“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 Minister of Propaganda Nazi Germany
We will now talk about the extent that the activists will go to, to repress the truth and repress dissent. They will stop at nothing to discredit and destroy the careers of anyone who dares to publish dissenting reports. Here is an article in Epidemiologic Perspectives & Innovations that discuss this. .
These stories show the willingness of epidemiologists to embrace such anti-scientific influences bodes ill for the field’s reputation as a legitimate science.
Two of the people in this article James E. Enstrom and Michael Siegel have compaired the anti-smoking movement is a McCarthyistic movement where groupthink dominates, dissent is not allowed, and no groups have the courage to publicly challenge other groups and risk being viewed as “traitors” to the cause.
Both are non-smokers and Michael Siegel openly favors a ban but is against using junk science and out and out lies to get there. He believes in the integrity of his profession. Click on their names for more info.
Added July 17, 2008 For those that don’t know both of these men were members of Tobacco Control. Michael Siegel has some comments here on the movement.
Filed under: reality check | Tagged: corruption, Health, health issues, Politics, smoking, smoking ban
Check out Kabat’s new book:
http://cup.columbia.edu/book/978-0-231-14148-2/hyping-health-risks
James Enstrom is probably the heaviest hitter on the side of freedom. We really need to study and get behind his work.
Bill
Siegel is getting there here is his response to ASH’s policy on banning smoking in the home.
Before anyone criticizes me for exaggerating the importance of this story based on the fact that it is only one organization that is making this statement, let me make two important points.
First, ASH is not just some fly-by-night operation. It is truly a very prominent national organization that has been at the forefront of the tobacco control movement for decades. The fact that ASH has publicly taken this position is extremely important and cannot be overemphasized.
Second, even if ASH’s views do not represent the views of most anti-smoking groups, that doesn’t matter at all if those other groups do not come out and publicly reject ASH’s agenda. Since ASH has now spoken, its agenda has become the de-facto national anti-smoking agenda. It will remain so until and unless other anti-smoking groups come out and publicly reject it.
I doubt that will happen because, as I have learned, the anti-smoking movement is a McCarthyistic movement where groupthink dominates, dissent is not allowed, and no groups have the courage to publicly challenge other groups and risk being viewed as “traitors” to the cause.
It is all black and white in this movement. If you oppose a tobacco control policy, you will be painted as anti-anti-tobacco. You will be framed as being an enemy of tobacco control. You might as well apply for a job at a tobacco company. You’ll be accused of working for the industry anyway. Why not at least reap some financial benefit from it?
Dr. Michael Siegel
http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2008/01/2008-anti-smoking-agenda-revealed-ban.html
Siegel is great on the politics. But Enstrom is the heaviest hitting epidemiologist who holds that ETS doesn’t kill anyone.
We need to de-stigmatize Enstrom first. The problem is that he has been so viciously smeared, that even though he is 100% correct in what he says and perfectly legit, he is blacklisted thanks to the usual smear campaigns.
I don’t know if you’ve seen it or not, but buried in the “health” section of the BtB site is some work I’ve done on the ACS vs. Enstrom:
http://banthebanwisconsin.com/acs.aspx
You should add this information to the stuff on the ACS.
According to Epstein, these failed strategies are largely due to institutional malaise and outdated mindsets fixated on treatment, to the virtual exclusion of prevention, other than quitting smoking. But, Epstein says, there is much more. In particular, the book shows how the NCI and ACS are corroded with major institutional and personal conflicts of interest with cancer drug companies (“Big Pharma”). As candidly admitted by a recent NCI director, the NCI has become a “government pharmaceutical company.” For the ACS, these conflicts extend to environmental polluters in the chemical industry, and connivance in white collar crime. Not surprisingly, The Chronicle of Philanthropy has charged that “the ACS is more interested in accumulating wealth than saving lives.” These close ties to industry have transformed the NCI and ACS into cheerleaders for special interests rather than stewards of the public interest.
http://www.preventcancer.com/publications/cancer-gate.php
Here Epstien shows their conflict of interest.
http://www.preventcancer.com/losing/acs/wealthiest_links.htm
BTW he calls for a total boycott of the ACS
[...] Know the enemy part 3 – Ban the Ban [...]