 2014 by arunsakda

[mitsubishi]

Yes more than not smoke it appears. In most countries prevalance of adult smoking is closely correlated with lower educational achievement. Here though it seems most long term expats are highly educated quite successful types, at least here in CM.

With a cigarette hanging out of their gob they don't look so smart to me, and they don't smell that great either.

By the same assumption then being clean-cut implies people who aren't streetwise, are easily beguiled and are unmanly.

[robblok]

Yes more than not smoke it appears. In most countries prevalance of adult smoking is closely correlated with lower educational achievement. Here though it seems most long term expats are highly educated quite successful types, at least here in CM.

With a cigarette hanging out of their gob they don't look so smart to me, and they don't smell that great either.

By the same assumption then being clean-cut implies people who aren't streetwise, are easily beguiled and are unmanly.

The correlation of intelligence and education and smoking is a real one. You just made one up you cant back up with data.

[NoshowJones]

There are about 10 million adult cigarette smokers in Great Britain and about 15 million exsmokers.

Since 1990 there has been a steady increase in the number of smokers using mainly

hand-rolled tobacco. In 1990, 18% of male smokers and 2% of female smokers said they

smoked mainly hand-rolled cigarettes but by 2011 this had risen to 40% and 26% respectively.

In 2012, the OPN survey found that 38% of men and 24% of women smoked hand-rolled

cigarettes.

OP, your statement "I come from the UK and over there smokers are firmly in the minority" needs some more research.

I would agree with your last sentence Costas, but I do have some sympathy for older smokers as when they started, they did not get the health warnings people have gotten over the last thirty years or so. I would say that smokers under the age of around forty are stupid, stupid, stupid.

The ones who do reach old age are going to spend it all coughing and spluttering, and have no one to blame but themselves, I am just so glad I never started smoking and drinking.

[NoshowJones]

How does one manage to get banned with only 9 posts?

You generally make a couple of thousand don't you?

What has this got to do with Farangs smoking?

[NoshowJones]

For gods sake! Smokers? Heaven forbid. They all die of smoking-related diseases.

To make things worse: Non smokers die of non-smoking-related diseases. This in itself is outrageous.

Being a smoker, I compensate the ill-effects of smoking by buying healthy vegetables from local markets, knowing that the concentration of pesticides, herbicides, fungicides would make the eyes roll of any laboratory assistant in Europe.

In certain areas of Bangkok and Pattaya, the daily intake of toxic-fumes from traffic-exhaust alone equals the consumption of 2 packs of cigarettes per day.

Cheers.

I don't believe that. Yes, in certain places the air is not clean, but two packets of fags (cigarettes) per day. Come on.

[transam]

Yes more than not smoke it appears. In most countries prevalance of adult smoking is closely correlated with lower educational achievement. Here though it seems most long term expats are highly educated quite successful types, at least here in CM.

With a cigarette hanging out of their gob they don't look so smart to me, and they don't smell that great either.

Many of us grew up in an era where near everyone smoked, nothing to do with education. Posh folk smoked a pipe, tele ads were crammed with smoking ads.

[NoshowJones]

Many Thai females also smoke in Thailand i have noticed, and long may it continue . Must be something about the place and I guess prices and no excessive peer pressure to stop.

Yes, that's another interesting thing. According to official figures the smoking prevalence of Thai females is around 3%, but from personal observation I would put it a lot higher than that; perhaps 8 - 10%. Again, these figures rely on the women admitting to being smokers, and cultural pressures dictate that many of them will deny it when asked by a stranger.

I liked the women back in Scotland, in my line of work, you met women all the time, and I took advantage of that, and the vast majority of them were smokers, in fact, that is one of the reasons I came to Thailand to stay, after being here a couple of times, I noticed how few of them smoked, or even drank, especially up country, it's great to live in a smoke free house.